Fundamentalist Mormons Seeking Recognition For Polygamy

[NaturalHigh]

CENTENNIAL PARK, Arizona (Reuters) - When Ephraim Hammon returns home from a day of working construction near Arizona's border with Utah, he's greeted by his wife SherylLynne. And then by his wife Leah.

Polygamy, once hidden in the shadows of Utah and Arizona, is breaking into the open as fundamentalist Mormons push to decriminalize it on religious grounds, while at the same time stamping out abuses such as forced marriages of underage brides.

The growing confidence of polygamists and their willingness to go public come at an awkward moment for mainstream Mormons, who are now in the spotlight as Republican Mitt Romney, a prominent Mormon, seeks the U.S. presidency.

The Salt Lake City, Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or Mormon church, introduced polygamy before the Civil War but banned it in 1890 when the federal government threatened to deny Utah statehood. Today, about 40,000 "fundamentalist Mormons" in Utah and nearby states live polygamy illegally.

More at Yahoo...

[LSparkle]

1. Bad timing for Mittens ...

Reminder of the "dark side" of Mormon history.

[FreeState]

12. Dark Side?

How is this the "Dark Side" of Mitts religion? He belongs to the SLC church, that stopped practicing polygamy over 100 years ago. Mitts how old?

Guess since my Great Great Great grand father had 7 wives I should be worried about my dark history too, cause everyone knows I personally am responsible for what break off sects are doing with a religious principle my ancestors practiced. Oh and if that is the case then all Christians better be worried bout the dark side of christianity - the KKK. /sarcasm

[JNelson6563]

62. Um, actually

The Mormon church itself is extremely protective and secretive of their own history. Don't take my word for it, look into it yourself. They have purchased or gotten wealthy members to purchase for them many documents that would prove potentially embarrassing.

Julie

[BuyingThyme]

2. Good.

[Kolesar]

3. "I don't think the revelation that Joseph Smith received came from Christ,"

...said John Llewellyn, a retired Salt Lake County policeman who once practiced polygamy but now campaigns against it. "I think it came from his Y (male) chromosome."

I wonder if the polygamists are part of the "Reorganized Church of Latter Day Saints".

[FreeState]

9. RLDS never practiced polygamy

The RLDS (Church of Christ) came about when Brigham Young tried to gain hold of the Church after Joseph Smiths death. Joseph Smiths first wife, Emma, was against polygamy and argued that her son, Joseph Smith III, should be the next leader and started the RLDS break-off. So the RLDS have never practiced polygamy and actually have a lot of different beliefs from the Salt Lake church (even their view of the nature of God is different).

Hope that helps:)

(Polygamy was not in the limelight until after Joseph SMiths death - very few members even knew about it until Brigham Young took control of the Saints that left for SLC with him)

Also just on a grammar side note - its spelled "Latter-day"

[Kolesar]

11. Were they in Missouri at the time of the schism you described?

thanks for the information :hi:

[FreeState]

13. Nope

They were in Illinois -

There is evidence Smith started to practice polygamy even before Missouri (The church started in New York, and were then forced into Ohio, then Missouri then Illinois and then broke into 2 main churches one stayed and one went to SLC - the SLC one grew a lot bigger than RLDS). Most members did not know about it until way later - it was something only the hierarchy practiced until later.

http://www.cofchrist.org/history/disorganization.asp

Edit to add a link to Joseph SMiths wives and the years they married http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/

[TahitiNut]

25. I lived in western New York (near Palmyra) and eastern Washington ...

... and noticed a huge difference between the secular and sectarian behavior of the LDS in those places. Even attending the Hill Commorrah pageant, I saw nothing close to the separatist/clannish attitudes I saw in the interior PNW.

[FreeState]

27. Try Utah LOL

I grew up in Seattle and went to school in Utah - two very different types of Mormons. The same can be said of Eastern WA and Western WA too:)

I've never been to the pageant but would love to go some day:)

[TahitiNut]

34. Yes, I saw the Seattlite LDSers as distinct from the Yakima/DryShitties/Lewiston LDSers, too.

The Seattlites were closer to the Palmyra variety's attitudes. I enjoyed the company of the Palmyra 'stakes' LDSers far, far more than the EWa/ID LDSers. My GrandUncle was LDS - Norway to South Dakota to California migration in the early 20th Century.

On edit: The word I've been seeking is "insular" - the attitudes of the inner Pacific Northwest (E. Wa & N. Id.) Mormans seemed remarkably more insular ... bordering on adversarial. Since I had a multitude of personal and working relationships in both places, I doubt it's my imagination. I recall surreptitious remarks to the same effect from Mormons (friends), too.

