Blaine Robison MA’s: “On Polygamy” Final Section and Citations

All segments of paper at:
http://www.blainerobison.com/concerns/polygamy.htm

THE LAST SECTION:

Answering Objections

Polygamy faces three types of criticism: its legality, its effect and its morality.
It’s Illegal. By legal definition polygamy exists when one marries or cohabits with more than one spouse at a time in purported exercise of plural marriage. The term implies more than two in contrast with bigamy which means a second marriage distinguished from a third or other.[28] All the states adopted antibigamy laws shortly after the founding of the country. The Edmunds Act of 1882 made bigamous cohabitation a misdemeanor, but the Edmunds-Tucker Anti-Polygamy Act of 1887 classified polygamy as a felony. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the law in 1890.[29] Some states that joined the union after that date included bans against polygamy in their state constitutions.[30]
Christian opponents to polygamy often categorize polygamists as lawbreakers and appeal to the apostolic command to be “in subjection to the governing authorities” (Rom 13:1; cf. 1 Pet 2:13-17). Of course, adultery is also a crime and a much more serious problem in America than polygamy. Even Christians commit adultery. Yet, there is no clamor to jail all the adulterers. The truth is everyone breaks the law, if it’s only the speed law. Scripture says that anyone who breaks even one law has violated the law as a whole (James 2:10).
It is ironic that those who object to polygamy on the grounds of obeying Caesar also lionize colonial patriots who not only broke the law but overthrew a legitimate government by force of arms. The truth is that Christians around the world are quite ready to break the law to stop abortions, spread the Gospel or perform other acts of conscience in order to obey God’s Word. It was for this reason that Jews in the first century continued to practice plural marriage in spite of the Roman “standard” of monogamy. Jesus’ statement about “whom God joined together” (Matt 19:6) illustrates that marriage in Israel was always the province of God and the family, not the idolatrous civil government.
In my view those who practice polygamy, especially from a religious basis, have been unfairly treated. Christians should not tolerate infringements of religious liberty, just because it doesn’t fit one’s theology. One only needs to survey the case archives of Christian legal advocacy organizations to understand the insidious and pervasive nature of the problem. The U.S. is not a Christian nation and our right to practice our faith according to the Scriptures and our conscience is under attack every day.
Polygamists employ various strategies to avoid legal penalties. Some don’t register any marriage or call themselves married either publicly or on government forms. After all, bigamy and adultery are only crimes for married people and only a few states still criminalize “lewd and lascivious” cohabitation (Florida, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia). Polygamists may call additional wives “concubines” since there are no laws against concubinage. Some polygamists divorce and marry each wife in turn in order to establish a lawful basis for the relationship. There is no law against living with your ex-wife and this procedure allows partaking of the legal benefits of marriage.
There is some good news for polygamists. The attorneys general of Utah and Arizona have said in recent interviews that they have no intention of prosecuting polygamists unless they commit other crimes such as incest or taking underage brides.[31] As a result polygamist communities and leaders have become more open with authorities to report offenses against minors. Actually the real threat to polygamists across the country is not prosecution but social opposition, whether expulsion from churches, discrimination by employers or child custody lawsuits instigated by disapproving relatives.
Perhaps it’s time for Christians to return to a biblical view of marriage. A covenant of lifetime companionship without a bureaucratic license was considered marriage for over five thousand years before the government got involved. Government sanctioned ceremonies, whether civil or religious, do not guarantee the durability of a relationship. Half of all legal marriages, including Christian, end in divorce, usually with much acrimony and at great expense. This is better than polygamy?
It’s Harmful
The second attack on polygamy criticizes the nature of the relationship. The Media has given sensational coverage to several cases of “marriage” to underage girls or close relatives, the most notorious of which are Warren Jeffs and Tom Green. Such stories suggest that all polygamists in America are either rapists or prurient religious fanatics. The rhetoric of conservative family activists criticizes polygamy as being just too improper, too unhealthy for the good of society. The practice surely demeans women and harms the children involved. And, the only reason it exists is to give men all the sex they want.
In response polygamous wives are openly defending their choice in Media interviews, insisting they have not been coerced, don’t feel demeaned and are not sex slaves.[32] Some have even offered compelling glimpses into their lifestyle through books and websites. (See the Polygamy References and the Polygamy Websites sections at the end of this article.) They’re quick to remind the public that every polygamous marriage has more women in it than men. From their point of view polygamy is primarily for women.
