Dear Crabby,

As far as Christ's law for marriage being clear, I would have to agree. Here it is:

“Furthermore it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery." –Matthew 5:31-32 NKJV

His statement here does not disallow polygamy, but it disallow divorce and putting away of one's wife. In polygamy, a man does not put away his wife, but he and his wife bring in another wife.

Again Christ states:

"And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?" He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." (Matthew 19: 3-6 ESV.)

Here, He does not disallow polygamy either. Here, he states that man cannot separate what God has joined together. Polygamy does not separate what God has joined together; it allows another to be joined with them. In polygamy, the first wife remains joined to her husband while the second or more wives are also joined together with the husband. Many believe that a man or a woman cannot be joined with more than one wife or husband. Clearly, this is not true. According to I Corintians chapter 6:
"15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. 16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. 17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit."

What is a harlot? Some believe she is a prostitute, but this is not so. Harlot is a married woman who sleeps with other men. If she can become joined to anyone with whom she sleeps with and her husband, then clearly "the two shall become one flesh" means that a man can have more than one wife and be joined to each of them.

In fact, God creates a law for polygamy in Exodus chapter 21:

"10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. 11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money."

Clearly, God allows polygamy since he makes laws protecting the first wife if the husband marries another wife. The husband still needs to provide food, clothes, and "duty of marriage" aka sex for his first wife. No where does God call this adultery or a sin, and neither does Christ.

My last statement in my last response concerning abuse, incest, molestation, ect. was clear:
"Such people should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, whether they are polygamous or monogamous."
Religion should not shield the degredation of human biengs.  If people are being hurt and abused, nothing should shield them.  Then need to be punished.  The topic of human sacrifice is a "Red Herring".  A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue.(http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html) The original issue is a marriage ammendment about polygamy not human sacrifice which is another evil pratice which has no place in any society. Related to the issue of polygamy is the abuse from a religious compound that has a tenet of practicing polygamy.  My assertion is that the polygamy didn't cause the abuse.  False and twisted religious teachings caused the abuse.  These people could have been monoagomous and still have practiced incest, underage marriage, forced marriages, ect.  We know that to be true because such evil things happen outside of polygamy.  When we hear of molestation or incest happening in a monogamous home where polygamy does not exist, people don't attribute the evil actions to monogamy or polygamy.  These actions are the product of a twisted mind, a predator, ect but no one cries polygamy.  Conversly, no one says that a man or woman did these evil things because they were monogamous.   
Anyone who allowed themselves to be brainwashed into believing false teachings that led to abuse of children would have done it without polygamy.  Again, polygamy did not lead to the abuse.  False and twisted teachings being believed by weak or evil people led to the abuse.  And those people should be punished whether they practice monogamy or polygamy under the guise of religious freedom or otherwise.
The question on the table is whether non-abusive, consenting adults, who are not coerced and freely choose to enter into a polygamous lifestyle should be allowed that right.  If a man and two women or two men and a woman choose to spend the rest of thier lives together, with full knowledge, not forcing children, no abuse, no incest ect, should they be allowed to be together?  Should a marriage ammendment be put in place to further hamper legal adult age, non abusive, and in some cases not even religious men and women to pursue a life together?
If you read my other post, you would see that by decrimanalizing polygamy and putting the same type of age, consent restrictions as monogamy, then polygamy has the same protections as monogamy.  A monogamous man can't force a minor to marry him, can't have sex with with a minor, can't practice incest.  If a monogamous man did these things he would be jailed.  So a polygamous man or woman should have the same restrictions.  If they do those things, just like the monogamous, they should be jailed.  But like the monogamous man is allowed to enter into a consenting, legal age, non-coereced marriage, so should the polygamous man be allowed to enter into a consenting, legal age, non-coereced marriage.  At no time am I advocating allowing anyone to commit crimes in the name of religion or polygamy.  What I am say is that a marriage ammendment banning polygamy (which is already illegal) will do no good.  Decriminalize polygamy, regulate it like monogamy and prosecute anyone who breaks the laws, just like you would a monogamous is a better solution.
People argue that polygamy caused the crimes and point to situations like the YFZ case as examples.  They fail to show groups like Polyfamilies, PrincipleVoices and others that practice polygamy without any abuse.  If polygamy causes abuse, then how do these people practice it without abuse?  Answer: polygamy didn't cause the abuse.  Other factors in places (like twisted and false teachings) at the YFZ ranch caused the abuse.
I know some poly people.  They don't practice incest, underage marriage, forced marriages, or abuse.  They are disqusted by what has happened to these children at YFZ.  But the people I know don't hide thier lifestyle because they know it is wrong.  They hide it because people who don't know anything about them, believe that all polygamous are abusive.  They are stereotyped, judged and branded when all they choose to do is to love more than one consenting adult witht he full knowledge and acceptance of thier partner.  They don't hide because they did anything wrong but because the mob wants to grab the pitchforks and torches and attack them before they even know if they are really a monster.  They hide because they are unfairly branded as abusers and they have never abused a child, practiced incest or forced anyone else to marry them.  They hide because people never took the time to know who THEY are.
 

