Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Same Gender Marriage Now Legal in Utah
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ghostrider



Joined: 27 Jun 2011

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 1:17 am    Post subject: Same Gender Marriage Now Legal in Utah Reply with quote

"SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — A federal judge struck down Utah's same-sex marriage ban Friday in a decision that marks a drastic shift toward gay marriage in a conservative state where the Mormon church has long been against it.

The decision set off an immediate frenzy as the clerk in the state's most populous county began issuing marriage licenses to dozens of gay couples while state officials took steps to appeal the ruling and halt the process.

Cheers erupted as the mayor of Salt Lake City led one of the state's first gay wedding ceremonies in an office building about three miles from the headquarters of the Mormon church."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/20/utah-same-sex-marriage-ban/4146907/

Wow, I though Utah would probably be one of the last states to legalize gay marriage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 1:47 am    Post subject: Re: Same Gender Marriage Now Legal in Utah Reply with quote

ghostrider wrote:

Wow, I though Utah would probably be one of the last states to legalize gay marriage.


They would be one of the last states to legalize gay marriage. They did not legalize it, it was imposed upon them.

It's pretty much all down hill from here on the issue; only a matter of time before every state in the union either willingly falls into line or is forced to do so. Moreover, it's probably only a matter of time after that before marriage complete collapses as an institution. Between this and no fault divorce, marriage no longer has any meaningful connection to gender roles, nor any implication of life-long commitment. The incredible and growing number of children being born out of wedlock also illustrates how that has been alienated from the institution of marriage as well. You'll see America shifting more and more in the direction of Northern and Western Europe, with more and more couples simply living together unmarried and then splitting when they feel like it in order to dodge the hassle of the inevitable divorce hearing entirely.

That's assuming, of course, there's no massive reactionary snap-back as people see this all playing out before them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
catman



Joined: 18 Jul 2004

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 4:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just like each state was forced to accept miscegenation. It has all been downhill since then. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 4:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

catman wrote:
Just like each state was forced to accept miscegenation. It has all been downhill since then. Laughing


"All down hill from here" means that the hard work is finished and that the conclusion is more or less guaranteed. It is not a pejorative phrase.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Titus



Joined: 19 May 2012

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 5:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/14/justice/utah-polygamy-law/

Quote:
Judge strikes down part of Utah polygamy law


When did judges get appointed as gods?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Cosmic Hum



Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 9:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Same Gender Marriage Now Legal in Utah Reply with quote

Fox wrote:
Moreover, it's probably only a matter of time after that before marriage complete collapses as an institution. Between this and no fault divorce, marriage no longer has any meaningful connection to gender roles, nor any implication of life-long commitment.

That time has come and gone.
The only question is...what's next?

Nothing but change from here on in.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zackback



Joined: 05 Nov 2010
Location: Kyungbuk

PostPosted: Tue Dec 24, 2013 2:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What's next? Polygamy.

The Freak Show is picking up steam.

CNN) -- A federal judge in Utah has struck down part of that state's law banning polygamy, after a lawsuit was brought by the stars of the television reality series "Sister Wives."

The ruling late Friday by U.S. District Court Judge Clark Waddoups threw out the law's section prohibiting "cohabitation," saying it violates constitutional guarantees of due process and religious freedom.

But the judge said he would keep in place the ban on bigamy "in the literal sense -- the fraudulent or otherwise impermissible possession of two purportedly valid marriage licenses for the purpose of entering into more than one purportedly legal marriage."

Brown family on 'Becoming Sister Wives' The 91-page decision comes months after the Supreme Court struck down a separate federal law that defined marriage as between only one man and one woman, a major legal, political, and social victory for homosexual couples seeking recognition of their same-sex unions.

The current suit was brought two years ago by Kody Brown, a Utah resident and his four wives -- Meri, Janelle, Christine, and Robyn -- who together have 17 children, and whose lives are chronicled on the TLC cable television program.

'Sister Wives' on challenges of polygamy They claim their privacy rights were being violated by the decades-old law, passed around the time Utah became a state. They are members of a fundamentalist branch of the Mormon Church known as the Apostolic United Brethren Church.

Brown and his family said in a statement they were grateful for the ruling.

"Many people do not approve of plural families," he said, but "we hope that in time all of our neighbors and fellow citizens will come to respect our own choices as part of this wonderful country of different faiths and beliefs."

Some religious groups criticized the ruling.

"This is what happens when marriage becomes about the emotional and sexual wants of adults, divorced from the needs of children for a mother and a father committed to each other for life," said Russell Moore, of the Southern Baptist Convention. "Polygamy was outlawed in this country because it was demonstrated, again and again, to hurt women and children. Sadly, when marriage is elastic enough to mean anything, in due time it comes to mean nothing."

There was no initial reaction to the ruling from Utah officials, but they are expected to appeal.

The case is Brown v. Buhman (2:11-cv-652).

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/14/justice/utah-polygamy-law/index.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Squire



Joined: 26 Sep 2010
Location: Jeollanam-do

PostPosted: Tue Dec 24, 2013 3:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That guy sounds like he's living the dream. I don't see who is harmed by polygamy. I can't see how it's immoral, unless the wives are under age which is always a concern with these religious types
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
northway



Joined: 05 Jul 2010

PostPosted: Tue Dec 24, 2013 6:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zackback wrote:
What's next? Polygamy.

The Freak Show is picking up steam.

CNN) -- A federal judge in Utah has struck down part of that state's law banning polygamy, after a lawsuit was brought by the stars of the television reality series "Sister Wives."

