>>>>>>If marriage is a fundamental right as opposed to a privilege I can see this argument coming up in the future based on the 1st and 14th amendments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Why don't we ever see one woman marrying many men?
>>>>>
>>>>>Marriage is a religious entity, so I can see how an athiest or agnostic might think it's okay to marry a ______________. (fill in here)
>>>>
>>>>It may have started out as a religious ceremony, but as it stands right now, "marriage" is a legally defined institution with benefits and responsibilities provided by the state. Take a gander at your marriage license if you disagree.
>>>>http://www.usmarriagelaws.com/search/united_states/tennessee/index.shtml
>>>
>>>If marriage doesn't have a religious underpinning, then why can't people marry multiple wives, or vice versa? The only reason is a moral reason, and last I checked, the "state" is amoral (and how).
>>
>>Multiple religions advocate polygamy. The laws of the "amoral" state prevent the practice in America.
>
>And those laws were based on what? Maybe "Judeo-Christian" beliefs....

Does state recognized marriage have a "religious underpinning" or is it specifically "Judeo-Christian"? The latter runs perilously close to a violation of the 1st Amendment so lets stick with the more general "religious underpinning". If the state is "amoral" then religious morality would have no influence on the law. Clearly that is not the case as any "sin" tax will prove. There exist an abundance of "moral" guidance laws, specifically put their by morally superior individuals who wish to legislate against behaviors that they disagree with.