Averagejoe, I agree that incest, rape, underage marriage, molestation and the like do go on outside of this polygamist cult. I also understand that the issue here is polygamy. I have cousins who are of the Mormon faith and I know that the practice of polygamy is not a practice that they teach or that they condone. I also understand that the FLDS branches of the Mormon faith are groups, there are others besides the ones that follow Warrens, who have separated themselves from the teachings of the Mormon faith. So are you saying that just because these things happen outside of this “religious” cult, then we should just overlook this illegal lifestyle and these kinds of abuses that have been going on within this cult to their children? Are we to condemn those outside of “religion” for these crimes and then turn around and allow it because it has been packaged under the guise of religious beliefs and practices? What should we allow next…human sacrifice?

Fightforfreedom, I also understand that in the biblical times of the Old Testament there were men of God that had many wives. The Old Testament of the Bible holds the history of events and mankind that took place before the coming of Christ. Upon his death and resurrection the New Testament became the laws by which we are to live. These books contain God’s laws as taught by Jesus and as such are the laws we are to live by and the laws by which we will one day be judged. Christ’s laws on marriage are crystal clear and polygamy is not found in these teachings…no matter what sways popular opinion in “modern” times. If polygamy is true and in keeping with the Lord’s teachings…then why is it that the FLDS feel the need to be so secretive, deceptive, and guarded when it comes to this part of their “religion?” Answer…because they are breaking the law and violating their children in the process. Also if it truly is following the teachings of Christ and a viable part of their religious beliefs why then do the Mormon leaders teach against it? The answer is because it is not…it is a part that was added by the nasty men in this cult who wanted it and made it so under the guise of “religious beliefs and practices.”

For the record I am a liberal, and as such I am a firm believer in the separation between church and state. This separation was written into our constitution to protect religious freedom by curtailing our government from ever installing any one religion on the people of our nation, like they had endured in the old world. It should also be noted that under the laws pertaining to religious practices…those practices CAN NOT break any of the other laws of our nation. I really don’t care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own relationships, however the fact still remains that polygamy is against the law in the United States, and so in keeping with the topic of this story, adding an anti-polygamist amendment to Texas law is not needed. Why should we change the law to allow the practice of polygamy when crimes like the ones that have been committed here will be able to continue, grow, and then be even harder to combat? Fight…you are right you and anyone else who would like to can exercise their rights to seek changes in our nation’s laws to accommodate polygamy, but there are also many of us who will exercise our rights to oppose it.

The issue being discussed is about a Texas Amendment banning polygamy. Polygamy doesn't cause incest, sex with minors, abuse or forced marriage. What caused that is the twisted teachings of a religious group. The group believes that polygamy can help them get into heaven but forced marriages, incest, sexual abuse, and the other host of crimes committed were because the group choose to accept the beliefs of thier leader. The group choose to believe thier leader and practice these crimes. Polygamy didn't cause these crimes. It was the false teachings of a twisted sexual predator. There are groups of FLDS Mormons in the US who rejected the abusive, twisted teachings of Warren Jeffs and still practice polygamy. PrincipleVoices is one such group. They show how you can be a FLDS Mormon and not practice forced or underage marriage,abuse, incest, rape and molestation. Such evil actions have existed outside of polygamy and sadly will continue regardless of whether polygamy is stamped out or not. Polygamy didn't cause those evil actions. Bad people did.Such people should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, whether they are polygamous or monogamous.

