User login
Navigation
Syndicate
Polygamy: A Valid Choice?
Over the weekend, a group of Utah teenagers held a pro-polygamy rally:
"Because of our beliefs, many of our people have been incarcerated and had their basic human rights stripped of them, namely life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," said a 19-year-old identified only as Tyler. "I didn't come here today to ask for your permission to live my beliefs. I shouldn't have to."
Polygamy is banned in the Utah Constitution and is a felony offense. The rally was unusual because those who practice polygamy typically try to live under the radar.
It drew about 250 supporters to City Hall, said Mary Batchelor, co-founder of Principle Voices of Polygamy, which helped organize the event.
Polygamy's image moved further along on its path to refurbishment ... The AP made sure to note that the crowd was dressed mostly in flip-flops and blue jeans, that they spoke on cellphones and played loud music, and that many of them stressed that their home lives had not included "abuse, neglect [or] forced marriages."
My comment:
Why should anyone care how anyone else lives his or her personal life, especially if it's a religious choice? I understand Utah's history and why polygamy is a felony there; it's the only way they could get into the United States in the 19th Century. But this is the 21st Century.
Increasingly I am coming to believe that the government should not be in the marriage business. If people want to be recognized in a religious partnership in whatever configuration among consenting adults, it's their business and their religion's business. If people want to be recognized in a secular partnership, then it's the state's business. But it should not be called marriage, and I'm increasingly beginning to believe that civil partnerships should not have any special benefits attached to them. It's not fair and it's not right, and I say this as a legally married woman.
Comments
polygamy
I live in Arizona. There is a town that practices polygamy in very northern Arizona.
They are not legally married to the second, third, fourth, etc wives. They are "spiritual marriages." So the extra wives are not legally married and receive welfare benefits for their children. So they are exercising their religious beliefs at the expense of taxpayers.
Many of these extra wives are young teenagers (as young as 13 or 14) who have no say in whether they marry 40 year-old men. They are given as wives, regardless of their wishes.
Am I understanding right?
Just for clarification Lynn, are you saying the govenment shouldn't recognize any relationship at all as a "marriage," but instead as a secular partnership (if at all?)
That probably would clear up some of the difficulties people have in wanting to be fair to nontraditional partnerships in the legal realm without (necessarily) extending religious recognition of them. Still, I'm not sure how I'd feel if my marriage was changed from a "marriage" to a "civil partnership" in the eyes of the law. Maybe it'd just take some getting used to, I don't know.
Interesting topic
In most jurisdictions, marriage is pretty easy to get into. [Just a side note: in Texas, in fact, the state recognizes common law or "informal" marriages(along with 14 or 15 other states). You don't need a license or a ceremony... it won't be registered in the state's vital statistics registry or anything, but you are still very much married if you satisfy the three simple elements in the law.] The difficult thing is getting OUT of that marriage. Once you file for divorce, the state (via the family court system) starts to micro-manage everything in that failed partnership: property (real and personal), child custody, child visitation, child support.
How do you dissolve a marriage or civil union with three people involved? What about six? What if only one person wants out and the others want to carry on? Do non-biological parents have visitation rights to children who were born during the union but are not actually their children? FWIW, I do see some wisdom in limiting civil unions to two adults.
tough issues
These are tough issues for sure.
I read a book a few years back "Under the Banner of Heaven" by Jon Krakauer. Very good commentary on the subject, I thought.
I understand Lynn's viewpoint and the differentiation b/t secular partnerships and religious marriages. The part I can't get past is the age of some of these girls - they are children and are entering into a lifestyle before they are ready to and before they are able to make their own independent, informed decisions to do so. How do we differentiate this from statutory rape? At what age should young women able to choose this lifestyle? That is the part I struggle with - girls who have grown up in this fashion and don't understand their options and aren't offered alternatives. Does the government - the law - society - whatever - have any part in regulating this or discouraging this? I don't know. I just struggle with that part of it.
