Legality and free speech

[Scoop]

So if I even verbally say that I have a second wife then am I committing a crime based on this statute?


Kentucky Statutes > Chapter 530 > § 530.010
Kentucky Statutes 530.010 – Bigamy — Defense
Current as of: 2019 | Check for updates | Other versions
(1) A person is guilty of bigamy when he:
(a) Purports to marry another person knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife; or
Terms Used In Kentucky Statutes 530.010

• Felony: A crime carrying a penalty of more than a year in prison.
• State: when applied to a part of the United States, includes territories, outlying possessions, and the District of Columbia. See Kentucky Statutes 446.010

(b) Cohabits in this state after a bigamous marriage in another state.
(2) It shall be a defense to bigamy that the accused believed he was legally eligible to remarry.
(3) Bigamy is a Class D felony.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 257, effective January 1, 1975.

 

[Pacman]

So if I even verbally say that I have a second wife then am I committing a crime based on this statute?


Kentucky Statutes > Chapter 530 > § 530.010
Kentucky Statutes 530.010 – Bigamy — Defense
Current as of: 2019 | Check for updates | Other versions
(1) A person is guilty of bigamy when he:
(a) Purports to marry another person knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife; or
Terms Used In Kentucky Statutes 530.010

• Felony: A crime carrying a penalty of more than a year in prison.
• State: when applied to a part of the United States, includes territories, outlying possessions, and the District of Columbia. See Kentucky Statutes 446.010

(b) Cohabits in this state after a bigamous marriage in another state.
(2) It shall be a defense to bigamy that the accused believed he was legally eligible to remarry.
(3) Bigamy is a Class D felony.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 257, effective January 1, 1975.

Just don't tell anyone who isn't trustworthy... This is Babylon be wise and be prepared...

 

[FollowingHim]

Or don't call her your "wife", rather your "woman", and don't have a ceremony that could be considered a "wedding". Then you are not "purporting to marry". That law does not technically forbid cohabitating with more than one woman, it just forbids such cohabitation after entering into a marriage with them. That's not ideal, obviously, for many emotional reasons. However, it's technically correct, as the word "wife" never actually appears in scripture, the word is always "woman". So that wouldn't be offensive to your women (technically, though it could be offensive emotionally), nor ungodly. But it could help avoid legal complications.

 

[rockfox]

It's not a speech thing but a marriage law thing. Historically, your wife was whomever you called your wife. Much like if you claimed a goat as yours and possessed it it was yours. That is your common law right, only recently abridged by statutes. This law is a reflection of that reality. Though apparently Kentucky did away with commonly law marriage in 1852, so this is very old legal cruft.

Although 'purports to marry' may not necessarily mean 'verbally say I have a second wife'. Ask a lawyer, purports is a legally laden phrase. It may carry connotation of falsely doing something, hence getting a marriage license under false pretenses, and hence invalid, because you are already married. Esp. since this statute was first passed into law in 1975. But I'm not sure.

The crazy part is...

(b) Cohabits in this state after a bigamous marriage in another state.

Which could lead to a prosecution for you living with someone, without a license, after having lived in bigamy in another state (prosecuted or not). Keeping in mind that 'bigamy' in this or that state may come from simply cohabitating with another while married.

Again, I don't have government sanction to give advice on the law, these are just my unstudied opinions for entertainment.

 

[cnystrom]

So if I even verbally say that I have a second wife then am I committing a crime based on this statute?

Short answer: yes you are commiting a felony.

Purporting is claiming. It does not matter if you have a legal marriage license or not.

Texas is another "purporting" state.

The good news is that it is rarely prosecuted unless there is a bigamy complaint. They do not want to provide a method to overturn it. Better (in their eyes) to just leave it on the books as a threat.

P.S. Usual disclaimer that I am not a lawyer, etc.

 

[FollowingHim]

What is the full list of states that have this "purporting" law in some form? I thought there were three - is it Kentucky, Texas and Utah? Or are there more?

This is a very peculiar law that doesn't exist anywhere else in the world, that I am aware of, other than a very short list of US states where it appears to have been introduced for the purpose of state persecution of the Mormon church.

 

[steve]

for the purpose of state persecution of the Mormon church.

Sadly, it seemed necessary due to the abuses of the Mormon church.
The enemy of our souls knew that he hadn’t defeated Yah’s plan for marriage totally, so he used this religion to do an end run into the dark side and defame plural marriage by having it practiced negatively.
Not that there weren’t and aren’t beautiful, righteous people practicing it in that religion, but they don’t generate headlines.

 

[Scoop]

I may consult a few lawyers, I saw this in a Tennessee statute as well, I have a hard time seeing them enforce “purport” if you never apply for a second license. It’s twists my stomach though.

 

[steve]

Has any guy ever been persecuted in a case that didn’t involve one of the wives turning on him?

 

[Keith Martin]

Legally, bigamy requires having more than one marriage license. Avoid marriage licenses, and you won't be a bigamist.

Also, note that the Kentucky law was enacted in 1975, but a number of U.S. Supreme Court cases since that time have almost entirely nullified the enforcement of anti-cohabitation laws, most notably Lawrence v Texas in 2000 which prevented the State of Texas from legislating the private intimate behavior between two unmarried (of course, at the time) men. The vast majority of legal scholars consider that to have put a stake in the government's ability to legislate private relationships. In the wake of legalizing gay marriage, it's now unlikely that government enforcement is going to be directed toward telling us who our relationships can be with (although this Wuhan Flu reaction insanity does give me pause).

 

[Scoop]

The legality of the word "purports" really concerns me. In the wake of having serious discussions with my wife about moving forward, Im just navigating here. I mean we dont plan to broadcast it but still if im in public and we meet a friend or other people i dont want to feel the need to lie. It doesnt help people see something besides what they do on television. I'm also in a field where i absolutely cannot have any any questionable things going on legally.

 

[FollowingHim]

One family I know in a state with the same legal problem simply introduces everyone by their names. "This is Susan and that is Lucy". Leave it to others to come to their own conclusions. In practice, I understand few ask any further questions.