Dear Crabbyoldlady,

It is interesting how one person can come into a peaceful conversation about freedom in the United States and try to insult other educated people.

You act like I was talking about the Mormons and their polygamy here in Texas, and you also act as if Mornon polygamy is the only form that exists. This is not the case. Infact, some non-mormon Christians practice polygamy as did King David, Solomon, Moses and Abraham and other Patriarchs in the Bible. Polygamy does not only exist within religious beliefs, but there are also atheists and agnostics who also live polygamously.

I know that at one time our country stood for freedom for a select few based upon prejudice and intolerance. However, The constitution and Bill of Rights still protect the rights and freedoms of all citizens regardless of the original authors or their intent. Infact, Amendments have been made to protect African-Americans from slavery, to allow them and women to vote treating them both as individual people with rights. The First amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" specifically protects the citizens from the infringment of religion by the government. Furthermore, when we believe a law like "One man to One woman" is unjust, we have the right as a people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances whether you like it or not. Marriage is changing not only to allow monogamy, which will always exist, but to also allow polygamy which has existed since the beginning of time and is more natural than monogamy and to allow homosexuals to marry as in Massachusetts, California, Canada and other countries.

I am totally against forced marriages, whether monogamous or polygamous. I am also totally against child marriages and rape; however, this is not what I was speaking about. I clearly stated that I see no issue with consenting ADULTS marrying polygamously. If you want to talk about child brides in polygamy, you might find it interesting that according the Supreme Court of Texas CPS had NO LEGAL right to take any of those children from their parents, and very little abuse occured. However, it appears that you would rather believe that these children were indeed abused because polygamy and the idea of it makes you feel uncomfortable. Furthermore, as far as child rape and abuse, let's not only look at polygamy, but let's look where the highest numbers occur in mongamous families! Then, maybe, we should ban all forms of marriage because thousands and millions of children are abuse and raped everyday!

Once again, not allowing polygamists or homosexuals their right to marry and raise a family is not freedom. It is oppression and intolerance! As Americans, we need to practice tolerance!

How can we rattle on about the way consenting adults wish to live is okay in this case when the real problem with the FLDS is the rape of little girls and the abuse of little boys, and little girls by nasty old men in the name of religion. You see it is NOT just about consenting adults...becasue there are little girls who are pregnant, and who are momma's...and not by their choice. How can the same people who rant about sexual preditors being kept away from our children...convince themselves that in some way this is different because it is wrapped in the package of long dresses and religion?

Unless I have been missing something here, I believe that it is already against the law, federal law, in all 50 states, including Utah, for people to live in a polygamist type relationship. Perhaps instead of trying to amend a law to the constitution that is already in place, we should ask our justice system to do their job in upholding those laws. As for you Fightforfreedomusa...perhaps you missed out on early American history when you were getting that education. The freedoms and laws that were originally written into the U.S. Constitution were written by men who were much, much, much, more conservative than the most conservative of Americans today. True freedom of religion and religious principals as written into our nation’s laws were only true freedoms to those who were members of certain religious beliefs like the Puritans, the Separatists, and other mainly protestant faiths. Like it or not, believe it or not, there is a reason that the Mormons ended up way out west in Utah…they were not welcome nor was their religion accepted in the established part of the United States. When it comes to polygamy it is the same as the issue of homosexuality…it will come down to how many of America’s citizens believe that popular views out-weigh the laws of our religious beliefs as defined in the Bible. Until then…it is against the law.

