🚀 go-pugleaf

As I recall, Eric Fowler (EricF@microhouse.com) wrote:
->What's the issue? Utah/Colo will just grant the license on the grounds that 
->they are not legally married.

Perhaps.  I just want to see the debate come to light.  And it will.

->Besides, why would anyone do this, except to make a debating point? 

No other reason.  That's the one.

->The Utah/Colorado form can just have a slot
->that says 'Are you legally married in another state?'. They must say 'yes',
->because the marriage is legal in Hawaii(and their new spouse-to-be should
->be so informed), but Colorado need not deny the new license.

But I imagine they will try to deny.  They just won't be able to
provide a valid (to them) reason why.

->In reverse, if someone has a (straight) marriage in Colo, then goes to 
->Hawaii for a (gay) marriage, then Hawaii could deny the license on the 
->grounds that the new marriage constitutes bigamy. 

My thought was to put the onus on Colorado.  If you were to leave Colorado
and go to Hawaii, of course you would be charged with bigamy if you 
were already married.

-DanD

--
#  Dan D (kd4igw)  dand@rmii.com    dand@frottage.com 
# Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead.
# 		Benjamin Franklin