Deseret News | Polygamists plan to take the Hill

Reader comments
Polygamists plan to take the Hill

Page:
1
2
Next >

OC Surfer | 12:40 p.m. July 23, 2008

This is one of the first things about Senator Harry Reid that I support...I hope the polygamists are scared

common sense | 12:45 p.m. July 23, 2008

Well of course Polygamists will be at the hearings! Who forgot to tell them that Polygamy is against the law! Intentionally breaking Federal laws and they ALL should be stopped.. We have seen what polygamy has done through generations.. It abuses women and children, and its NOT Religious, Its SICK!
Go Senator Reid!!! YOu have LOTS of AMERICANS behind you and the senate and the Bill your wanting to introduce!!!

Nephi | 12:53 p.m. July 23, 2008

Reid is LDS right? It's sad to see that we LDS have turned from being the persecuted to being the persecuters. If we had lived in the days of Brigham Young, would we have been those who persecuted the Saints?

Comments continue below

shoelover | 12:54 p.m. July 23, 2008

I just don't get it...polygamy is again the law right? Why are these people allowed to repeatedly break the law and get away with it? If the authorities know where the polyamists are why not arrest them for breaking the law, if they were drug dealers they would. A major crackdown is need!

All Hail Senator Reid | 12:57 p.m. July 23, 2008

Senator Reid is going to put a stop to this silly situation...

Lionheart | 1:04 p.m. July 23, 2008

I finally have something to like about Harry Reid.

For shoelover, who doesn't get i | 1:07 p.m. July 23, 2008

"I just don't get it...polygamy is again the law right?"

-----------

Yes, shoelover, polygamy is "again" the law, but many suspect that the law is itself "again" the law. That is, it's unconstitutional. So if government enforces the law and it goes to the Supreme Court, government could lose that very law as a tool to persecute the polygamists. Then polygamists would be everywhere, oh my!

Gal50 | 1:11 p.m. July 23, 2008

One thing I have learned is that it is very hard to assess another culture. We don't have a methodology for assessing and describing the differences.

For example, some people feel the FLDS has violated child labor laws. But, our children sit around playing electronic games all day. It appears to me that perhaps my children are paying a higher price because the labor laws prevent my children from working. They haven't produced something of which to be proud and some would say they have wasted their time. Perhaps the FLDS children were overworked and maybe the FLDS have violated labor laws, but their children may be better off for that. When a group disconnects from the mainstream and builds their own community on things that make sense to them, they are going to have different rules and violate some of ours. We do need people inside these cultures to help us understand them.

The US culture does a great job of giving rights to the less powerful such as children. The FLDS is horrible at this and as a result, judging from Texas demographics, there may be 70 or more statutory rape cases in Utah/Arizona.

why the conference | 1:17 p.m. July 23, 2008

just follow the law or are we saying just some of em.

just a thought | 1:20 p.m. July 23, 2008

Isn't it interesting that Americans vote for and pass laws that allow same sex marriages to happen, but when it comes to polygamy they get all freaked out?

Txmom | 1:26 p.m. July 23, 2008

Bigamy,the act of LEGALLLY marrying more than one person is against the law. The spiritual marriages of claiming someone as your spouse isn't against the law.You can have a wife and as many mistresses as you want as long as you don't marry them legally at the courthouse.

It's like two lesbians calling each other wives in Utah. No they are not legally married, no they aren't breaking a law, they just feel like they are married.

uncannygunman | 1:30 p.m. July 23, 2008

Good for the polygamists, I hope they are allowed to speak. Maybe we wouldn't have so many dumb laws if the lawmakers listened to the actual people who are going to be affected by a particular law.