Polygamy has even become a new arena for feminists to assert their cause. In monogamy the wife often struggles with the expectation to be all things to her husband and children. Feminists regard polygamy as liberating. The noted libertarian John Tierney defended polygamy in a March 11, 2006, New York Times editorial, in which he declared that polygamy “isn’t necessarily worse than the current American alternative: serial monogamy.” He goes on to quote a woman in Utah who shared her hubby with seven others but enjoyed the shared day care arrangement.
“If I’m dog-tired and stressed out, I can be alone and guilt-free,” she explained in a speech to the National Organization for Women. “It’s a rare day when all eight of my husband’s wives are tired and stressed at the same time.” She said polygamy “offers an independent woman a real chance to have it all” and represented “the ultimate feminist lifestyle.”[33]
Family therapist Audrey Chapman wrote about non-Mormon American women that voluntarily chose a polygamous lifestyle. The women she interviewed told of safety, security and stability in their households. One woman remarked that she “knows at all times where her husband is.” She also said, “I’m not worrying all the time that he’s going to leave and break up my family.”[34] Another polygamous wife told Chapman that her relationship with a co-wife works because they don’t see their husband as a possession. The wives in these households avoid rivalry by scheduling personal time with their husband and the husband including them in decision-making. A surprising revelation came from one wife when asked about their sex lives. While sexual contact is kept private and each wife respects that intimacy, she reported, “Actually not much sex occurs, because the relationship is not based on their physical union, but upon a spiritual basis instead.”[35]
The reality is that 500 years of enforced monogamy has not prevented uncommitted cohabitation, underage or forced marriage, dishonest bigamy, adultery, wife swapping, prostitution, seduction, rape, incest, child and spouse abuse, desertion, the child-welfare state, and other social ills. Social history since the Council of Trent suggests that the monogamy-only policy has actually contributed to these problems due to the libidinous propensity of men and the surplus of women in the world.[36] Indeed, Islam asserts that its allowance of polygamy makes men responsible for their sexuality and serves as an effective deterrent against prostitution, divorce, sexually-transmitted diseases, and financial instability of single women.[37]
The evidence indicates that the great majority of American polygamists have not contributed to the cultural decay. By all accounts they are decent, hard-working and law-abiding citizens with strong moral, ethical and family values. One can only wonder how a man making a vow of lifetime fidelity, being responsible for the welfare of his wives and their children and teaching them to live by God’s Word can possibly be unhealthy or harm the women and children. Indeed, Christian and Fundamentalist Mormon polygamists seek to honor the principles of marriage found in the Bible just as committed Christian monogamists.
It’s Immoral
The third form of criticism addresses the biblical material and classifies polygamy as either a form of immorality at worst or a dispensational condition that ended with the New Covenant. Biblical characters that engaged in polygamy are typically cast in a bad light and we must not be like them. The main problem for these critics is that nowhere in Scripture, including the New Testament, is the practice of polygamy classified as sinful, prohibited or even criticized (cf. Rom 4:15; 5:13). It is never included in the definition of adultery, prostitution or incest.
Moreover, there is not the slightest hint of disapproval in Scripture from God or any biblical character toward a man because of having multiple wives. The spiritual and salvation implications for Abraham, Jacob and their blood descendants, as John Milton aptly observed, would be very grave if polygamy were to be defined as wicked (cf. Deut 23:2; John 8:41). [38] In reality, all of the biblical marriage values and ideals can apply to plural marriage as well as to monogamy. The biblical record of polygamists proves it. To call polygamists immoral is calumny of the worst degree.
The names of polygamists in Scripture include many good and righteous men faithful to God, including Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Caleb, Abdon, Elkanah, King Abijah, King David and King Joash. Many other names are listed without any character evaluation and only a few had a bad reputation (Lamech, Esau, King Rehoboam, and King Ahab). King Solomon, who had the most wives, is difficult to classify, since he began well and ended badly.
Some of these stories clearly reveal God’s attitude. Not many Bible expositors consider that when Hagar ran away from Sarah, God told her to go back to her marriage (Gen 16:9). After the death of Sarah Abraham had at least two wives at the same time without any adverse comment from God (Gen 25:1-6). When Aaron and Miriam opposed Moses’ decision to take a second wife (Num 12:1-9), God defended his action by extolling his faithfulness (Num 12:7) and punished Miriam in particular for her opposition.
After David committed adultery God’s rebuke reminded him that in addition to the multiple wives and concubines David had, God had given him the widows of King Saul into “his bosom” (KJV), which means conjugal relations (cf. Gen 16:5). Moreover, God would have given him more wives if he had asked (2 Sam 12:8). So, God not only permitted polygamy and directed marriage in situations of Levirate marriage that would result in polygamy, but was willing to act as a matchmaker for polygamy.
