NewsIndiaTimes - page 2

ow that a U.S. appeals court has
declined to strike down Utah’s
bigamy laws, it’s reasonable to
ask:What does the Constitution,
properly interpreted, have to
say about the topic?
Legally speaking, the issue can be split
in two. The first question is whether a
state may criminalize marriage to more
than one person. The second is whether,
in light of the U.S. Supreme Court deci-
sion last year to require states to recognize
same-sex marriage, there now exists a fun-
damental right to marry more than one
person – and to make states treat plural
marriages on equal terms with marriages
between two people.
The first one is easier. Under current
laws in many states, if you’re already mar-
ried, then it’s a crime to marry another
person as well. These laws are part of our
legal tradition, and perhaps make some
sense if you restrict them to bigamists
who marry a second spouse without
telling them about the existence of t he
first.
But consider the consolidation of con-
stitutional rights that already exist: I can
have sex with any consenting adult under
the court’s 2003 precedent of Lawrence v.
Texas, which struck down anti-sodomy
laws. I can freely engage in any religious
ritual under the free-exercise clause of the
First Amendment. And using my freedom
of speech, I can talk about both my sexual
relationships and religious rituals that I’ve
used to solemnize them.
Given these rights, it seems strange that
the law prohibits me from forging sexual
relationships with multiple partners and
calling themmy spouses after we’ve made
a mutual religious commitment. If I called
them girlfriends or boyfriends, I’m pro-
tected by the Constitution. So, it seems in-
defensible that I can’t call themwives or
husbands.
It might just be plausible to say that I
can’t call my life partners legal wives or
husbands so long as the law doesn’t recog-
nize plural marriages. But even a rule pro-
hibiting me from doing so on the grounds
that it might mislead others is almost cer-
tainly unconstitutional. In U.S. v. Alvarez
in 2012, the court struck down a law that
criminalized lying about winning a medal
of honor. The right to lie is therefore en-
shrined in the constitutional pantheon. If
I can lie about a medal, why not about
marriage?
The harder question is whether the
state should be obliged to recognize plural
marriage and treat polygamists equally
with those who marry one person. In the
Supreme Court’s gay-marriage decision,
Obergefell v. Hodges, Justice Anthony
Kennedy said that there was a fundamen-
tal right to marry the person of your
choice, and he said that everyone is owed
the opportunity for the equal dignity of
marriage regardless of sex or sexual orien-
tation. But he did not say those rights
could be extended to polygamy and po-
lygamists.
Logically, however, that extension is
warranted unless the government has a
compelling interest in preventing plural
marriage. Start with the fundamental right
to choose a partner. Suppose I am not
married and want to choose someone
who is already married. My autonomy de-
mands that I be free to make that choice,
much as I should be able to choose a part-
ner regardless of that person’s sex.
Then there’s the question of equal dig-
nity. If all humans are inherently entitled
to have their marriage choices respected
and acknowledged by the government,
there’s no good reason to exclude people
who choose plural marriage. The fact that
some religions – Muslims and fundamen-
talist Mormons, for example -- tend to be
the people seeking this right gives a fur-
ther free-exercise reason to treat them
equally.
Often, the Supreme Court asks whether
a fundamental right is trumped by a com-
pelling state interest to the contrary. This
does not seem to be such a case. Consid-
ering that the law already allows me to
share my life with multiple partners, what
interest can the state have in refusing
recognition to that relationship? Certain
versions of plural marriage may be associ-
ated with cult-like behavior or abuse. But
the solution is to outlaw abuse and coer-
cion, not polygamy itself.
Practical legal problems regarding child
custody and property division would arise
in plural marriages. And it remains to be
worked out whether such marriages
would consist of overlapping bilateral re-
lationships or comprehensive joint ones.
But these are the kinds of problems that
family law excels in solving. Plural mar-
riage, after all, is not some newfangled in-
vention.
It’s in the Bible, and was known to most
ancient civilizations in one form or an-
other. Its roots lie even deeper than those
of gay marriage. It’s time the Supreme
Court recognized it.
