B.C. court to weigh polygamy laws

[elder999]

It's society's business just as it is society's business when anyone gets married. The state has a right to regulate marriage in order to promote the common good, which includes fostering a culture that will encourage strong marriages that produce children in order that the society continues. Is it an absolute right to legislate every aspect of bhavior associated with marriage? Obviously not. But neither is it a matter of privacy since the family is the building block of society.

And yet a society that is somewhat slow to permit gay marriage permits gay couples to adopt children in order that the society continues, and the vast majority of states do so.

Societies change, Chris.

 

[Bruno@MT]

With regard to homosexual marriage: There are hundreds of legal areas where 'the' married partner has rights or duties. All these laws have been written with the understanding that there is only 1 of those.

Allowing gay couple to marry is not going to change anything to any of the laws, case law and precedent. But a polygamist marriage will be a legal nightmare to sort out.

 

[Ray]

But a polygamist marriage will be a legal nightmare to sort out.

What did the US do before the mid-nineteenth century, before polygamy was outlawed? It was practiced by several groups.

 

[Touch Of Death]

What did the US do before the mid-nineteenth century, before polygamy was outlawed? It was practiced by several groups.

Different economies.
sean

 

[granfire]

Well, it depends upon how you define "marriage," and how you define "child."

In Senegal, for example, polygyny is legal-a man can have up to four wives. The minimum legal age for marriage for a woman is 16. While you or I might define that as a child, in some cultures it clearly is not.

In some cultures, both monogamous and polygamous, arranged marriages take place between people who are, quite literally, children-often as young as 9 years old, but more typically around 12. The children continue to live with their parents, and don't live together as man and wife until they reach something resembling a majority, though that may be as young as 15. Again, within their cultural framework, they aren't "children" any more when they do so, and, while they are "married" prior to that, there is no consummation.

Can't say for sure that "child brides" don't take place in this instance, but this article on polygyny in Siberia and Mongolia is interesting.

Well, in not to distant past legal age to get married off was as young as 14...

However, these laws always only cover one guy and many women...(probably part of the socio-economic dynamics)

 

[chrispillertkd]

Societies change, Chris.

Really? Thanks for the news flash. But not every change is good.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Scott T]

B.C. outlines 'unprecedented' case against polygamy

CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Mon. Nov. 22 2010 10:16 PM ET

A British Columbia prosecutor began laying out an "unprecedented" case against polygamous relationships Monday, telling the court that multiple marriages can lead to child brides and destabilized communities.

The case stems from a series of attempts since the early 1990s to prosecute the leaders of Bountiful, a fundamentalist Mormon community of 1,000 near the U.S. border.
Speaking in the B.C. Supreme Court on Monday, lawyer Craig Jones, from the B.C. Attorney General's office, said that such relationships can not only sexualize young girls, but they can also leave many young men marginalized.

"You are being asked to settle a question that for decades has been in vigorous dispute. Legally, this case is difficult. Procedurally, it's unprecedented."

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20101122/bc-court-polygamy-law-hearings-101122/

Should be an interesting case. If the polygamists win, Canada will be only country in the western world where it will be supported.

Time to pop some popcorn and grab a beer. The squealing of the religious right will be the show to watch.

 

[zDom]

The squealing of the religious right will be the show to watch.

It will be interesting watch them twisting scriptures to back their squealing.

The Apostle Paul suggested that deacons should be men with only one wife — the implication being that it was permissible and common for Christian men to have more than one.

Jewish law also permitted more than one wife. Pretty sure the Koran still allows FOUR wives for Moslem men.

Just because the polygamists getting the most media attention today are ALSO forcing child marriages and milking the government doesn't mean that polygamy automatically includes coerced marriages, pedophilia and indigency.

By the logic presented in previous posts, I could say: the only drunken driving I've ever heard about happens in cars, so we should outlaw cars.

 

[zDom]

Interesting. Have you read any autiobigraphies of women who were "brides" in polygamous groups? It's not a pretty picture.

Nope. But I have heard about it.

So hammer the groups that do these despicable things. Their culture is the problem, not polygamy. Polygamy is only one part of their twisted culture.

 

[Makalakumu]

Nope. But I have heard about it.

So hammer the groups that do these despicable things. Their culture is the problem, not polygamy. Polygamy is only one part of their twisted culture.

That's really the issue here. We're shifting the blame away from the groups (usually religious extremist) that practice polygamy in a despicable way. We also have other laws that should protect our children and if they aren't being enforced, then its not necessarily the fault of polygamy.

Polygamy itself isn't a bad thing. In fact, I see no reason to ban it if the people involved are following all of the other laws spelling out good behavior. From an economic point of view, group marriages make a lot of sense. Sharing the resources in the household and sharing family duties frees up time to work and play and generally be more productive.

The hardest thing about it would have to be managing the relationships. Many people can hardly manage one spouse. Therefore, even if it was legal, I think it wouldn't be very common. It takes a special group of people to form that kind of bond and not everyone has the social skills to pull it off.

In the end, it's an issue of liberty, IMO. The government doesn't need to define marriage. The government only needs to provide a court system to enforce the contract.