Another factor often ignored is that plural marriage was highly valued in Israelite culture by the women. Sarah, Rachel and Leah were all eager for their husbands to take a concubine-wife in order to have children (Gen 16:2; 30:3-4, 9). Deborah, the godly judge of Israel, in her song of praise to the Lord after the defeat of Sisera included in the list of the blessed spoils of war “a maiden, two maidens for every warrior” (Judg 5:30). When Ruth the Moabitess married Boaz the women of the village said, “May the Lord make the woman who is coming into your home like Rachel and Leah” (Ruth 4:11). Abigail joined David’s polygamous household without reservation (1 Sam 25:39-43). Indeed, Scripture records the joyful anticipation of joining the king’s polygamous household (Ps 45:9-11; SS 6:8-9).
Often overlooked is that God even portrayed Himself as a polygamist to teach a spiritual lesson (Jer 3; Ezek 23). In short, God has never permitted something He deemed immoral. If God had wanted only monogamy just one “thou shalt not” would have taken care of the matter. When God permits something or allows something He is still making a choice. When God is morally outraged He does not keep it to Himself. There are things God hates clearly identified in Scripture, but polygamy is not one of them.
Conclusion
Researching the subject of polygamy has been an enlightening and thought-provoking venture. Polygamists offer cogent arguments for their lifestyle and deserve to be heard. Polygamy is not going away and polygamists will continue to press for equal rights. It’s long past time in my view to de-criminalize polygamy between consenting and competent adults. I encourage all Christians to study for themselves what God’s Word has to say on this important issue and let Scripture be the final arbiter. I think our churches could benefit from increased dialog on this subject and greater charity toward those who choose to live differently than the majority.
Works Cited
1. Walter Scheidel, Sex and Empire: A Darwinian Perspective (Stanford University, 2006), 21. http://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/scheidel/050603.pdf.
2. Hunt and Edgar, Select Papyri (Harvard Univ. Press, 1970), I, 5-7, cited in Jay Adams, Marriage, Divorce & Remarriage in the Bible, (Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1980), 81.
3. Pseudo-Demosthenes, Speeches: Against Neaera, 59:122, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?lookup=Dem.+59+122.
4. Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, XVII, 1, § 2.
5. Justin Martyr (110-165), Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, §134.
6. Sanhedrin 21, Soncino Babylonian Talmud.
7. Eugene Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered (Orbis Books, 1975), 20f.
8. The Code of Maimonides, Book Four: The Book of Women. Trans. Isaac Klein. (Yale University Press, 1972), xxiv.
9. Marriage, Jewish Virtual Library, http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/marriage.html.
See also Christopher Smith, “Polygamy’s Practice Stirs Debate in Israel,” St. Lake Tribune, Dec. 7, 2001. http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/polygamy-israel/index.html
10. Ibid.
11. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book I, Chap. 28.
12. “Concubinage,” Encyclopedia Britannica (1911), http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Concubinage.
13. Council of Trent, Session 24 (1563), Doctrine on the Sacrament of Matrimony, http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct24.html.
14. Franciscan Sisters, Frequently Asked Questions, http://www.torsisters.com/faq.htm.
15. “Ethnographic Atlas Codebook,” Atlas of World Cultures, Patrick Gray, ed., http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/worldcul/Codebook4EthnoAtlas.pdf.
16. David Seamans, “A Marriage Counterculture,” Christianity Today, August 31, 2000; http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/augustweb-only/44.0c.html.
Elizabeth Isichei, “African Family Values,” Christianity Today, July 1, 2003; http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/2003/issue79/5.25.html.
17. 1900 Indian Census – By Townships & Towns, http://www.rootsweb.com/~okmurray/Resources/1900xxxindiancensus.htm
18. Audrey B. Chapman, Man Sharing: Dilemma or Choice (William Morrow & Co, 1986), 38f.
19. Steve E. Ozment. “Luther on Family Life,” Case Study: The Impact of the Reformation on Women in Germany, Warwick University, 2000. http://www.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/History/teaching/protref/women/WR0912.htm
20. Don Milton, Thelyphthora, http://www.christianmarriage.com/home/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=114.
21. Don Milton, John and Charles Wesley’s Sister Married a Polygamist, http://www.christianmarriage.com/home/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=115.
22. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Moody Bible Institute, 1980), Vol. II, 724.
23. Emil G. Hirsch & Schulim Ochser, “Pilegesh,” Jewish Encyclopedia, http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com.
24. According to the Jerusalem Talmud, Kethuboth 29d, a concubine also received a ketubah, but without the “aliment” guaranteed (financial support in the event of divorce or death of the husband). Emil G. Hirsch and Schulim Ochser, “Pilegesh” JewishEnclypedia.com.
25. The Code of Maimonides, op. cit., 87.
26. Reflections on Covenant and Mission, Consultation of The National Council of Synagogues and The Bishops Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, August 12, 2002, http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/cjrelations/resources/documents/interreligious/ncs_usccb120802.htm.
A Sacred Obligation: Rethinking Christian Faith in Relation to Judaism and the Jewish People, The Christian Scholars Group on Christian-Jewish Relations, September 1, 2002; http://www.jcrelations.net/en/displayItem.php?id=986.
27. Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, XVII, 1, § 3.
28. Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, West Publishing Co., 1979.
29. See Ray Jay Davis, Anti-Polygamy Legislation, http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/history/plural_marriage/Legislation_EOM.htm.
30. Arizona, Idaho, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Utah.
31. Jason Szep, “Fundamental Mormons Seek Recognition for Polygamy,” Reuters, June 12, 2007; http://www.polygamy.com/articles/templates/?a=314&z=1.
32. Mary Batchelor, Marianne Watson, and Anne Wilde, I Would Never…Go Back to Being a Monogamous Wife, beliefnet, http://www.beliefnet.com/story/66/story_6652_1.html.;
Elise Soukup, Polygamists, Unite!: They used to Live Quietly, But Now They’re Making Noise. Newsweek, May 20, 2006, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11786790/site/newsweek/;
Batsheva bat David, From A Woman’s Perspective: The Case For Polygamy, http://pilegesh.blogspot.com/2007/01/from-womans-perspective-case-for.html.;
Hannah Wolfson, Christian Polygamists on the Move, Associated Press, July 19, 1999, http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy24.html.
33. “John Tierney Backs Polygamy as HBO Series Debuts,” Editor and Publisher, March 11, 2006, http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002157335.
34. Chapman, 46.
35. Ibid., 47.
36. See Thelyphthora, or A Treatise on Female Ruin by Martin Madan (1780); The History & Philosophy of Marriage: Or, Polygamy and Monogamy Compared by James Campbell (1869)
37. Reasons Why Islam Permits Polygamy, http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/328/.
38. John Milton, De Doctrina Christiana, 1825, http://www.btinternet.com/~familyman/milton.htm.
Polygamy References
Mary Batchelor, Marianne Watson, and Anne Wilde, Voices in Harmony: Contemporary Women Celebrate Plural Marriage. Cedar Fort Publishers, 2000.
Theodore C. Bergstrom, On the Economics of Polygyny, (private paper) University of Michigan, 1994; http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/Evolution/polygyny3.pdf.
Audrey B. Chapman, Man Sharing: Dilemma or Choice. William Morrow & Co, 1986.
Rick Cross, Polygamist Groups, http://www.rickross.com/groups/polygamy.html.
Tim Harford, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do: The Economic Case for Polygamy. Slate Magazine, Feb 18, 2006, http://www.slate.com/id/2136453/.
Eugene Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered. Orbis Books, 1975.
The History & Philosophy of Marriage: A Christian Polygamy Sourcebook. 4th ed. edited by Nathan Braun. Imperial University Press, 2005.
Philip L. Kilbride, Plural Marriage for Our Times: A Reinvented Option? Bergin & Garvey Paperback, 1994.
Martin Madan (1711-1776), Thelyphthora, Or, A Treatise on Female Ruin, in its Causes, Effects, Consequences, Prevention, and Remedy; Considered on the Basis of Divine Law. J. Dodsley Publisher, 1780.
John Milton (1608-1674), De Doctrina Christiana (published in 1825).
Richard Mouw, A Modest Defense of Polygamy, beliefnet, http://www.beliefnet.com/story/78/story_7881_1.html.
Jonathan Turley, Polygamy Laws Expose Our Own Hypocrisy, USA Today, October 3, 2004, http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/2004-10-03-turley_x.htm.
Polygamy Websites
Bible Polygamy, http://www.biblepolygamy.com/, created in 2003.
Biblical Polygamy, http://www.biblicalpolygamy.com/, created in 2001.
Broken Shackles Ministry, http://www.bfree.org/, created in 1996.
Christian Marriage, http://www.christianmarriage.com/, created in 1998.
Christian Patriarchy, http://christianpatriarchy.com/, created in 1998.
Christian Polygamy INFO, http://www.christianpolygamy.info/, created in 2001.
Christian Polygyny, http://polygyny.dukeofmarshall.com/, created in 2005.
Family Values Polygamy Chat and Community, http://www.4thefamily.us/, created in 2004.
Introspection of a Plural Wife, http://www.pluralwife.blogspot.com/, created in 2005.
Love Not Force, http://www.lovenotforce.com/, created in 2000.
The Orthodox Jewish Pro-Polygamy Page, http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/polygamy-orthodox/index.html.
Patriarchy Website: Israel C.S. Lim, http://www.patriarchywebsite.com, created in 1997.
Pilegesh: http://www.pilegesh.blogspot.com/, created in 2006.
Polygamy Now Blog, http://polygamynow.blogspot.com/, created in 2006.
Principal Voices, http://www.principalvoices.org/, created in 2006.
Pro-Polygamy, http://www.pro-polygamy.com/, created in 2001.
Righteous Warriors, http://www.righteouswarriors.com/, created in 1998.
Steadfast Love of SisterWives, http://steadfastlovesgod.blogspot.com/, created in 2006.
Sisterwives @ http://www.ezboard.com, http://p221.ezboard.com/bsisterwives, created in 1999.
TruthBearer, http://www.truthbearer.org/, created in 1998.
Other Research Sources
Alfred Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social Life, Updated Edition (Hendrickson Publishers, 1994).
Atlas of World Cultures, Patrick Gray, ed., University of Pittsburgh Press, 1998.
Julius H. Greenstone, “Polygamy,” Jewish Encyclopedia, http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/.
Stanley Kurtz, Here Come the Brides: Plural Marriage is Waiting in the Wings. The Weekly Standard, Dec 26, 2005, Volume 011, Issue 15.
Solomon Schechter & Joseph Jacobs, “Levirate Marriage,” Jewish Encyclopedia, http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/.
Soncino Babylonian Talmud, London: The Soncino Press, 1961.
Sudan Pushes Polygamy, BBC News, 15 August 2001, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1493309.stm.
Walter Scheidel, Sex and Empire: A Darwinian Perspective, Stanford University, 2006, http://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/scheidel/050603.pdf.