[FreeState]

38. My family goes way way back

Im related to the original fiancee of the Book of Mormon and my 3 great grandfather was Brigham Young's personal secretary (also the first person baptized in Great Britain). I served a mission to Norway... love that part of the world - the Mormons in Norway are closer to Utah mormons than CA or WA mormons in their insular attitudes, unfortunately. Im actually a very distant relative of Mitt Romney as well. (Although Mitt would hate me :) Im very liberal and gay to boot!).

[Kolesar]

48. One of these days I am going to read that book by Jon Krakauer

"Under the Banner of Heaven". Right now I am reading a book about soil building and gardening. I have lived in the LDS community in Ohio for several years now and I only have a bit of knowledge of the LDS community. I don't like this community, but it is mostly because they are rich suburban white people who vote republican rather than their faith.

[kimmylavin]

50. Fascinating Book

However, parts of it made me so mad I actually threw the book.
But a good look in to the fundie Mormon lifestyle/mindset, and the men who twist it for their own desires.

[Traveling_Home]

4. Do Muslims, who ......

legally marry more then one wife when living in their country, have their marriages recognized when they come to the US?

[NaturalHigh]

44. Good question.

I don't think so, but I've never really considered it.

[Bridget Burke]

57. No. Polygyny is allowed in many Muslim countries but not common even there.

This Wikipedia article says that 1% to 3% of Muslim marriages are polygynous. (Yes, it's referenced.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygyny_in_Islam#_note-enc

If a Muslim immigrant was well off, he could have more than one wife living with him here. Who would know? Who investigates who is sleeping with whom--especially in fine neighborhoods?

The Muslim immigrant men I've known are more "modern" & only have one wife. A Pakistani co-worker mentioned he might return home when he retires. We laughed & said he could have more wives then. He blanched. His wife is educated, independent & beautiful. She's all that he can handle!

Most of these Fundamentalist Mormons do not want educated & independent wives.

[Xithras]

5. Polygamy, in concept, isn't a bad thing.

Assuming it's legislated equally (one woman with many husbands should be legal too), the concept should be irrelevant to most people. How others choose to spend their sex lives is of little concern to me.

The problem with polygamy is in its historic implementation. Polygamist families tend to also participate in underage marriages, arranged marriages, and become sprawling welfare-dependent communities unto themselves with little opportunity for escape. That DOES concern society.

The problem with implementing polygamy in the US today is FREEDOM. In traditional polygamist societies (including the pre-ban Mormon society), people weren't allowed to engage in polygamy unless they could prove to the church/tribal elder/king that they had the resources to support the extended family. Today, that requirement cannot be created and enforced. There is no legal way to establish a means test for a polygamous marriage.

Why should we care? Because an unchecked polygamous society creates two issues. First, these relationships tend to generate a large number of children. A man with four wives can end up with 8 or 9 children in a relatively short period of time. These children are an immense financial burden. Second, unchecked polygamy creates an environment where men are constantly on the lookout for potential new brides. Every woman becomes a potential mate if the two click.

Combine these two, and you have a dangerous situation. Children, a burden to their families, must be pushed out of the home as early as possible in order for the family to survive. Men, looking for brides, are usually more than willing to take them in. Now you have the perfect recipe for underage forced or arranged marriages.

I used to be all for the legalization of polygamy, until I thought it all the way through. Now, I tend to think that polygamy will only work in modern society if it's coupled with strict population control measures. That's the only way to keep it from degrading into something abusive and controlling.

[depakid]

20. It's refreshing to read a well thought out and well reasoned post

Things are always a little more complicated than most people see at the first few glances.

[terisan]

6. Welfare Kings: I understand there is a big misuse of welfare among polygamists.

Although some polygamists can support their group marriages, others apply for and receive welfare payments.

[endarkenment]

8. I've heard the same about

blacks mexicans illegals

[terisan]

35. Sorry, don't understannd your point. Illegal Welfare Kings?

[endarkenment]

39. yes: one of the standard (and equally false)

arguments against immigrants is that they are living off welfare.

[blondeatlast]

55. Here's how it works in these communities.

One man, several wives. Only the first marriage is recognized by the state and those children don't receive AFDC. The next several wives, however, have several children each and each of those children, as the child of a single parent, can receive AFDC. They pool the money.

Apples to oranges.

[CanonRay]

63. Bad analogy

The two things have zero in common. And I know from personal experience that the "Welfare Kings" exist. I spent 20 years on and off working law enforcement in Utah.

