Montana Polygamist Nathan Collier Applies For Marriage License Using Supreme Court’s Same-Sex Ruling, Wants Equality

July 3, 2015 | By Garrett Montgomery More

Montana polygamist Nathan Collier and his family are using the U.S. Supreme Court’s historic ruling on same-sex marriage as an argument to obtain a second marriage license. Collier, who is legally married to Vicki, said he believes that he now has the right to wed his second spouse, Christine – but Montana officials are not buying his story.

Montana polygamist

It is crystal clear that after same-sex marriage, the Supreme Court will be hearing a polygamist case, and a trio from Montana has opened the ball.

Meet, Nathan Collier and his two wives – Vicki and Christine – a happy Montana polygamist threesome, who are not ashamed of their life choices and are now demanding that they be recognized as a family.

The Colliers were featured in an episode of the TLC reality series “Sister Wives” earlier this year. They marched to Yellowstone County Courthouse hoping to obtain a marriage license.

Collier legally married Vicki in 2000 and is hoping to do the same with Christine. The polygamist man told the clerk that based on the Marriage Equality Act, he should be allowed to marry Christine because:

“It’s about marriage equality.You can’t have this without polygamy.”

Baffled by the request, the clerk told the polygamist family:

“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.”

The Montana Attorney General’s office was asked to review the application and quickly denied to do so based on the simple fact that polygamy is illegal in America. Christine, who “wed” Collier in 2007, said:

“It’s two distinct marriages, it’s two distinct unions, and for us to come together and create family, what’s wrong with that?I don’t understand why it’s looked upon and frowned upon as being obscene.”

Collier, a former Mormon, who was kicked out of the church for being in multiple relationships, explained that he plans to used Chief Justice John Roberts‘ dissent that said “people in polygamous relationships could make the same legal argument that not having the opportunity to marry disrespects and subordinates them” in the fight for his marriage and his family to get the legitimacy that it deserves.

What are your thoughts on this Montana polygamist family’s quest for equality?

Be Sociable, Share!


    Category: News

    Comments (7)

    Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

    1. Jhericca Landers says:

      Why not? It is more Biblical than gay marriage. Why is the government involved in the marriage business at all? Can the government dictate to you whether or not the vows made to each other and before God are binding? I am not advocating the FLDS Warren Jeffs variety of insanity. I am speaking of a man having more than one wife and as long as his first wife is in agreement and they can financially support themselves than whose business is it. Nathan Collier has chosen to publicly to live that lifestyle and I personally applaud him and his two beautiful brides for it.

    2. Janelle Allen says:

      What a mess our world is!! I am not gonna be surprised if Jesus vomes back soon!

    3. WELL! says:

      I am trying to wrap my thoughts around SHARING.. I guess this would be ok if the two ladies are not jealous. wonder if the men would have a problem if it was ONE WOMAN wanting to marry two men? giving men are territory animals…. interesting.. but I guess this whole thing marring the two women all depends on these two ladies he has chosen for his wives…. Hope he gets his legal documents needed…. I wonder if the two ladies share the same house ? Gosh I hope not… where’s the excitement in that?

    4. Peggy says:

      To me it’s a separate argument…two consenting adults entering into a marriage contract versus three or more consenting adults entering into a marriage contract. The biggest argument against multiple legal spouses is the ability of one man to impregnate multiple women simultaneously. That alone is enough to be against it. But it would also create a legal nightmare in the realms of insurance, inheritance, Social Security, etc. Again, the lawyers will rejoice, but the rest of us will pay to rewrite the laws and support the enormous families. The system we had was unfair to gays, but was proven over millenniums to be the best way to have viable families or it wouldn’t have continued for so long.

      • Jhericca Landers says:

        Peggy, you say “The biggest argument against multiple legal spouses is the ability of one man to impregnate multiple women simultaneously”
        Take a look around in every town and city. It is called adultery. At least with a marriage license the dad is accepting responsibility.

    5. loa K says:

      That is one crazy story. This is America people.

    About · Contact · Contributors · Privacy Policy · Sitemap · Terms of Service ·