Times change, but polygamy's still a no-no

WASHINGTON — As they pushed for a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage, Sen. Orrin Hatch and Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney did something that most of the world would not expect from members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

They both blasted even the thought of legalizing plural marriage. And they did it while embracing greater rights and protection (but not marriage) for gay couples.

It makes one wonder what noted polygamists of history, such as Abraham, Jacob, David — or even Brigham Young — would think. (I cannot think of any historical same-sex "married" couples to imagine asking.)

It also makes one wonder why modern polygamists from Muslim or African countries should continue to expect legal shunning in America, while the country seems more willing to embrace same-sex couples.

The debate on the traditional marriage amendment, which died on a procedural vote last week, took occasional detours into polygamy for two reasons.

First, some critics worry that versions of its wording (defining marriage as between a man and a woman) might allow legalizing polygamy. Second, some said federal bans on polygamy show the federal government has long set standards on marriage, even though critics say it is a matter that should be, and usually has been, left to the states.

Amid that backdrop, Romney — who helped lead the charge for the amendment because the Massachusetts Supreme Court has forced his state to allow gay marriages — brought up polygamy at a hearing to make a point.

"If my state had begun polygamous marriages," Romney said, "and we were providing polygamous marriages right now, I would believe we would recognize that there was a need for a constitutional amendment to prevent that. I would certainly support an immediate constitutional amendment to prevent that."

Then Hatch brought it up, too, during debate last week.

He noted that a Utah ancestor, Jeremiah Hatch, had three wives and 30 children, and they practiced polygamy "because they believed it to be a spiritual principle." It was discontinued after Supreme Court rulings outlawed it, and after LDS Church leaders said prayer and revelation led them to submit to the national law.

"I dare say that no one would argue that it should ever come back," Hatch told the Senate. "I would never argue that it should ever come back, and I have been offended by some people who say there is an argument for it."