OK, I see. I should've
OK, I see. I should've figured as much. I guess I was just thinking back to families described in the book I mentioned were many of the wives were so young.
torn
As a lesbian, I feel like I should support the "any relationship between consenting adults" argument, but I also read "Under the Banner of Heaven" and it really disturbed me. The Mormon Fundamentalist communities in that book didn't just practise plural marriage -- they were also terribly misogynistic. The women had no education, no exposure to the outside world, and no opportuntities besides marriage, and they didn't seem to even have choices about who they married. Even if the women in plural marriages are of the "age of consent", I don't think there can be any true "consent" in those situations, at least, not informed consent.
of topical note
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/29/polygamist.arrest.ap/index.html
Warren Jeffs was arrested today after a traffic stop. He isn't one of the fellas from Big Love. This guy sets up 12 year olds with 60 and 70 year olds, and saves the "best" girls for himself and his inner cadre.
That is a particularly nasty example of a cult
I can't help but think that something is very very wrong with our law and order system that a man like that could be marrying underaged girls for four years before being caught. What's going on?
Anhata
www.familynaturally.com
Your Family's General Store, Naturally
Govt. needs to put an end to Polygamy
The govt. has allowed polygamy to go on for too long. It is against the law!!! Let's urge the govt. to uphold all laws and not pick and choose which ones are considered important!!! Taxpayer dollars are supporting this gross, disgusting lifestyle. . . these people are truly sick!!! It's a good thing I'm not in charge, I have some ideas of what I would do with those men "marrying" underage girls. . .you don't even want to know (people would call me barbaric, ironically).
Why has this been allowed to go on and on??? Why are decent people unwillingly supporting this lifestyle??? If they want to live that way, let them pack up and leave the country!!! Plenty of countries practice polygamy, let them go there!!!
I wouldn't call a 14-year-old a consenting adult
Would you?
And two thoughts: If the government got out of the marriage business, where would that put welfare checks for those families? Secondly, hard cases don't make good law; for every example like the ones you cite, I wonder how many more responsible families there are?
Lynn Siprelle, Editor
Yes
In France, you have to "get married" twice--once at the city hall, and once in church if you choose to. The first is the civil partnership; the second is the religious component, if that matters to you. Here, you can just do the religious ceremony and that's enough.
This is an instance where the state is interfering with the church, not the other way around for once. The state needs to get out of the marriage business. "Marriage" is a religious concept and should be left to religion. If people want a state-recognized partnership--with whomever and however many whomevers as long as they're consenting adult humans (animals cannot consent so don't start with me, y'all)--that should be called something other than marriage. And benefits, if any, should go to the state-recognized partnerships.
Lynn Siprelle, Editor
underage
Statutory rape laws would, in Lynn's scenario, continue to apply in the normal way regardless of polygamy vs. monogamy.
He's been steadily working his way up
the FBI's 10 most wanted for years now.
Honestly, I think they were trying to catch him, but we have only 700k law enforcement officers nationwide, and they have to cover 372million people, and 3.5 million square miles. Lots of places to hide.
Rudolph, the bomber, hid out 10 miles from his home, and it took years to find him, too.
Simple truth is that our country is sooooo big, people have many places to hide, even moreso if they are taken in and given assistance in doing the same. The history of bounty hunting illustrates this quite clearly...Early law enforcement realized that they were powerless to bring everyone in, and so the bail bondsman/bounty hunting tradition was started.
Now, this guy can get put away, and that will solve the immediate problem, but there will be more like him. The tighter we squeeze folks of exclusionist nature the more secluded they become, and the more of a danger they become as well.
yet another note about Polygamy
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/09/01/jeffs.towns.ap/index.html
CNN has been hitting this subject hard. Must be ratings week, or somethin.
from the article:
"It's been my experience down there that the women are as committed as the men, sometimes more so," he said. "(Outsiders) think it's about sex and power and domination, but it's about a lot of other things. This is what they were raised in and it's multigenerational. It's their culture." -- Ken Driggs, Atlanta Defense Attorney.