xxx

Cultural Revolutionaries find Polyamory Odd.

Call the Exterminator? KW–Article in response to While Ironing, below.

Three’s company for polyamorous Edmontonians
Posted by st0pp0lygamy.
By Mindelle Jacobs
Last Updated: February 5, 2011 12:00am

Marilyn, a stay-at-home mother and polygamist has a dilemma.
Who to sleep with on Valentine’s Day? Her husband or her boyfriend?
I’ve covered some strange stories over the years but this is one of the most mind-blowing.

I’m sitting in a Jasper Avenue cafe with Marilyn, her husband, Harry, and her other lover, Bob.
(I’m using pseudonyms.)
The three plan to go out for a Valentine’s dinner together next weekend, but who gets to have sex with Marilyn?

“I don’t know. I haven’t been told yet,” quips Harry.
Retorts Marilyn, pretend-checking her PDA. “I make no promises. I have no idea,” she laughs. “Probably nobody,” she says seconds later, since Valentine’s Day is a Monday and she’s got to be up early to get the kids to school.

Harry says he’ll likely give Marilyn a big bag of cinnamon hearts for Valentine’s Day. As for Bob, he maintains he’s not into “greeting card” holidays and won’t feel snubbed if Marilyn hooks up with Harry for the night.

Marilyn e-mailed me after reading a recent column I wrote in which I criticized a law professor for urging that polygamy be decriminalized.
“As a mother and wife, I firmly believe in the protection of women and children,” she wrote. “As an individual who identifies as polyamorous … and is involved in a consensual relationship with not only my spouse but also with another man, I strongly disagree with (the ban on polygamy).”

She wondered if I’d like to chat. Well, sure. After all, you don’t (knowingly) meet polygamists every day. The back story is that Marilyn and Harry have been married for 12 years. Harry and Bob have known each other since junior high.

A couple of years ago, Marilyn met a polygamous trio (a man and two women) and, as she explained: “Something just resonated with me.”
She compares her awakening polyamorous sensibility to someone realizing he or she is gay. “It was a very interesting process coming out to myself,” she says. “I realized something very deep about myself — that this kind of relationship makes sense to me. This is who I am.”

Marilyn bumped into Bob one day and opened up to him about her feelings. She wondered if Bob was interested in experimenting with polygamy, or polyamory, as she prefers to call it.

“It kind of weirded me out in some respects,” admits Bob, who is separated and raising kids of his own. “It’s not something I ever expected to pursue.”
Marilyn thought she’d better ask Harry what he thought of her taking on a second husband, so to speak. “When I told him, I was in tears because I didn’t know what it meant. Was this the end of my marriage? I had no idea how he’d react.”

Recalls Harry: “It would be untruthful to say that I was completely happy with the situation.”

In the end, he decided he could live with another man in the picture because he loved Marilyn. Not that he isn’t jealous sometimes. “Everybody has their moments of inadequacy,” he says.

All in their mid-40s, they’d be unremarkable in a crowd. No Playboy Mansion looks. Just middle-aged people with a bizarre lifestyle. The trio don’t live together, by the way, mostly for financial reasons. Marilyn just stays at Bob’s house occasionally. They sleep together about once a week.
“Unless someone’s going to hand me $1 million, a large house with enough rooms for all the animals and all the children, (one happy polygamous household) is not going to happen,” says Marilyn. “So (Bob) has his house and we have our house.”

The kids in the two households are too young to know what’s going on but they may figure it out one day.
“If the legalities of this were different, I’d probably be much more open with my children,” says Marilyn.

She’d like polygamy either legalized or the Criminal Code section narrowed so proof of exploitation is
required for a conviction.

Sorry, Marilyn. While I can’t imagine the police busting up your polygamous party, I don’t want Canada
to be a beacon for the cause. Overall, polygamy causes immense harm to women. Why encourage it?

mindy.jacobs@sunmedia.ca2011/02/04/17160971.html


http://www.edmontonsun.com/comment/columnists/

Overall? By nature human civil and human rights are universally applicable. A well off polygamous
woman may have money to contribute money for the work and income women needed to relieve poverty and contribute.
This is all so repressive that it is hard to believe that someone hasn’t been paid to bribed to write this text.