Religious or Civil Marriage? | 1:34 p.m. July 23, 2008

Polygamy, from the standpoint of multiple civil marriages (possessing a license and filed with the government) is against the law. However, religious polygamy (church only marriages) are not against the law because they aren't recognized by the government. This is one reason why it is so difficult to prosecute. How would you prosecute a man who is legally married to one woman but who has 3 other women living with them that according to the government are not married? In that instance they aren't breaking the law because the husband has not filled multiple marriage licenses. If it is only a religious marriage then they can always scream freedom of religion, as long as they aren't breaking any other laws such as what is currently going on with Warren Jeffs.

common sense | 1:39 p.m. July 23, 2008

ONE state passed a gay marriage law just a thought. That ONE out of 50.
Rodney Holm tried to contest polygamy to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court wouldnt even listen to it.
So, im not worried the Supreme Court will pass a Pro Polygamy law.

wrz | 1:40 p.m. July 23, 2008

common sense | 12:45 p.m.: "Well of course Polygamists will be at the hearings! Who forgot to tell them that Polygamy is against the law! Intentionally breaking Federal laws and they ALL should be stopped.."

Illegally crossing US borders is illegal, too. When are they going to round illegals up and put them in front of a hearing committee?

Answer: Never. The way things are going, these law breakers will not only not have to be grilled, they will get amnesty... off scott free. Some lawbreakers get lucky breaks, some don't. go figure.

wrz | 1:41 p.m. July 23, 2008

Nephi | 12:53 p.m.: "Reid is LDS right? It's sad to see that we LDS have turned from being the persecuted to being the persecutors."

The Mormon prophet, Joseph Smith was reportedly killed at Carthage by former friends and disenfranchised members.

Rita | 1:47 p.m. July 23, 2008

Better be careful if any of the FLDS go to the hearing.
There might be a warrant out for some of them.
Gal, how do your kids play electronic games all day if they don't have tv's?
A child does not waste it's time by not working. There's plenty of time for that when they grow up.
Let them be kids.

dcc | 1:48 p.m. July 23, 2008

Polygamists seem to have a preference for little girls. How can that be defended?

Willard | 2:26 p.m. July 23, 2008

The prophet Joseph Smith showed us the right way and we should up hold it, the true practice of polygamy is God's commandment of man and essential for man's eternal well being. Polygamy should be regulated but not illegal.

jwr | 2:29 p.m. July 23, 2008

Polygamy between adults = why not? But to little grils = no way. Also, if you have so many wives and children then provide for them not collect welfare etc. Tax payers are supporting these so called religions and the Utah AG has side stepped the law in favor of the FLDS

rick | 3:16 p.m. July 23, 2008

jwr i agree. responsible marriages are the fabric of this country. too many couples these days are just living together no commitment, playing house then there is the guys and guys, gals and gals, unnatural. The guys after children need to be dealt with. If some guy wants to enter into polygamy then he should be a guy and support them. kind of takes the aura out of the union. I can hear it now HER KIDS GOT NEW SHOES WHAT ABOUT MINE. In a true polygamist union there is a lot more to it than sex. I'm happy with one taskmaster. Those who think that it is glorious go for it.

Korihor | 3:19 p.m. July 23, 2008

Whatever, the polygamists don't have the numbers. Wait a minute...

bert | 3:23 p.m. July 23, 2008

Willard,
Perhaps Joseph Smith did receive revelation to practice polygamy, but a later prophet (Woodruff)supposedly received revelation to discontinue the practice. I would think that the later prophet would have precedence.

Rich | 3:22 p.m. July 23, 2008

Mark Shurtleff won't do it, but maybe a federal task force will -- stop this destructive and sick form of polygamy that has been going on for too long, depriving young women of normal marriages, children of normal family relationships, and young men of normal social development while simultaneously robbing our society of the resources required to care for the many dependents created by these polygamous unions. Start jailing and fining some of these guys until this practice stops.

howard | 3:24 p.m. July 23, 2008

FLDS,LDS its all the same.
Just a different time and place but a polygamist is a
polygamist...whenever whatever...

protect the children | 3:28 p.m. July 23, 2008

I hope these concerned "Moms" speak about their reluctance to protect their children when church leaders take their young daughters away to marry some old fart.

Come on sisters - quit letting your men hide behind your skirts.

Dan | 3:36 p.m. July 23, 2008

Willard - To my knowledge Joseph Smith didn't promote child bride marraiges.

Karl | 3:47 p.m. July 23, 2008

For the continued belivers of Warren Jeffs, I offer you this:

"Downward to Avernus: Where he goes, I follow"

Like the sound of that?