I'm talking about consenting adults
Yes, thanks, Becky, as far as I'm concerned statutory rape laws would still be on the books. Some of the "women" entering into these relationships in the fundamentalist Mormon enclaves are far too young to be marrying ANYONE, let alone a guy with three other wives. No argument there.
Those girls might have a better go of it--MIGHT, I say--if polyamorous marriages were decriminalized. There'd be no reason to hide out in the wilds. More families might come in from the desert. The girls themselves would see women and girls making other choices for themselves.
And the argument that poly needs to stay criminalized because of underage "marriages"--well, that happens in the "mono" community too, it just stays out of sight and doesn't call itself "marriage":
This is why we have statutory rape laws on the books, and I heartily advocate enforcing them.
Lynn Siprelle, Editor
I also wanted to comment on
I also wanted to comment on the idea that polygamous communities wouldn't have to exist in isolation if polygamy was legal. Again, I've only read one book on the subject, but it was pretty clear that the leaders of the fundamentalist communities want to keep their followers isolated so they aren't exposed to "outside ideas". They aren't allowed to watch television, read magazines, go to public schools, etc. Well, I take that back -- many of the kids do go to a "public school", but all the teachers are fundamentalists, as are all the members of the school board, so anything they learn is pre-screened.
hence the "might"
But it would be one less reason the cult leaders (and face it, these are cults) could give to hide out.
Lynn Siprelle, Editor
Legalizing Polygamy
There are 3 issues here, that I am hearing. Polygamy, Religion (& cults) and child prostitution.
If you take Polygamy, all by itself. 3 (or more) Consenting adults. And by adults, I mean that the third spouse must be even older than "consenting age". I see nothing wrong with it. I say older than consenting age, because to become part of a poly-relationship, you should be old enough to fully understand what you are getting into. I would say at least 22 yrs of age. So... to legalize such a relationship... you place a law that states a third or successive marriage partner must be of a certain age, and that all partners agree, before the ceremony. And that the other marriage partners are older than age 19... or have been married for 2 yrs before another partner is allowed.
End of story, for the child prostitution stuff we are hearing about. Which, please remember, this is what the media is focusing on, to get us all riled up. Child prostitution is wrong, and that is what decent citizens agree with. But this is the focus of what we're hearing about in the media, regarding Polygamous relationships.
Or, we're hearing about religion. There are many religions that allow multiple spouses. Christianity is one of them, just read the old Testament. Not everyone is Mormon or Muslim. Don't let cultists and religious leaders be abusive. No matter what their religion.
You get sexual deviants, no matter what your religious affiliations are. You hear of school teachers, priests (of every religion) and community leaders who go astray sexually. You also hear of police officers and doctors too.
So then what can we do? The best we can. We need to be supportive of everyone. I can not relate to people who have fetishes, but as long as everyone is consenting, and no one is being harmed... who am I to say that it's wrong? It's like the government trying to tell me that I can only have sexual intercourse doggy-style... it's not right for everyone!
But if I hear of someone who is being abused... I will be supportive of them, I will get them out of there, I will help them to re-build their lives. Educating as many people as we can, is the key to preventing abuse.
As far as social assistance goes... people are complaining about the multiple spouses receiving assistance because their marriage is not seen as valid. Make it valid, and make the "central" partner, responsible. By the way... how many people are having affairs on their spouses, and having multiple children without the benefit of marriage at all? These children often grow up on social assitance as well. It happens all the time in supposedly Monogamous relationships, so let's not blame all the Poly-relationships for it.
As far as a poly-relationship goes... why not? It might not be right for me, but isn't that why you talk to whom you are dating before you marry them? Or your spouse, if had never occured to you before the marriage. It's no different than talking about how many children you want, or if you want children at all.
Post new comment