State vs. Holms
 

Utah Supreme Court says that ban on polygamy is Constitutional.

Screwing someone besides your wife, and calling it just plain "sex" and not marriage, continues to be legal.

Makes perfect sense, right?

Put people practicing their religion in jail, while you celebrate adultery in the media.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3829072

Given the SCOTUS decision, State vs. Lawrence, it is hard to argue that this decision by the Utah Supreme Court follows the reasoning of SCOTUS. In fact, Scalia said that if you can't prohibit sexual activity between consenting adults, you can't prohibit polygamy.

Should the state be able to prohibit sex between consenting adults?

Not having followed this case, I find it difficult to makes heads or tails of the court's actual basis for decision from this poorly worded article. Although the decision excerpts quoted talk about anti-polygamy statutes, the prosecutor talks about pursuing charges based on under-aged marriage, tax fraud and other fraud. Moreover, I note that the second 'wife' in the case was only 16 years old at the time of 'marriage.' SO it is hard to draw much from this article. If I have time later I will try to get the actual opinion and figure this out.