[kimmylavin]

51. They (fundie Mormons) call it "Bleeding the Beast" n/t

*Edited for clarity.

[blondeatlast]

54. In northern AZ, it's a HUGE problem for both AZ and Utah.

Since the marriages aren't recognized and the each woman often has several kids by the same father they can easily receive state aid.

[CanonRay]

61. I've seen it first hand.

They'll publicly support the first wife and kids, but the other five and forty of fity kids are all on the dole. Nothing can be done about it because the wives won't pursue child support, and they aren't legally married.

[endarkenment]

7. Why not? They are all adults making free decisions about their lives.

How they choose to organize their families is not my concern. Let them live in peace and with equal rights.

[Matariki]

14. At the moment no one has the right to be legally married to multiple spouses

Although people can live with as many partners as they choose. In fact I have a number of friends in poly relationships, well outside anything Mormons would find acceptable.

Do you think the laws should be changed?

[endarkenment]

19. yes of course, the laws are stupid.

This is a matter of privacy and contract law, and as there is no harm to others, it is a matter of private and not public morality.

[mainegreen]

16. Because the human race comes in 50/50 numbers? Because it's mysogenistic?

Because abuse often lies at the heart of this?

[endarkenment]

21. a) so what, and b) no it isn't.

You first response can be paraphrased as "marriage is one man and one woman". Gee where have I heard that argument before?

Your second response is nonsense. There is no reason at all why polygamy need be mysogenistic. As long as contracts are entered into freely, your abhorence of this practice is something you should keep to yourself: it is none of your business. If there is 'abuse at the heart of this' then perhaps it is the abuse that is at the heart that should be gone after, rather than adults making free choices to live as they see fit.

[mainegreen]

23. My first argument absolutely can't be paraphrased as that.

My first argument could be paraphrased as 'society should try and make sure that there are enough partners to go around'. Homosexuality does not affect that logic. If you want to know why this is important look at parts of India and China and see the results of imbalances in this equation.

There is no reason why polygamy needs to be misogynistic, but seriously, what do you think is going on in Utah?

[FreeState]

24. Why do people have to have a partner?

society should try and make sure that there are enough partners to go around

Why do people have to have a partner? What about people that want to remain single? Seems to me there are a lot of single and available people around these days. In fact it's a little sexist to presume a woman or a man needs someone else to the point that society should assure that they get a partner IMO.

Also, Polygamy, from break offs of the LDS church, are not just in Utah. They are in Canada, Arizona and Mexico. Each of them have their differing problems and believe it or not positives.

[mainegreen]

26. I never said people need partners.

I said people who want partners need to have partners available.

I have no doubt there are positives to polygamy. There are positives to all sorts of things that end up having significantly more negative impacts that positive. Some people can make polygamy/polyandry work great, however these breakaway churches are not really known for making this work are they?

[FreeState]

29. Some have

however these breakaway churches are not really known for making this work are they?

There are some that do - sorry I don't have a link right now but there is a Church that accepts GLBT partners and practices polygamy in SLC - very liberal. I think its the Patriarchy churches that have more issues on how they treat women in general. Look at any fundamental church in America and one of the things that ties them all together is their disregard for women and women's rights.

I said people who want partners need to have partners available.

I think the government should stay out of this all together - not marriage but making sure people can find a mate. I don't see how those practicing polygamy take away partners either - not unless there is a large amount following the practice - which there are not.

[triguy46]

28. and the positives are?

[FreeState]

32. Positives

You can do a google and get a lot of articles on the positives...

However here are some I would include (this is assuming a non abusive relationship):

Lots of brothers and sisters
More parents to turn to
More income sources
Exposure to diversity in your own family
More skills to fill needs from parents and children


Just like any relationships there are negatives and positives.

[endarkenment]

30. It is the same argument.

By allowing a women to marry women, for example, the number of possible man-woman partnerships is reduced by one. Oh of course those extra men can marry each other, right? Likewise for polygamy. The left over men can marry each other. Likewise for polyandry - the left over women can marry each other. The argument is no different. The argument is basically nonsense cloaking a moralistic and irrational argument: 'it is wrong because IT IS WRONG'. Leave people alone to sort out their own affairs and let the state get involved when there is actual harm to others.

"but seriously, what do you think is going on in Utah?" I don't know. However, like I said, if there is 'abuse at the heart of it' by all means go after the abuse.

[mainegreen]

31. Strange how you apply motivations to my statements that aren't there.

You presume to much about my beliefs.
And no, it is not the same argument.