N
Noah Feldman
Columnist
Bloomberg View
Chairman & Publisher
Dr. Sudhir M. Parikh
Editor
Sunil Adam
Managing Editor
Ela Dutt
Consulting Editor
Suman GuhaMozumder
Chicago Community Editor
Urvashi Verma
Ahmedabad Bureau Chief
Digant Sompura
ContributingWriters
Shilpi Paul, Joanne Flynn Black,
Swathi Reddy
Layout & Design
Shashikant Warik
Photographers
Peter Ferreira, Deval Parikh
Chief Operating Officer
Ilyas Qureshi
Executive Vice President
Bhailal M. Patel
Business DevelopmentManager
JimGallentine
Advertising Manager
Sonia Lalwani
Advertising NewYork
Shailu Desai, Manoj Vyas
Advertising Chicago
Syed Sheeraz Mahmood
CirculationManager
Hervender Singh
Editorial & Corporate Headquarters
115West 30th Street, Suite 1206
NewYork, NY 10001
Tel. (212) 675-7515
Fax. (212) 675-7624
E-mails
Website
Chicago Office
2652West Devon Avenue, Suite B
Chicago ,IL 60659
Tel. (773) 856-0545
California Office
650Vermont Ave, Suite #46
Anaheim ,CA 92805
Mumbai Office:
Nikita Ajay Pai
Goregaon,West Mumbai,
Ahmedabad Office
303 Kashiparekh Complex
C.G. Road, 29 Adarsh Society
Ahmedabad 380009
Tel. 26446947 Fax. 26565596
Published weekly, Founded in 1975.The views
expressed on the opinion page and in the Letters to
the Editor column are those of the writers and do
not necessarily reflect those of News IndiaTimes.
Copyright © 2016, News IndiaTimes
News IndiaTimes (ISSN 0199-901X) is published
every Friday by ParikhWorldwide Media Inc.,
115West 30th Street, Suite 1206, NewYork, NY 10001.
Periodicals postage paid at NewYork, N.Y.,
and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send ad-
dress change to News IndiaTimes, 115West 30th Street,
Suite 1206, NewYork, N.Y. 10001
Annual Subscription: United States: $28
Polygamy Is Constitutional
Plural marriage is not some newfangled invention. It’s in the Bible, and was known to
most ancient civilizations. Its roots lie even deeper than those of gay marriage
Opinion
News India Times
April 22, 2016
2
“Dating &Marriage diaries in Urban
India” By Sahil Thaker
any Indians search for their life
partners onmatrimonial web-
sites these days. Some have
good experiences while some
have sour memories by the end.
A lot of parents in India look for NRI boys
for their girls while a lot of NRIs look for
their “typical Indian” girls via these web-
sites. Although the author has researched a
lot on the topic, marrying his own experi-
ences with facts and providing a basic guide
to searching for a life partner, beware! The
read is not soft or laced with sugar!
Completely from a man’s point of view,
Sahil Thaker’s brutally honest penned-down
experiences give an insight as to how and
on what basis people do or should look for
their better half.
One wouldn’t say that every reader would
agree to the points made by him, but the
thoughts shared by the author, who was
born and raised inMumbai and has lived in
U.S. for almost six years, can be very offend-
ing for the female readers.
The author has taken to categorizing
girls, elucidating on the “types” of women
who have their profiles on the matrimonial
websites like “The ugly” – a woman who is
almost overweight or obese – with “spelling
mistakes and grammatical errors” in her
profile, “the visa queen”, “the princess”, “the
over-liberated” and the “hardworking
types”. Perhaps the categories speak a lot
about the thought process of not just
Thaker but many men.
All said and done, the composition of
facts and experiences shared by the author
give direction to a lot of individuals who are
looking forward to settling down.With
headers like “factors to consider in a poten-
tial spouse” and “miscellaneous considera-
tions”, the book has been broken down into
a lot of sub-heads, which play a crucial role
in finding that perfect someone.
The read also addresses the issue of
many and although irksome in the begin-
ning, highlights the ill-effects of tobacco.
The author, who has left key tip notes at
the end of every sub-heading, states, “Do
not pay any dowry in cash or kind, refuse to
marry if asked for dowry”.
Another important topic discussed is
household responsibilities. The author says
that it is important to discuss factors like:
Where will you be living, especially if you
are living with your in-laws then they could
have additional expectations; dividing
household responsibilities, especially if the
couple is living alone and howmuch an in-
dividual wants to contribute to running the
household, among others.
“Dating &Marriage diaries “ is an honest
composition, as it gives insight to a lot of
factors we might not have actually consid-
ered in our search for that perfect someone.
– IANS
DatingAndMarriage In IndiaToday
By Kishori Sud
M
Considering that the law
alreadyallowsme to sharemy
lifewithmultiplepartners,
what interest can the state
have in refusing recognition to
that relationship? Certain
versions of pluralmarriage
maybe associatedwith
cult-like behavior or abuse.
But the solution is tooutlaw
abuse and coercion, not
polygamy itself
1 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,...32
Powered by FlippingBook