In order to be admitted into the United States as a state in 1896 the state of Utah was required to write into its constitution a law banning polygamy. Skip ahead to today. Just in time for Christmas, U.S. District Judge Robert J. Shelby struck down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage, saying the law “conflicts with the United States Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection and due process under the law.” Utah has now become the 18th state in the country to allow gay marriage. And no, the media just can’t resist showing all the images of joyous gay couples tying the knot in Utah.

It would be interesting to ask the people who lived back in 1896, who were so insistent that Utah ban polygamy, which would be more abhorrent to them gay marriage or polygamy. Is there any reason left now why those who favor polygamy should not demand the right to practice it? Does not the same argument work for both gay marriage and polygamy? Can’t it be argued that bans on polygamy conflict with “the United States Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection and due process under the law”?

Those of us who oppose the redefinition of marriage have always argued that, if gay marriage is approved, what will be next? We may find out sooner rather than later.