Question for bert??? | 3:55 p.m. July 23, 2008

Since when did a "statement" beginning with "To Whom It May Concern" become a commandment of God?

Wilford Woodruff (as President of a democractic organization) just pandered to the masses and gave you what you wanted. ;-)

unknown | 3:55 p.m. July 23, 2008

The cost to the American tax payer is going to increase significantly in regards to "paying for polygamists" once we start sticking perfectly healthy happy children into foster care, taking away a large families main provider, and paying for a federal tax force. To all of you who aren't looking at the big picture maybe 5% of polygamist families are on welfare, but the majority of them have multiple incomes and are supported by polygamist run businesses. If the U.S. is going to start prosecuting people who are not legally married just because the general public doesn't understand or like them, then are they also going to start prosecuting ALL the men in our country who commit adultery on a regular basis? Which is also against the law. If we disrupt these families and communities based on stereotypical ideas, and don't give those kids who are being taken care of a chance to growup with their families, then we become tyrants. Has the U.S. done anything for those women and children who are tortured and mutilated around the world? Shouldn't we focus our efforts on helping people rather than on judging and condemning them?

Anonymous | 4:03 p.m. July 23, 2008

For Shoelover:

I just don't get it...fornication is again the law right? [Answer: Yes. See Utah Code Ann. 76-7-104.] Why are these people allowed to repeatedly break the law and get away with it? If the authorities know where the fornicators are why not arrest them for breaking the law, if they were drug dealers they would. A major crackdown is needed!

Gordo | 4:05 p.m. July 23, 2008

wrz said: "The Mormon prophet, Joseph Smith was reportedly killed at Carthage by former friends and disenfranchised members."

That would be a re-write of history. Smith was being guarded at the Carthage jail by members of the Carthage militia called the Carthage Greys in Carthage Illinois when it was besieged by members of the militia from nearby Warsaw, Illinois. The Greys promptly abandoned their posts and Smith and his brother Hyram were assassinated, tow others were wounded. I have never read anywhere that the Warsaw militia was staffed with former members of Smith's church. However, he was in custody due to complaints by and from former friends and members, specifically in this instance over Smith overstepping his authority as mayor of Nauvoo, Illinois and ordering the destruction of a private printing press that had printed a newspaper critical of Smith and exposing the practice of polygamy.

Let them speak! | 4:12 p.m. July 23, 2008

Whether you support the FLDS and other polygamous groups' contention that polygamy is part of their religion or not, it is only fair and just to let them speak for themselves.

I, personally, don't see how a culture that is fixing to legalize gay marriage, that has no objection to various live-in relationships, condones illegitimacy (and welfare benefits to those people), that ignores millions of illegal aliens obtaining welfare benefits and breaking the laws, that uphods the "right" to partake of pornography (which certainly dehumanizes women and even children for someone's sexual pleasure) can be so self righteous about polygamy.

Now forced marriages, I object. Child brides--I object (although there is many a mother in this country who encourages her teenage daughters to have illigetimate children in order to draw welfare).

But polygamy itself--most of the non-western world accepts polygamy to this day. If people want freely to enter into polygamous marriages, who are we to say they shouldn't?

And no, I don't live in Utah and I'm not FLDS. I'm also a woman, married to one man for more than 40 years.

birdinflight | 4:19 p.m. July 23, 2008

Gal50 | 1:11 p.m. July 23, 2008
For example, some people feel the FLDS has violated child labor laws. But, our children sit around playing electronic games all day. It appears to me that perhaps my children are paying a higher price because the labor laws prevent my children from working. They haven't produced something of which to be proud and some would say they have wasted their time. Perhaps the FLDS children were overworked and maybe the FLDS have violated labor laws, but their children may be better off for that.

Child labor laws have not kept your children from working. YOU have kept your children from working by giving them electronic babysitters instead of chores that they are expected to finish before they get allowance or anything else they want. They could help an elderly neighbor or family members.
TURN THE VIDEO GAME OFF.

realitycheck | 4:20 p.m. July 23, 2008

I don't know why everyone is so upset about polygamy. If a guy can get multiple women to live with and "service" him, more power to him. I mean, who really cares as long as they are of age?