I fail to understand how legal polygamous marriage attacks the foundation of marriage in general. Some state that monogamous marriage has been the main or sole type of marriage in the Western World. This does not justify the continuation of exclusive monogamous marriage. According to the Nizkor Project website (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallac... is a the fallacy of Appeal to Tradition. In short, Appeal to Tradition is:

1. X is old or traditional
2. Therefore X is correct or better.

The continued practice of anything does not necessarily make it correct or better. History is full of "traditional" acts that we know are wrong: slavery, subjugation of women, banning or inter-racial marriage or suppression of scientific or social truth due to religious belief. "Because we've always done it this way" does not make it correct or better.

When considering polygamy or even homosexual marriage, one must ask how this affects traditional marriage. Will the divorce rate go up? As a whole, it may but not because polygamous are causing more people to choose divorce but because you have increased the number of married people thus increasing the statistical pool from which to draw data. Will births go down? I don't see that monogamous people will choose not to have children because polygamous have been married. Will heterosexuals choose not to marry?I don't see that heterosexual will choose not to marry because polygamous marriages are occuring. These are all assumptions but asking the small circle of people around me (creating a statistical pool from which to draw data)none of the monogamous men and women (who disagreed with polygamy) would choose not to be married or have children because of polygamy.

Polygamy should be sanctioned and governed like any other goverment ordained union. A monogamous man or woman is not allowed to force anyone to marry them. The monogamous man or woman is not allowed to have underage sex or practice incest. If a monogamous man forced a 13 year old girl to marry him and have sex he would be arrested and labeled a sex offender and jailed. All the rules that apply to monogamous men and women should apply to polygamous. Polygamous marriage should be between consenting legal age adults. It shoud be non-coerced or forced. All parties involved should be aware and agree. If a man and woman wish to add a third partner to thier marriage, then both should be required to sign the marriage certificate along with the new spouse. If one spouse refuses to sign, then the marriage does not occur. And of course, TAX them.

In the modern world, polygamy falls under the umbrella or polyamory. Sites like LoveMore show regular non-religious people practice polygamy all around us. A polygamous family allows all wives and husbands involved to work, go to college, become more educated and achieve higher goals in life. A three or four income household adds more financial stability in a time when gas is sky rocketing and people blink when they see the price of milk. Can there be issues? Of course, but with monogamous marriage flaunting such a high divorce rate, polygamy isn't the issue.

Polygamy exist outside of religious groups. There are men and women who practice it in many cities in the US who choose to because they love each other. They work regular jobs, attend little league games with thier kids, thier kids go to public school and they may even go to a mainstream churches (Baptist, Catholic, ect.) Thier kids listen to rock, rap, country or what ever and these families watch Lost, Smallville, House or Depserate Housewives like everyone else. But they have to hide because people assume that they are just as abusive as the one religious group that practices polygamy that is all over the news. A religious group that they may not have even heard about till they were in the news. Yet people want to label them.

Shouldn't non-coerced, consenting adults be allowed to make thier own choices?

Hello Maryann,

Good question, "Where do we draw the line?" If you noticed, my argument agreed to draw the line at consenting adults, human beings. An animal cannot consent to marriage or sex with anyone.

I agree the family should be preserved. Polygamous families have a great sense of family with more spouses there are the more children that exist. The more adults that exist in a family the more likely that there will always be at least one adult relative either one of the moms or one of the dads to raise these children. Thus, children are not handed off to day car centers or baby sitters to raise them. They are raise by the family especially today when we need at least 2 parents working to survive financially in this world.

Polygamy in and of itself is defined by marriage to 2 or more spouses. This could mean a woman could have 2 husbands, which does exist, or a man could have 2 or more wives. A woman having more than one husband is polyandry, and a man having more than one wife is polygyny.

As far as divorce and custody cases among homosexuals, this is not surprising; they are people too. The divorce rate is high in and of itself amoung monogamous couples. In fact nearly half of heterosexual marriages in the US end in divorce, and this rate is even higher in the Bible Belt according to the National Center for Policy Analysts at NCPA.org. In fact, check out
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr.... They will show you that the divorce rate is even higher among Conservative Christian groups then among atheists or agnostics.