It really punishes and makes illegitimate women and Children whose beliefs are different than yours with draconian measures. In some countries it would feed young married Sunni girls into the torture/execution machine that is Iran’s IRB.

Creating a new category of capitol crime in the dictatorships of the world, that this would benefit women overall is odd from a woman who tries to improve the status of women overall. This will reduce it to nill in the most populous countries of the world.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW whether the Catholics, Mormons (LDS), and Evangelicals aren’t pumping funds into this smear campaign somewhere.

Videos of stories of MK Ultra Survivors

Videos of stories of MK Ultra Survivors

China imprisons and tortures girls and other young
people, there is no minimum age. If this is done in
NAFTA it will spread until Draconian penalties
AGAINST FAMILIES will, as some ERA era feminists
with myopic perspectives use as the basis for a
outdated myopic feminism. On the outside it looks
like it should work. It is insular and in our quick
paced times isolationism cannot be maintained
without harm dogging our hamstrings.

Women and children are the most vulnerable to
and the easiest targets of proactive Naziism.
Refusal to vote for good measures when they are
proposed or brought to the floor does not help
form a positive international consensus by an
informed and consenting world populace.

Cary Nations Returns, Reprinted

The time to lay charges against polygamists has arrived
BY JANCIS M. ANDREWS, VANCOUVER SUN
FEBRUARY 3, 2011

Re: B.C. must act on criminal offences in Bountiful case, Column, Jan. 31

In her superb column, Daphne Bramham hits the nail squarely on the head when she calls for charges to be laid against certain leaders of the polygamous community of Bountiful.

Her column also mirrors the deep concerns of millions of Canadians who watched with horror and consternation as abuse followed abuse at Bountiful, while B.C. government departments turned a blind eye. Because of their refusal to act, Bountiful has become a cesspool of wrong doing.

However, it’s a new day. New government officials are in charge, and the attorney-general’s office has a first-class representative in Craig Jones, who is leading the government’s defence of Section 293 of the Criminal Code, proscribing polygamy.

The B.C. government can rest assured that all mainstream Canadians are behind them and desire them to act. The time to lay charges is now. As Ms. Bramham said so ably, there are no excuses left.

Jancis M. Andrews

Sechelt

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

Who was Cary Nations? The proverbial old battle axe herself would descend upon Saloons, including those attached to
rooms where, well you have the idea, she would descend with her maenad legions, with real battle axes and brick bats and actually tear the establishment apart. You’d have to pay damages now-a-days, but NOT Cary Nations. She led the nation in passing prohibition in order to stop child neglect and abuse. It didn’t work, unfortunately and came with
a host of evils of its own and Prohibition was rescinded.

We are still working on Alcoholism. We know now that Alcoholism is not cured by Prohibition or Force, nor is Child Abuse. Jail may deter some, but they generally come out more out of control or traumatised than when they went in. Appropriate Treatment, before or after jail, preferably including during, replaces expensive and less effective treatment.

And the reason that Bountiful was on the back burner has to do with how Propaganda works. They have to draw this out for as long as they can and they can make it do double duty. I noticed a press ploy sufficient, contrived, and diversionary enough to turn the Cuban Community into warring factions and distracting enough to make me consider the idea that the real goings on were elsewhere. I noticed this trial which would set an unenforceable precedent, and
it could be pushed through “quick and dirty” without the broader implications of the re-criminalisation being considered at all.

It will be hard and unfortunate, but a listen given to the MK Ultra material posted here would be more than worth the time. And may Cary Nations rest in peace.

MK Ultra in North America, Child Brides in Malaysia

Too young, too soon, too wrong: Child brides
(My comment below)

Posted by: whatsaysyou on:
January 10, 2011
In: Issues, Comment!

Whenever the term “child bride” pops into a conversation over a cup of coffee at the dinner table, the practice that happened in the olden days where girls had little opportunities in life before our time comes to mind. And the eerie thought of an underaged girl in a cult being married too young too soon which has been mentioned in this website. Recently, some news coming all the way from Malaysia almost left me having a heart attack online. This news made headlines in Malaysia around December 2010 which created an uproar among rights groups and public citizens alike.

The girl in this news article is a 14-year-old child married not to a 15-year-old and not even to a 16-year-old boy. Her husband is 23 and what is even more shocking, a schoolteacher! Who in the right mind would allow a 14-year-old schoolgirl to be married to someone who is old enough to be her big brother? What does this 23-year-old see in a little kid who is only a child and someone’s baby. It is so ironic to note that marriage happens in a developed country which boasts its first-class tall buildings and state-of-the-art infrastructure.