The biggest issue is taxpayers having to support them. On that front, I think the best approach would be to limit the amount of state support a household (one address) can receive, regardless of how many women and children live there. In other words, only one mother could claim support for one house, and only up to 3 children. (If you can't afford them, don't have so many kids.) Then if they practice polygamy, and multiple women and children live in the house, only one could collect and only for her children - up to 3. If they want more, they would have to live at seperate addresses - which would defeat much of the point of polygamy.

None of this would address the real issue, which is the deliberate over-sermonizing of the children. The fact is, none of the FLDS children will grow up to amount to much, simply because of their upbringing. Very unfair to the children.

Anonymous | 4:24 p.m. July 23, 2008

"Although adultery has been historically regarded as a legal wrong, it has not always been considered a crime."

Isn't polygamy along the same lines as this statement? Do all of you who have stated that illegal is illegal agree with the above statement and therefore agree that ALL men who sleep with someone other than their spouse be thrown in jail?

If a child is in harm's way then that child should be protected regardless of whether they come from a polygamist family or not ... if however, we go after people simply because we don't like their beliefs and we use the "law" to do it, then we should use that same "law" to prosecute ALL those who are breaking it. I'm guessing that most of the people throwing out their pro-task force ideals have known, or have committed some sort of adultery. In some states lewd acts and comments against someone other than ones spouse is considered adultery. PEOPLE! Think before you judge. Find out the facts individual situations before you condemn an entire "society."

realitycheck | 4:40 p.m. July 23, 2008

re - question for bert???

since when did any of it become a commandment from God? some of you choose to believe Smith, some believe Woodruff. Both were just men. Why is that so hard to understand?

As far as I know, there are only 10 commandments from God, and if you would all follow them, you wouldn't be in this trouble.

Now I have a question:
my understanding is that there is a belief that there are 3 levels to heaven and each time you marry it promotes you to the next level upon death. Is this correct? If so, why would you not go through 3 lives to reach that level, instead of trying to cram it all into one? You could have 3 lives, full of fun and adventure, and get to where you will be having no fun and adventure with 3 wives now.

Do I not understand the concept? Am I missing something? I mean - personally I'd rather live 3 times and have fun each time rather than live once and be all stuffy in longjohns and having to hide out in the backwoods with no tv, no fun, etc...

Anonymous | 4:41 p.m. July 23, 2008

We don't want to have polygamous relationships "mainstreamed"--no matter how hard they've worked at it. This is an illegal action and it should be prosecuted. Congratulations Harry Reid for trying to protect marriage, children, women, men and the rule of law.

We don't live in the 19th century, and we shouldn't try and judge people by laws that others lived in the past--this is the 21st century, and we should live by the rule of law, not by emotional situations. If we are to have a peaceful society we must uphold the rule of law.

Of course the polygamous sects were not invited--they are law breakers. If they show up, I hope they are arrested.

Anonymous | 4:44 p.m. July 23, 2008

Amen! To Let them speak!

At least someone outside of Utah and the polygamist world has some common sense!

Think!!!! | 4:46 p.m. July 23, 2008

bert | 3:23 p.m. July 23, 2008
Willard,
Perhaps Joseph Smith did receive revelation to practice polygamy, but a later prophet (Woodruff)supposedly received revelation to discontinue the practice. I would think that the later prophet would have precedence.
______________________________________________

Notice you said (Woodruff)"supposedly received revelation" Then when you go read that "revelation" it's the only one in the whole book that says "To Whom It May Concern" Hmmmmmmmmm-Maybe it does not concern the FLDS? Perhaps (Woodruff) wrote it to save his property???

