posted on May 20, 2001 03:06:43 AM new
Anybody been following that story about Tom Green? He was judged guilty and he could get 25 years.
Now bigamy is no new thing out there for a certain group of ex-Mormons, even tho the Church outlawed it long ago.
Now I'm not against bigamy at all, I just think the rules should be changed a little. For instance, you shouldn't divorce your wife, keep getting her pregnant and then have her collect welfare.
I'm not in favor of 25 years in jail either. I think a more just punishment would be to sentence him to living in the same house with all 5 wives and 29 children and SUPPORTING them. Bet the guy would be willing to work 2 or 3 jobs just to get out of the house!
And he'd be the first man to start saying "Not tonight dear, I have a headache"
It seems to be suggested that many (approx. 30,000) still practice this style of 'family life'. But it is against the law. And why in the world would he choose to go on the Jerry Springer Show and Dateline to announce he is doing so, is beyond me. Appears that the state leaves those practicing alone, if they keep it a private matter.
Another article said besides being charged (and now found guilty of) bigamy, he was also charged with criminal non-support, and is going to trial for child-rape. Guess one of his wives was only 13 years old. http://www.msnbc.com/local/rtut/m45395.asp
IMO this practice is unfair to the women and children involved. But if they freely choose this life (as adults), then I respect their decisions. I just don't condone the fact that very young children are taken as wives, nor the fact that the men and women who do make these choices aren't (in some cases) taking responsibility to provide for their own families. To break the law and then expect the taxpayers to support their families is wrong, IMO.
[ edited by Linda_K on May 20, 2001 05:37 AM ]
posted on May 20, 2001 06:11:31 AM new
This case isn't nearly as bad as another one that was hushed up in the Mormon state.
A very wealthy mormon contractor practiced polygamy and "married" his 13 year daughter to his brother.
She resisted and was beaten and raped, she escaped and was found naked running away along the road.
The local mormon prosecutor at first filed no charges and returned the girl to the custody of her father, then with press heat he files only a minor battery charge, totally ignoring the felony rape and kidnapping.
This millionaire family was also connected to the mormon governor.
The press picked this story up and then dropped it as the Olympics was at stake.
Mormonism is a pretty disgusting cult, and it runs as well as owns the state of Utah.
The mormon church is quick to point out that polygamy is offically "outlawed" in the church, but as many scholars know, the church importunes a public image and has a very different private practice. Multiple wives and many children are how a "man" broadens the scope of his reign and influence in "heaven" as a god himself. The man also gives "secret" names to each wife, so when in the glorified body, they will know each other by their secret names. These tenets still exist in the church and is the "supposed" impetus for multiple wives, but "officially" polygamy is not allowed, but they stiil practice the reasons behind it.
posted on May 20, 2001 08:02:08 AM new"Mormonism is a pretty disgusting cult"
Well, although I am currently non-religious at this stage of my life, I was raised as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints [aka "the Mormons"], and I just have to say that I find your statement both offensive and appallingly ignorant.
I went the whole nine yards, BTW. Baptized at age of eight, served a two year proselyting "mission", went to the temple, etc. I stopped going to church a few years back for personal reasons that I don't need to get into here, but I'd like to think I know more about what the church "really" is than somebody who has just read a lot of negative literature on the subject.
The church certainly has its flaws, no mistake about it. And not every leader in the church has always had the membership's best interests at heart. as with any organization, there are bad apples, and with any organization things have changed over time to adapt to new situations. But the church also has a core teaching of the importance of family, loving one's neighbor, and providing Christian service. People don't have to be dragged to secluded areas and brainwashed into joining, and I don't know of too many "cults" where membership spans generations.
That's all I wanted to say.
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on May 20, 2001 08:42:11 AM new
I always wonder about the women in these bigamy cases. They are the ones that confuse me. Why do they willingly join in a partnership where they have a second class status?
"I always wonder about the women in these bigamy cases. They are the ones that confuse me. Why do they willingly join in a partnership where they have a second class status?"
The perception of status is relative. Although I cannot speak for these
women, they may consider their status first class.
Because of the shared labor and child care generally expected of women, they have more time to pursue other interests.
Being a favorite sexual plaything may not be one of their priorities.
posted on May 20, 2001 09:09:40 AM new
As for my feelings on bigamy/polygamy...
I think in THEORY there is nothing wrong with the idea [aside from the fact that it is against the law, of course], as long as all participants are willing and old enough to make informed decisions.
In PRACTICE, however, I think there are too many potential problems and that it should be illegal. Although in SOME cases the women invloived are all willing participants, in MANY cases there is coercion and abuse going on. Often, it's not a simple case of a man deciding to ask two women to marry him; often there are entire CLANS where women are "promised" at a very young age to certain men. I don't think a 13 year old girl is able to make informed consent as to whether she should join a polygamous unit, especially not when she was raised form birth being told that it was what she was GOING to do. And in many cases, the women involved only stay because of threats of violence.
Regards,
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on May 20, 2001 09:12:00 AM new
uaru - On the programs where I've heard some of these woman share their lives, some seem quite content with this 'family style'. The most recent one I saw, the women shared they liked the idea of shared household work loads. They felt they were living with their sisters and seemed to find comfort in that. Those with marketable skills, worked outside the home, to support the family. They seemed happy with the 'sharing' of the husband. Some shared they liked not having to be the only woman to take care of the husbands needs/wants. Others spoke of struggling with their jealous feelings.