[Matariki]

10. As long as women can marry multiple husbands too.

Considering the price of living these days, a good mormon woman with 10+ kids probably needs about 3 or more husbands to support them all.

[Warren DeMontague]

15. "Fundamentalist Morons"? Isn't that redundant? Oh. "Mormons". Sorry.

Never mind.

[FreeState]

18. Thanks for making this Mormon feel welcome here!

Bigotry on DU is such a welcoming thing /sarcasm

You do know there are Mormons here right?

[Warren DeMontague]

33. No, the comment was about fundamentalists.

Not Mormons. Sorry you misunderstood.

[FreeState]

47. and that makes it less bigoted how? N/T

[Warren DeMontague]

53. Because I happen to think the vast majority of hard-core "fundamentalists" of all stripes-

Christian, Islamic, etc. etc. are morons. I'm sorry, I do.

And I think that they're responsible for a disproportionate share of the problems this world is facing. Our fundamentalist nutjobs and "their" fundamentalist nutjobs want so badly to duke it out in World War III, but unfortunately they can't have it on the moon, so they'll drag the rest of us along for the ride.

The Creation Museum? Fundamentalists.
Al Qaeda type terrorism? Fundamentalists.
Abortion Clinic and Gay Bar Bombings? Fundamentalists.
"Honor Killings"? Fundamentalists.
Burquas? Fundamentalists.
The drive to outlaw birth control and abortion? Fundamentalists.

So, yeah, I stand by my statement- I think "Fundamentalist Morons" is redundant. If that makes me a "bigot", well, then I'm an anti-fundamentalist bigot. Whee.

[King Coal]

60. Welcome FreeState!

It must be interesting to be Mormon and gay. What would old Bringumtome Young have thought?

[gollygee]

17. I don't know if there's a way to write laws for this that wouldn't victimize women

because it does seem to happen mainly that men have multiple wives.

Anyway, here are a few of the legal issues that would have to be cleared up:

When a third partner enters a marriage, does that third partner marry both other partners or just one of them? In fact, back that up - can a third partner enter a marriage, or would the first marriage have to end and a new one formed that includes all three people?

If three people marry and one person leaves the marriage, does the whole marriage end or does just that one person stop being part of it?

If the whole marriage does not end, how is marital property divided in the divorce? In thirds? What if one partner hasn't been in the marriage as long? This could get complicated.

If one person leaves, does that person have any responsibility of child support or rights to custody in regard to children born of the other two partners? If that partner leaves and becomes the custodial parent of children born in that marriage, does the non-bio parent have rights or responsibility to those children?

If you think about all the issues surrounding marriage, custody, and divorce, there are quite a few things to be re-written if polygamy were to become legal. AS it seems to work in practice where it's legal, if there is a man with two wives, and one wife leaves or is told to leave, she's pretty much SOL. I would want to see some protection for her.

[Matariki]

22. These are all good questions around this issue.

[Disturbed]

37. I wonder why only Fundie Mormons are mentioned when

the subject of polygamy is discussed. Muslims out number Mormons by a large margin. If the Bigamy Law was done away with there would be millions of people practicing plural marriage in the US.

[gollygee]

40. I was thinking of both groups

when I said "in places where polygamy is legal" I was thinking of Islamic countries. Women don't have a lot of rights in many Islamic countries. I haven't heard of a place where polygamy is legal and women's rights are taken seriously. Is there a place where women are protected and polygamy is legal? If I saw someplace like that I might be less hesitant.

[Matariki]

41. I agree with you, but wonder why you are addressing this to me.

Even the post I was responding didn't mention Mormons, but rather brought up some good points about the logistics of multiple marriage partners.

I actually know a few people in successful long term poly relationships. They aren't Mormons, they're kinky pagans actually. I have a female friend who has been together with two male parters and another woman for many years. I could never do it, but it works for them.

[The Straight Story]

46. Will try to answer some:

When a third partner enters a marriage, does that third partner marry both other partners or just one of them?

-- Would depend on the sex of the partner. IE - if it was one man to two women, the third would marry the man. If third was a man, he would marry the woman. UNLESS it was all the same sex, then you define a head of household or define marriage as a union of individuals in general.

If the whole marriage does not end, how is marital property divided in the divorce?

-- Shit, we can't get that straight now :)

If three people marry and one person leaves the marriage, does the whole marriage end or does just that one person stop being part of it?

-- That person leaves the group and gets their 401k :)

If one person leaves, does that person have any responsibility of child support or rights to custody in regard to children born of the other two partners? If that partner leaves and becomes the custodial parent of children born in that marriage, does the non-bio parent have rights or responsibility to those children?