Not just FLDS | 5:02 p.m. July 23, 2008

Most major cities have large segments of their population that have children born out of wedlock and parents that do not support their offspring. Many of these parents started in their early teens as they were steadily sexualized by the movies and TV programs they watched. (We even have public figures [e,g, Jesse Jackson] who have "love children" without remorse.) Is Harry Reid going to hold hearings on these perpetrators too?

willy steel | 5:04 p.m. July 23, 2008

Most of you sound like a lynch mob from a "B"western movie. Personally I don't think its governments business to legalize any kind of marriage, gay or otherwise. And, its certainly not any of yours how folks want to live as long as its without harm to you. Harry Reid, take the day off and go fishing in a different pond.

Doug S | 5:30 p.m. July 23, 2008

@ realitycheck (4:40 PM)

I'm not sure about FLDS belief, but if it's anything like mainline LDS, your interpretation is mistaken. LDS theology rejects the idea of reincarnation--you go to a level of heaven, and that's it; you're done. There is no coming back for another go-around in an attempt to improve your status.

Moreover, there is no link between number of spouses and one of the three levels of glory--enter into the "new and everlasting covenant of marriage" (understood in Brigham Young's day to be polygamy, whether two or twenty-two wives; and now understood to be merely a Mormon temple marriage even if monogamous) and (subject to a number of other factors, obviously) you're in the top level; otherwise, you're in one of the other two.

plankton | 5:41 p.m. July 23, 2008

re: Realitycheck at 4:40

Your having a zen moment aren't you.

To reality check | 5:53 p.m. July 23, 2008

No, you don't have it correctly. Thumbnail description: In the LDS belief, people's spiritual levels during their lives are very different and the belief of "degrees" of glory in the resurrection simply reflects that idea. Paul describes the resurrection so in the King James Bible (Rather than having some magical line that divides the "good" from the "damned".) The lowest degree is for those who knowingly choose wickedness. The middle degree is for those who are good and honorable people of the world, and the highest degree would be for those who choose to try to purify their lives to become as Christ-like as is humanly possible (always realizing that it takes the Atonement of Christ of cleanse us of repented sin).
One does not move from one level to another by marrying multiple wives!

Secondly, as to their only being ten commandments, you have forgotten that Christ, who said he came not to destroy the law but to fulfill it, gave us two commandments not mentioned in the 10. To love the Lord with all our heart, mind and strength and to love our neighbors as ourselves--pretty tough things to live up to.

To reality check, again | 5:55 p.m. July 23, 2008

Sorry, misuse of a pronoun--there instead of their.

Spiritually married? | 5:59 p.m. July 23, 2008

Excuse me? Being spiritually married to more than one wife is also called "Adultery." That IS Not against the law, but it certainly is against GOD's LAW!

Pick and choose, pick and choose which of God's laws to live by or not.

This is all too hysterical. A child can tell you what is right and wrong. Why do seemingly educated and well...what's a good word....grown ups NOT get what is right and wrong?

A man and a woman legally and lawfully married to one another is right. Anything else...is going against God's laws.

These people want to be GOD fearing people, but choose instead to make up the rules as they go along.

Same sex double standard | 6:03 p.m. July 23, 2008

Where are all the homosexuals that scream for civil rights and shout down anyone that opposes same sex marriage? Why aren't the gays and lesbians supporting the polygamists on this one?? Why aren't the gays and lesbians jumping on here calling those opposed to polygamy bigots and neocons???

Seems like a same sex double standard.

kenny | 6:01 p.m. July 23, 2008

The institution of marriage in all forms is being pulled apart,changed,revised,etc by people through out the world.When you speak of marriage, the definition has surely changed in my life time.The laws against polygamy may well be imaterial and unconstitional given the way men/men,women/women/,man/woman enter into relationships.Sure its illigal but do the people who practice it care. Not really.I say good luck to people on both sides of this issue.

realitycheck | 6:01 p.m. July 23, 2008

re - willy steel 5:04pm

how ironic that you would bring up B movies. Your whole clan reminds me of the old westerns where the preacher is walking down the dusty street with 50 uptight women carrying temperance league signs.

you know, everyone that's ever seen one of those movies thought to themselves "thank God my parents aren't like that".

Unfortunately, you are just like that. I feel bad for your kids. If they ever get to see a movie like that (heaven forbid) then they will think - oh, look, it's mom and dad.....

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.