After some time, the 14-year-old bride was interviewed had a post-wedding interview which was featured on Yahoo!7 online recently. Reading what she said left me, as a reader, shaking my head in disbelief. A 14-year-old child should be staying in school and enjoying her adolescent years rather than take up the duties of a married woman. It is more shocking to note that her mum must be mad enough to allow her daughter to carry on and be a wife beyond her years (if you also include the government not giving a toss about law reforms to ban child marriages). Every mother wants her child to have a bright future but this mother really just take the cake much to my shock. But then again, perhaps maybe the mother has no say in all this because it could be possible that the girl’s dad may play a role on her marriage with the older guy but I don’t know if it is really true but this is just my theory. They can justify that their culture and religion allow child brides to married all they like until the cows come home, but I think this is just wrong. Therefore,

I ask myself how long can the marriage between a fourteen-year-old girl and her twenty-something husband can last. We all know what teenagers are usually like when they start rebelling and arguing with the grown-ups. I get the feeling that the marriage may not last when she gets a bit older if she starts seeing someone else. Or perhaps her older husband might start eyeing a lady his age and possibly love her because she is not some kid just like that schoolgirl. Who knows, anything goes in life.

Unlike that 14-year-old who made headlines in Malaysia as a child bride, this other 14-year-old girl from India was lucky to be spared from becoming a child bride all thanks to a tip-off from a kind grown-up, some cops, the law and common sense which intervened on her behalf on time. As long as common sense among adults is on a girl’s side, she is in for a life full of better opportunities rather than be turned into a child bride who has no choice but to part with a promising future.

Those backward-thinking adults in modern day and age can try and justify that it’s all about family honour or climbing the wealth and social ladder just to justify why they allow their daughters to be child brides to men who are old enough to be their brothers, fathers and grandfathers. What they don’t realise is that they are depriving those girls their normal childhood and their future. Do they not realise that child brides are also vulnerable to becoming prey to paedophiles who are happy enough to take advantage of them behind closed doors once they are married to those men who have no ounce of common sense in them? Anyway, what says you about this? Feel free to have your say.

Comment, MM:

Well, child marriage, as it was called, was a phenomenon of Southern Utah until 1997. It was certainly the dominant form of marriage when I was in high school–that is, marriage of girls under the current minimum age of 18. Not that my friends who all married at 16 were forced, but they all married boys who were drafted or volunteered for Viet Nam. Virginia and I were the sole survivors of our group, and we both planned on going to College. If a girl was under 18, she and her fiancé had to go before a judge, and he nearly always allowed the marriage, particularly if the girl was pregnant or the boy was headed for Viet Nam. This may be one reason that Yearning for Zion Ranch was built in Texas. They liked it there once, the grandmothers of my age. I am 59.

My niece was a brides’ maid. She was very tall as a freshman and started to see a senior so she hoped to marry him when she turned sixteen and went before the judge.
The LDS, when we were Polygamous and when the last girls married in the Principle, tried various schemes to try to make the marriage age fit the circumstances. Earlier in Viet Nam, the church had tried to get the girls to marry at 21 and the boys after a tour of duty in Viet Nam. My great grandma was Danish and my great-grandfather spoke for her when she was young. This happened often enough that Willa Cather makes it the plot of her book. In both cases their fathers
wanted them to marry, if they married, after my Great-grandmother was 18. He wanted her to have time to look around before she tied the knot.
In my grandparents generation, as my grandma had gone down to attend the Branch Agricultural college/Normal School, romance was big on the agenda of couples. My grandparents had quite a long one and married when she was past 20 and he was 26 or so. Most Westerns were filmed just above Cedar City and they both worked around movie stars and glamour.
So I think the public has been somewhat led in their impression of how this child-bride problem might be solved and with what success.
There were many demographic strains that effected the age of marriage.
Spanish law forbade the selling of a slave away from his or her parents until the child was at least 14. This may be why the 14 year old was easily considered an emancipated minor.
It has nothing to do, specifically, with polygamy. So, after all the trauma, if the trial is fair, and it isn’t fair yet, there is no reason to believe that the FLDS would not submit to a 18 year old marriage age.
The girls in town who tend to marry young (seldom at 14, but it did happen rarely) may be less rigidly controlled and may be more likely
to try to marry by getting pregnant and going to court for permission.
They live in a much more open and non authoritarian region–the same one.
It occurs to me, having found myself a 19 year old boyfriend at almost 15, that the women of India are generally mature when they are much smaller and the consensus is that marrying as a small 14 year old is very dangerous and limiting, since the basic education of girls is an issue, while an American teenager may have a much more intensive education–not enough to support a family. And working wives need a good education so I do think that it may be seen and agreed upon that among the FlDS, girls should marry at the same age they do in town.

Forced marriage and forced intercourse, ie., marital rape, was not permitted among the LDS. Susa Young, one of Brigham Youngs’ daughter felt that girls, while they should not be forced into having marital intercourse, they should not be kept in complete innocence either, and Deseret Books published a novel in 1909 that Tolstoy’s wife enjoyed very much. Susa was divorced and felt that her innocence, ignorance, had had much to do with her failure.

