# Prop 8 trial update: Walker's ruling upheld **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 14, 2011, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prop-8-trial-update-walkers-ruling-upheld/585500 "2011-06-14T22:31:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 123
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2011, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prop-8-trial-update-walkers-ruling-upheld/585500/123 "2011-06-16T15:06:06Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Of course, this is incorrect. Polygamists are a class. Incorrect. They are not a class. By definition, polygamists are people who are married to more than one person at the same time. Since this is not legl in the US, then polygamists don’t exist in the US at all, protcted or not. Every citizen of the US is a non-polygamist. There are no subclasses of non-poylgamists being discriminated against. > [@](#): > > They are not a _protected_ class for the purposes of Equal Protection analysis. They don’t exist at all, and it’s not necessary for a class to be stipulated as “protected” to find that they are not getting equal _[iprotection_ > [@](#): > > You possibly mean the Fourteenth Amendment. Of course. It was a typo. I have made the 14th Amendment argument many times on this board and previously in this thread. I know what number it is. > [@](#): > > Completely incorrect. Polygamists are a class. Nope. Polygamists don’t exist in the US. We are a nation of 100% non-polygamists. Laws against polygamy do not draw distinctions between sub-classes of non-polygamists, so there isn’t any discrimation. No class of “polygamists” exists in the US, because polygamy does not exist in the US. ETA Sorry. Didn’t see the mod note. I’ll stop now. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prop-8-trial-update-walkers-ruling-upheld/585500)._