{"id":2935,"date":"2011-07-31T14:18:36","date_gmt":"2011-07-31T19:18:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/girlwpen.com\/?p=2935"},"modified":"2013-07-14T16:41:40","modified_gmt":"2013-07-14T21:41:40","slug":"relating-radically-polygamy-in-utah-and-the-right-to-privacy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/2011\/07\/31\/relating-radically-polygamy-in-utah-and-the-right-to-privacy\/","title":{"rendered":"RELATING RADICALLY: Polygamy in Utah and the Right to Privacy"},"content":{"rendered":"
Okay folks, it\u2019s time to put on my legal hat.<\/p>\n

I recently came across a case that brings up some really interesting questions about law, feminism, and relationships, and I\u2019d like to share some of the issues with you. \u00a0This is a case about marriage, sort of, but not same-sex marriage. \u00a0It\u2019s a case about a law that interferes with privacy in the bedroom, but it\u2019s not a sodomy law. \u00a0It\u2019s a case that\u2019s going to make the parade of horrible folks really, really nervous.<\/p>\n

The case in question involves a polygamous family suing the state of Utah in hopes that an anti-bigamy law will be overturned<\/a>. \u00a0This family isn\u2019t asking for the right to legal marriage, but rather that the state not interfere in their personal relationships by making an additional purported<\/em> marriage or marriage-like relationship illegal when someone is already legally married.<\/p>\n

When we think about privacy law, we think about rights to do things versus freedoms from government intervention. \u00a0The latter are usually easier to claim, because they require no resources. \u00a0The government just has to stay out. \u00a0If it doesn\u2019t have some compelling state interest that allows for intervention, then we end up with a result similar to Lawrence v. Texas<\/em> (2003), which is the case being used as precedent here to challenge the Utah law.<\/p>\n

Of course, feminist lawyers and legal activists tend to have some difficulties when polygamy gets involved, and understandably so. \u00a0I\u2019ve seen several recent feminist critiques of polygamy<\/a>, pointing to its misogynist history and relationship with the Mormon church<\/a>. \u00a0But this isn\u2019t the only context for polygamous or polyamorous relationships. \u00a0In my opinion, the government has no business regulating relationships between consenting adults when those adults are making no claims to legal rights based on the relationship.<\/p>\n

There is no one true feminist position when it comes to what relationships should be \u201callowed,\u201d but I tend to believe that one of the most important tenets of feminism is the freedom to develop relationships in whatever way one chooses. \u00a0There are many polyamorous feminists, just like there are many queer feminists, many religious feminists, many married feminists and unmarried feminists and child-free feminists and feminists with children. \u00a0There are all sorts of way to create a family outside those that are legally recognized and supported. \u00a0The lead counsel in this case has it right when he describes the irrational way we pick and choose among those family types to determine public policy and law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Eventually, I hope that the legal recognition scheme for marriage will become more sensible<\/a>, but until that point, I hope that cases like this one succeed. \u00a0At the very least, adults should be able to form relationships in whatever way they choose, and cement those relationships with religious ceremonies, cohabitation, or whatever else they feel is appropriate. \u00a0Utah is simply out of line.<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Of course, feminist lawyers and legal activists tend to have some difficulties when polygamy gets involved, and understandably so. I\u2019ve seen several recent feminist critiques of polygamy, pointing to its misogynist history and relationship with the Mormon church. But this isn\u2019t the only context for polygamous or polyamorous relationships. In my opinion, the government has no business regulating relationships between consenting adults when those adults are making no claims to legal rights based on the relationship. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1922,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21112],"tags":[321,320,19781,21706],"class_list":["post-2935","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-relating-radically","tag-law","tag-marriage","tag-polyamory","tag-polygamy"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2935","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1922"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2935"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2935\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6289,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2935\/revisions\/6289"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2935"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2935"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/girlwpen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2935"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}