On June 25th in a post called In NY the people have the right to be wrong I said this:
3. I will be shocked if we don’t see a devout Muslim suing in NY for the right of polygamy. There is a significant population of Muslims in the state. If one can change the definition of marriage that has stood for thousands of years by a popular vote then there is no rational basis to deny a form of marriage that has been continually recognized by nations of the world and at least one of the worlds major religions for over a millennium.
I got the religion wrong but 17 days later:
On Wednesday, the Browns are expected to file a lawsuit to challenge the polygamy law.
The lawsuit is not demanding that states recognize polygamous marriage. Instead, the lawsuit builds on a 2003 United States Supreme Court decision, Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down state sodomy laws as unconstitutional intrusions on the “intimate conduct” of consenting adults. It will ask the federal courts to tell states that they cannot punish polygamists for their own “intimate conduct” so long as they are not breaking other laws, like those regarding child abuse, incest or seeking multiple marriage licenses.
Via Robert Stacy McCain who quotes Justice Scalia’s dissent in the above mentioned case and comments:
What can we say when such an awareness just suddenly starts emerging? And what possible objection can any liberal voice in the matter, without attempting to “impose morality” on Kody Brown and his wives?
Let’s remind you of what the Catholic Bishop of New York wrote on the subject just this week:
Veterans my age and over can remember sixty years ago when we fought widespread, no-fault divorce, convinced it would lead to a cheapening of the marriage bond and harm our kids (as, of course, scholarly studies now report has, indeed, happened). Recall how the Church resisted the “contraceptive mentality,” fearing it would rupture the sacred bond between love and the procreation of children. Then, remember how the Church sounded the alarm over rising rates of promiscuity, adultery, pre-marital sex, and cohabitation prior to or instead of marriage. And now we ring the steeple bell again at this latest dilution of the authentic understanding of marriage, worried that the next step will be another redefinition to justify multiple partners and infidelity. If you think I’m exaggerating, within days of the passage of this bill, one major newspaper ran a flattering profile of a proponent of what was called “nonmonogamy.” Apparently, “nonmonogamy” is the idea that society is unrealistic to think that one man and one woman should remain faithful in marriage, and that openness to some infidelity should be the norm!
The irony being that over and over the consequences the Catholic Church warned society about came to pass when society and some mainline Churches embraced these changes over the years.
We are likely at least a generation and a half away from the full consequences of this nonsense, but they will come. The legal victory of polygamy in states that embrace gay marriage will come mush faster.