Homosexuals can and do raise children that they either adopt, go through artificial insemination, or brought into the relationship. There are many monogamous heterosexual couples, who decide never to have children. Should we ban them from marrying as well to protect the family?

This is America: the land of the FREE. Yet, we want to limit the freedom of others like the homosexuals and the polygamists because they are different than us. Once again, this is not freedom: this is oppression!

Hello Freedomusa,
I can certainly follow your logic, and I agree that if the law allows homosexuals to marry, then one might conclude that consenting adults should be allowed to live in a polygamous setting as well. To do otherwise would be discriminatory to the utmost, ESPECIALLY if the states allow homosexuals to marry.
However, I do not agree that the definiton of marriage should be opened up to include homosexuals or polygamists. Marriage has been discriminatory in the Western world for thousands of years (depending on where you live) - minors have not been allowed to legally marry, many states have laws against first cousins from marrying, and all states have laws stating that one must be divorced before remarrying.
Why? Protection of marriage has always given precedence to the protection of the primary building block of society- the family, i.e., the unit of a man and a woman bearing children for the benefit of society. Marriage has provided legal and financial benefits for bringing up the children. No children- no society- weakened children, weakened society.  
Men leaving the woman behind, or women leaving the men- a legal contract of marriage gives the spouse and the family rights. How far would you take this freedom to marry in America? If you are for a man marrying 6 women (why is it that very few women would want 6 husbands??? :-}) and for two, three, or four same-sex people marrying, would you think it's kosher for a woman to marry an animal?
In England a woman actually married a dolphin. Don't blame her- she loved the fish. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,73...
I also read that in India a woman married a snake. No, not a jerk, but a real serpent- a cobra....
In Denmark a man legally married two women (They were reportedly bi-sexual.) Denmark legalized homosexual marriage years ago, and they also see the "discrimination" when it comes to marriage.
Come on. Where do you draw the line on this? How can you justify drawing any line?
I don't think marriage should be re-defined to be public recognition of a sexual relationship or even just because people or a woman and a dolphin love one another.
I am not belittling the love between two beings- just saying that society doesn't have to change a definition of marriage to recognize it.
Also, faults in heterosexual marriage don't seem to lend to opening up the definition of marriage. We already see in Massachusetts homosexuals divorcing each other, and suing each other over custody of children either brought from previous heterosexual marriage or conceived through invitro.

Alvin Stanchos' letter to the editor titled, "Anti-polygamy amendment needed" talks about fighting against polgamy, amd standing for democracy, individuality, and freedom, yet Mr. Stanchos refuses to see that an anti-polygamy amendment would actually be totally anti-democratic, anti-individual, and anti-freedom just as the Texas state amendment defining marriage to one man and one woman. He also refuses to admit that polygamy is already illegal in Texas and our nation.
We fail to see that the original Bill of Rights was a document which gave Americans rights. The Bill of Rights is not suppose to be about taking away the rights of those with whom we disagree with. Infact, the only US Amendment that actually took away rights of the individual citizen was prohibition, which the Supreme Court later decided was unconstitutional.
Mr. Stanchos also argued that polygamy is belittling to women. Many people argued that in the US past mongamous marriage was also belittling to women because women were treated as children and property. Some religions can also belittle women, yet I do not see an outcry to ban religious freedom, which would be totally against the First Amendment.
As am adult educated and professional woman, I see no issue with ADULT women choosing to live polygamously. Living polygamously could have its benefits: shared housing, a sisterwife to help you and care for your household and children, individual enrichment for the women through education and employment because there is always an adult relative at home to take care of the children, a constant sense of FAMILY, constantly surrounded by people who love you... However, as a nation and a state, we have stripped this choice from them just as we do the gays and lesbians. We cry "Freedom", yet we only allow freedoms to those we approve of. Countless men and women cheat on their spouses, and we allow this. However, we consider those who are willing to make life-long, mutually consenting commitments to 2 or more ADULT spouses as sinful and preposterous.
We want freedom, yet we want to deny others who believe and live differently than us their rights to freedom as well. This is not a democracy: this is oppression! As Americans, we need to demand freedom for ALL AMERICAN Citizens!