As for a non-child-rearing culture, I think this will happen when and where mothers have fewer children. My mother had twins when I was 11. So I agree that a normal childhood and adolescence are desirable,
no culture will agree until it is ready. Force in sexuality is a crime.
That is an incontestable truth, but a new one for the refugee girls who we have displaced.

There are many issues to be considered, and an investigation into whether the parents of any molested girls were involved in MK Ultra
in either America and Canada must be researched before any sentences are set. So much has been release and declassified in both Canada and America that such an investigation is needed before this case is through.

Though crimes committed should be punished, whatever the marital system, I feel like the polygamy-is abuse people need to exercise patience while complicated cultural and religious issues are better examined. More expenditure in the area of education, school buildings, remote learning centres etc. would certainly help these targeted populations. It looks to me that the specific article you read was benign, co-ordinated and targeted propaganda. I know journalists who disagree with these methods absolutely.

MK Ultra was a black psy-op that exploited small children in the South West in every way possible, beginning with children who are already ill. I saw a recruitment article that glorified the program. I knew I was ill and was feeling vulnerable because my grandmother had died. I think the Sunday Paper (SF Chronicle-Examiner, 1962-64) did not think prospective child subjects would read the hard sell and see how creepy it was. If they thought so they were wrong.

Like many, I summered and sometimes spent Christmas Vacation in Southern Utah. If the future leaders of Short Creek, Colorado City/Hillsdale were so often in federal custody, taken in raids, the chances that Mengele’s plan for Southern Utah would demoniacally succeeded would have been higher. (Cathy O’Brian identified “Dr. Green” as Mengele.) 


Thank you for the post.

Current Crisis Future Harm/Criminalisation of Polygamy

On the Human and life long Fiscal Cost of Heightened Criminalisation of Polygamy

I think this long existant law, not Polygamy, long has been inherently cruel to women who have functional husbands and a country and farms and houses and children as their great grandparents did. I think access to polygamous families, people Canadians might find they like. If removal and different surroundings would change their beliefs and the conformation of their families but no measure now, tried previously has ever worked.

I FEAR THAT VOTES, PARTICULARLY…

…in vast urban populations polls and votes may not reflect the will of rural polygamous families and be a mistaken use of public funds. If children are found to be truly abused, they should be relocated to more functional FLDS families by social workers. The Geneva Convention forbids removal of one group’s children into another. Help is always cheaper than force. These people are farmers–in Bountiful and right across the grain belt. It is no time to be forbidding farmers to farm and putting them away in jails at a great expense to the government.

At WHAT COST for how long?

Cities need food, better and cheaper food and that’s what these polygamous folks have to offer. No one can tell you how many there are–they stopped keeping track of themselves a long time, maybe one and a half Centuries ago, because of persecution.

They did not know polygamy was illegal in Canada, their destination.They certainly did not leave on such an arduous trek thinking they would be arrested at its end. It would be a harder relocation now. There are many peaceful and harmless people in the world who will not fight unless their backs are against the wall and you are putting these farmers and lumber company workers backs against the wall at your expense. Family sizes will shrink with time. A national incentive to those who have fewer children and other moderate measures will work better than rhetoric and force.

I have lived in Canada, many years ago, with a husband who had a geophysics job. We enjoyed it. At the time we had money. These are loyal and industrious citizens. If they need the help of Social Workers, these are citizens who have contributed to the Canadian economy and paid taxes for more than a hundred years. Legal proceedings and enforcement may seem inexpensive, but no long term costs have been counted.

AND EVEN UNTO OLD AGE…

So you put all the parents in jail for 17 years. The children be angry for the rest of their lives and this will be hard for any
“reform minded” foster parent to accept. They will be persecuted as Jewish children have been for the past few thousand years, a new and alien religion will be offered to them over and over while while their religion includes Polygamy, they know it. Their religion is all they have to hold onto of their former lives, particularly if their lives were happy.

I am just LDS, but I know how different I am than people who are the majority however I conceal it. And I see that both the KKK and the Salvation are Christians. So their is no majority religions, only groupings that make it seem so. There can be alliances. These are in the main the only tie short of Genocide, and some form of Genocide often results. Foster care is very, very expensive, about 2,000 a month for a Foster Care mother of four. Hard to place children get the most marginally appropriate homes. If they are lucky it may become a good home that doesn’t fit the stereotype or model of perfect, or even good home.

The unlucky may be forced to live in societies’ social and ethical latrines unless they will recant. In US and the Old Commonwealth, as adults, as with other abstinence cultures, the rate of Alcoholism among those who drink is 50%. There will be more imprisoned for life
after interventions than before intervention. And in the time of war and returning ill Vets who need beds, about 30% will be ill, many for life who would have thrived if way back when they had been left unmolested.