United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Polygamist who appeared on Sister Wives applies for a license to marry his second wife in wake of Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage
Source:
Daily Mail UK
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art ... o-applies-wedding-license.html
Published: Jul 6, 2015
Author: AP and Daily Mail reporters
Post Date: 2015-07-06 15:48:02 by redleghunter
Keywords: None
Views: 4304
Comments: 59
A Montana man said Wednesday that he was inspired by last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage to apply for a marriage license so that he can legally wed his second wife. Nathan Collier and his wives Victoria and Christine applied at the Yellowstone County Courthouse in Billings on Tuesday in an attempt to legitimize their polygamous marriage. Montana, like all 50 states, outlaws bigamy - holding multiple marriage licenses - but Collier said he plans to sue if the application is denied. 'It's about marriage equality,' Collier said Wednesday. 'You can't have this without polygamy.' Collier and his second wife were met with confusion when they went to the Yellowstone County court house on Tuesday to fill out the application. 'So, are you legally married, you didn't get divorced?' one clerk asked, when he saw that Collier marked 'not applicable' on a question asking the dissolution date of his previous marriage. Collier responded that he was indeed still married and trying to marry for a second time. 'We'll have to deny that, let me go grab the other supervisor real quick so I can get confirmation but as far as I'm aware you can't be married to two people at the same time,' another clerk said. County clerk officials initially denied Collier's application, then said they would consult with the county attorney's office before giving him a final answer, Collier said. Yellowstone County chief civil litigator Kevin Gillen said he is reviewing Montana's bigamy laws and expected to send a formal response to Collier by next week. 'I think he deserves an answer,' Gillen said, but added his review is finding that 'the law simply doesn't provide for that yet.' 'All we want is legal legitimacy. We aren't asking anybody for anything else. We just want to give our marriage and our family the legitimacy that it deserves,' Nathan Collier said. In a Facebook post on Wednesday, Nathan Collier said he had yet to hear an answer from the county attorney on their decision to grant or deny the marriage license. However, he says that he has told through 'other sources' that the attorney general's office is considering charging him for bigamy. 'I knew the risks I faced when I asked the State to grant legal legitimacy to my family, and I accepted those risks. 'I only ask that if their intent is to lock me in a cage (and we wonder why they keep asking for more money to expand the jails?!?!?) over my family dynamic, contact me privately and I will walk in your front door. 'I have no reason to run or hide. Please, don't kick my door in and shoot my dogs,' Collier wrote. Collier goes on to say that he is 'saddened' that his family faces such challenges in the 'land of the free'. 'You can believe that the entire nation is and will be watching your choices and actions. There is no honor in destroying functional families,' Collier added. The Supreme Court's ruling on Friday made gay marriages legal nationwide. Chief Justice John Roberts said in his dissent that people in polygamous relationships could make the same legal argument that not having the opportunity to marry disrespects and subordinates them. Poster Comment: Seems to look like a "happy, loving, healthy" family...I mean who are we to judge if they all really love each other....The wise Latina wants to know...
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 21.
#3. To: redleghunter, Nolu Chan (#0)
(Edited)
The supreme court case centered around equal treatment under the law. The logic is that since a hetero couple can get married a homo couple should also because they are denied rights a married hetero couple would get. This does not apply to polygamists because that is not allowed for anyone. Whoever brings up this polygamy should now be legal argument just shows they are ignorant over the judicial arguments involved. I don't agree with gay marriage at all as a Christian but the arguments for it are based on the equal protection clause. If I am wrong, I will let our resident lawyer tell us otherwise.
Same sex marriage was not allowed for anyone either, Bozo.
The issue is two people could get married and have benefits under the law that two other people as a couple could not. Know your enemy rather than your own ignorance.
So two sisters can now marry? And two brothers as well?
I think they would hold that the State has a paramount interest in not licensing close relatives.
#24. To: nolu chan, Pericles (#21)
So two sisters can now marry? And two brothers as well? I think they would hold that the State has a paramount interest in not licensing close relatives. Why if, as in a gay marriage, no procreation is possible ? What would be the compelling interest to prevent two sisters or two brothers from marrying?
Not at all. Marriage as a means of encouraging procreation is out. Couples who are known to be infertile or past the age of reproduction are given marriage licenses all the time. The state would have no compelling interest in letting them have the same thousand or so rights attached to marriage. Yet this was what swayed Anthony Kennedy. That and the supposed shame of children having two gay parents who couldn't marry. Kennedy mentions these elements prominently in his opinion. And polygamists do have a lot of children (who are being denied rights and dignity like the kids of gay marriages were). Unlike sodomy marriage, there is a long history of legal polygamy around the world. Kennedy was always a ringer for gay rights if you know his personal history. It isn't certain he will be willing to go as far for polygamy but it wouldn't surprise me. It would be far more consistent with his recent ruling.
That's the way it used to be. But now according to the U.S. Supreme Court, "F**k the state". People have a constitutionally protected right to marry. It's there, somewhere, in the U.S. Constitution that THIS court managed to find. Neither the state nor the citizens of the states have anything to say about it.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#6. To: Pericles, redleghunter, Nolu Chan (#3)
This does not apply to polygamists because that is not allowed for anyone.
#7. To: SOSO (#6)
Same sex marriage was not allowed for anyone either, Bozo.
#10. To: Pericles, All (#7)
#21. To: SOSO, Pericles (#10)
So two sisters can now marry? And two brothers as well?
Replies to Comment # 21.
#32. To: nolu chan (#21)
I think they would hold that the State has a paramount interest in not licensing close relatives.
#38. To: nolu chan (#21)
"I think they would hold that the State has a paramount interest in not licensing close relatives."
End Trace Mode for Comment # 21.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]