-- They make laws about it, then attorneys make money off sorting it all out. Same as with two people :)

About protection, et al - I would GUESS that it would work in a way that there ... aw fuck, hell I don't know. Why someone would want two spouses nagging em is beyond me, just become a swinger and have at it.

:rofl:

[Bridget Burke]

58. "Non-bio" parental rights can be problematic even outside polygamy.

I knew a guy whose parents divorced when he was a baby; his father won custody. Afterwards, the father had numerous marriages & long-standing relationships. But he used the All American "serial monogamy" model. (If you ignore a bit of "overlap" as a relationship ended.)

So my friend developed very close relationships with several ladies during his childhood. But none of them ever adopted him, since his mother is still alive, although distant. When his father ended a marriage (or whatever), his son's relationship with the lady in question ended. There were no legal ties & his dad liked to "move on."

It did not make for a happy childhood.

[GeorgeGist]

36. Slowly but surely religion sucks ...

the soul out of every life it touches.

[BoneDaddy]

42. So?

As long as the women are not coerced, what business is it of mine?

[NaturalHigh]

45. I didn't post it in a critical way.

To be honest, it doesn't get me too worked up one way or the other. It's not for me, nor does it fit with my belief system, but I have bigger things to worry about. I posted this because I thought it would make an interesting topic for discussion.

[BoneDaddy]

56. True

it does. It is not my speed, and my apologies if I drew the wrong conclusion. Sometimes the morality police exist on DU too.

Have you ever watched "Big Love" on HBO? It is about a mormon polygamist and is VERY interesting.

[silverback]

43. Paternity, not morality....

The roots of the institution of marriage go back to our tribal beginnings where we lived in relatively small groups and it was imperative that everybody knew exactly who they were related to, who'd fathered which children, for obvious reasons.

That's also part of the reason polyandry is so rare while polygamy is quite common.

Criminalizing polygamy isn't an appropriate way to go about reducing forced and underage marriages, which are already illegal. On the other hand there's no reason for society to subsidize the practice either.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

49. This article was written the day after the season premier of Big Love on HBO. Interesting. :) nt

[NaturalHigh]

52. I've never watched that show...

but I hear it's pretty entertaining.

[lapislzi]

64. Don't know how realistic it is

The contrasts between the very affluent main family and the rest of the polygamist community who live in near-squalor are very sharply drawn. As I know nothing of LDS culture, I can't imagine how a man could buy 3 houses in a development, install his wives 1-2-3 and still maintain a facade of respectability within the community.

The show itself is interesting for other reasons. It can be subversive in a quiet way.

[entanglement]

59. Opposition to polygamy is not necessarily moralistic

but rooted in reproductive self-interest. If polygamy becomes widespread and a small percentage of successful :) men corner the "market", it'll hurt the chances of the average single (straight) man in finding a mate - I don't think they'd be too happy with that. Large numbers of unattached men are not very healthy for society - consider the doom and gloom prognostications made by sociologists for nations with large gender imbalances (like China). LARGE scale polygamy would lead to something similar - likely increased violence, social unrest and increased prostitution.

Polygamy is (often) observed to coexist with reduced women's rights, but it is not clear whether those form a cause-effect pair or are merely correlates.

So while polygamy is perfectly OK from a sexual rights perspective, there are societal implications for
government to consider if it adopts the libertarian view and legalizes polygamy.

:)

[Marrah_G]

65. People should read up on the Mormon fundie group (FLDS)

They are a scary and destructive cult. They rule women through fear and isolation. "wives" are given and taken away by the will of the "prophet". Most wives go to older men with high standing in the church. Teenage boys are cast out onto the streets for fear the older men may have to compete with them.

If a man has 4 wives and 30 children and does something to make the "Prophet" angry then the man is banished and his wives and children are given to different men. No choices.

Young girls have no chance of falling in love with the man of her dreams. Her only choice in life is marriage to a much older man someone has picked for her and become his "property" along with her "sister wives".

They live off welfare and as soon as the boys are old enough to swing a hammer they go to work for the church construction companies and get paid little to no money for their work. The Jeffs have made billions off the backs of their brainwashed followers.

Now I have friends in Polyamorous relationships, but the people that are seeking recognition for this would be the first to condemn my friends. They would also race to the front of the line to make sure gays cannot even marry once.

I say let them marry, but force them off the welfare rolls. If he can't support his family then has no right asking more women to breed for him while the tax-payers pay for all the results of his greed.