Then there are those who are very unhappy with sharing a husband. My thoughts on this are since they were raised this way, they went along with the teachings of their religion, doing what was 'expected' of them.
posted on May 20, 2001 09:15:37 AM new
What surprises me in the watching shows recently on Morman multiple marriages---is that the man speaks about how he needs to have as many children as possible to insure his 'seed' is carried on as if he is some 'Sultan' of great power, wealth and wisdom.
also --if some of the men get 10+ wives doesn't there end up being a wife shortage at the lower end of the scale??
posted on May 20, 2001 09:22:21 AM new
Barry - Thanks for your comments, I agree completely. We were posting at the same time, but you said it much better than I.
hjw - I agree...there is the issue of church vs. state here. But we live in a country with laws. When Utah wanted to join the US, they agreed to no longer allow more than one marriage. They could have decided to not agree to these issues.
When it is against the law to marry more than one person, or when children are married off under the legal age, or under pressure to do so against their will, I believe religious groups have to be law-abiding. Like a religious group couldn't decide that according to their beliefs they should be allow to murder someone, abuse someone, etc. and then claim 'freedom of religion'.
posted on May 20, 2001 09:29:33 AM new
The show that sticks out in my mind was done a few years ago (and was the cause of the bigamy charge)--it was either 20/20 or Dateline. I don't think with even the most sensational reporting they can manifest that they could equal Springer.
posted on May 20, 2001 09:36:05 AM new
True Helen, but they at least were aware they were going to share, other woman expected/hoped they wouldn't have to.
But, they should have known better that to entertain such "hopes."
When you walked down the street as a young
girl and saw all the married men looking you
over with lust in their eyes, did it not occur to you that infidelity is the nature of the beast called man?
posted on May 20, 2001 09:49:18 AM new
What I find interesting is that this man is legally married to only one of the women. How can the state "decide" that he's committing bigamy? Doesn't Hugh Hefner have 7 or 8 girls shack up with him at the same time?
posted on May 20, 2001 09:56:56 AM new
I watched one of those shows, I don't think it was Springer, a few years back.
The women in one household that were married to the one man, yes they did share the workload of the home and children. BUT alot of them worked outside the home, and I don't think the husband worked at all.
And he was not helping in any household chores or raising of all the children (and there were a lot!)
They showed him just sitting back, with a kid in his lap.
The women in these communitys are raised this way, why they don't or can't have a mind of their own is beyond me.
Yes it should be illegal, the marriage part.
Loving more than one women, well yeah thats happens all the time
posted on May 20, 2001 10:48:03 AM new
Well you know how Brigham Young got his name... 'I don't care how ya bring 'em, just bring 'em young'
Seriously though the Mormon church has 'convienent revelations' as in the polyagmy cases. They had a 'revelation that God told them that time had come for one man not to have more than one wife' (When it was outlawed, of course-condition of statehood)
In 1978, another 'convienent revelation' came, a civil rights one, where African Americans were not allowed to become bishops,
but they were allowed in the church. Their reasoning was that African Americans beared the mark of Cain. And so another 'convienent revelation' came that God said 'Do not let the sins of the father pass unto the children' and so they were allowed to higher themselves in the Church.
Sorry, no disrespect to Barry or any other Mormons. Its just a little different sort of Christian Church.
posted on May 20, 2001 10:50:45 AM new"Mormonism is a pretty disgusting cult"
To judge entire groups of people by the deeds of a relative few is unfair.
I dare say you could probably come up with a Baptist that perhaps beat his wife, or a Methodist that was an alcoholic or a Catholic that had a wife and 10 kids and a "girlfried" or two, maybe even a kid or two on the side. Would you then say that Baptist are "wife-beaters", Methodist are alcoholics or that Catholics are immoral????
I truly find it hard to think of the people in these stories as "Mormons". They have left the true Church keeping very little but the name. You would be hard pressed to find them as active members of any Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints that I know of and I have been a member for 25+ years. I assure you I do not believe I belong to a "disgusting cult".
posted on May 20, 2001 10:55:21 AM new
Non Christians presumably view orthodox Christian revelations and claims as equally absurd. How a distinction is drawn between them and the Mormon church escapes me. Any finger-pointing is therefore misguided.
The Catholic Church used to castrate little soprano boys. I'm sure all religions have practices in their past that they've since abandoned. I believe calling anyone else's religion "digusting" is digusting.
posted on May 20, 2001 10:56:09 AM new
Sulyn for sure, the other denominations you mentioned, they all have members that would do what you mentioned.
I am/was Roman Catholic, my family is, went to parocial school, at the time I went, most of the kids in my class had 9, 10, or 11 brothers and sisters.
We had a large family too, at the time birth control (besides the rhythm method) was against the laws of the Church. Of course in the changing times the Pope wiped that one out
posted on May 20, 2001 11:31:59 AM new
I sincerely believe each of us has the freedom to believe or not believe anything we choose. It is part of our free agency.
To say that there are no flaws in humanity, government or organized religon would be naive. I am not wise enough to have all the answers, nor do I believe I ever will be on this side of the grave. So all I can do is my best and try hard not to judge. We will each come to the truth in "due" time. Who knows, maybe we will discover we missed the point... In that case, I sure hope we get points for trying!
Interesting note---women in Utah (with the blessings of Brigham Young) were given the right to Vote in 1870---women in the rest of the USA had to wait another 50 years---1920
posted on May 20, 2001 12:43:35 PM new
MORMONS do not practice nor do we condone polygamy. In the past yes-
Today NO WAY Excommunication.
Most of the Polygamists belong to the RLDS or other apostate groups.
I can promise you no MORMONS practice polygamy, not in public or in Secret.
Many in Utah do, but they are not MORMONS.