The ruling late Friday by U.S. District Court Judge Clark Waddoups threw out the law's section prohibiting "cohabitation," saying it violates constitutional guarantees of due process and religious freedom.

But the judge said he would keep in place the ban on bigamy "in the literal sense -- the fraudulent or otherwise impermissible possession of two purportedly valid marriage licenses for the purpose of entering into more than one purportedly legal marriage."

Brown family on 'Becoming Sister Wives' The 91-page decision comes months after the Supreme Court struck down a separate federal law that defined marriage as between only one man and one woman, a major legal, political, and social victory for homosexual couples seeking recognition of their same-sex unions.

The current suit was brought two years ago by Kody Brown, a Utah resident and his four wives -- Meri, Janelle, Christine, and Robyn -- who together have 17 children, and whose lives are chronicled on the TLC cable television program.

'Sister Wives' on challenges of polygamy They claim their privacy rights were being violated by the decades-old law, passed around the time Utah became a state. They are members of a fundamentalist branch of the Mormon Church known as the Apostolic United Brethren Church.

Brown and his family said in a statement they were grateful for the ruling.

"Many people do not approve of plural families," he said, but "we hope that in time all of our neighbors and fellow citizens will come to respect our own choices as part of this wonderful country of different faiths and beliefs."

Some religious groups criticized the ruling.

"This is what happens when marriage becomes about the emotional and sexual wants of adults, divorced from the needs of children for a mother and a father committed to each other for life," said Russell Moore, of the Southern Baptist Convention. "Polygamy was outlawed in this country because it was demonstrated, again and again, to hurt women and children. Sadly, when marriage is elastic enough to mean anything, in due time it comes to mean nothing."

There was no initial reaction to the ruling from Utah officials, but they are expected to appeal.

The case is Brown v. Buhman (2:11-cv-652).

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/14/justice/utah-polygamy-law/index.html


The problem was that the cohabitation statute violated equal protection in that it was only applied to polygamists rather than any other individuals who might happen to cohabitate. Marriage didn't even enter into the equation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Tue Dec 24, 2013 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Titus wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/14/justice/utah-polygamy-law/

Quote:
Judge strikes down part of Utah polygamy law


When did judges get appointed as gods?


Its kind of funny you put it that way, because the decision emphasized the effect of the Free Exercise Clause.

Quote:
Accordingly, in Part II below the court finds the Statute facially unconstitutional and therefore strikes the phrase “or cohabits with another person” as a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and as without a rational basis under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, both in light of established Supreme Court precedent.


I also found this noteworthy.

Quote:
9. The content of “The Sister Wives” program includes the defense of plural families and discussion of the Browns’ religious beliefs in polygamy.

10. Utah government officials were aware that the Brown family was a plural or polygamist family for years before the first episode of “The Sister Wives” aired on TLC Network. Compl. ¶¶ 123-24; admitted in Answer ¶ 49;

11. The investigation of the Browns occurred only [after] the first episode of “The Sister Wives” aired. Compl. ¶ 158; admitted in Answer ¶ 58;

12. State officials have acknowledged that “The Sister Wives” program triggered their investigation. Compl. ¶ 163; admitted in Answer ¶ 60. This nexus was also acknowledged by Counsel for Defendant in the December 16, 2011 hearing . . . ;

13. State officials publicly denounced the Browns as committing crimes every night on television. Compl. ¶¶ 163-65; admitted in Answer ¶ 60;

. . .

19. There has been no allegation of child or spousal abuse by members of the Brown family. Compl. ¶¶ 120-22;

20. No member of the Brown family has ever been charged with a crime. Compl. ¶ 122; admitted in Answer ¶ 49;
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to say this news gave me a big smile. Utah of all places! Very amusing.

Assuming this does not get overturned by a higher court, I'd say same sex marriage is going to be in all 50 states very soon (and much more quickly than I certainly expected).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralCali



Joined: 17 May 2007

PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bucheon bum wrote:
I have to say this news gave me a big smile. Utah of all places! Very amusing.


Had it been a state judge, I'd think "Utah of all places" would be appropriate. As it is, federal judges haven't been exactly absent in striking down laws against SSM.

Quote:
Assuming this does not get overturned by a higher court, I'd say same sex marriage is going to be in all 50 states very soon (and much more quickly than I certainly expected).


It's almost like the US is turning into Canada! Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yodanole



Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: La Florida

PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 10:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Coming soon to an enclave near you, Gay Polygamy.......

Undecided, as yet, whether it would be considered polygny or polyandry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
On the other hand



Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Had it been a state judge, I'd think "Utah of all places" would be appropriate. As it is, federal judges haven't been exactly absent in striking down laws against SSM.



So, federal judges do not in any way reflect the culture and values of the states in which they preside?

I assume it's just a coincidence, then, that none of these pro-SSM rulings have been handed down in the Bible Belt?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Thu Dec 26, 2013 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On the other hand wrote:
Quote:
Had it been a state judge, I'd think "Utah of all places" would be appropriate. As it is, federal judges haven't been exactly absent in striking down laws against SSM.



So, federal judges do not in any way reflect the culture and values of the states in which they preside?


They do. In the ruling, this judge decided that prohibiting co-habitation violated the free exercise clause, i.e. it violated their religious rights.

Its the President of the United States who appoints Federal judges, though, and states often elect their judges. This can make a very significant difference. Utah has a hybrid system, and while the governor appoints committee nominees, the electorate chooses whether to retain a judge every two years thereafter.
http://www.utcourts.gov/knowcts/judsel.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International