English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints continues to practice polygamy, although the marriages are unrecognized by the state. The sect, however, is known to have ostracized unwed male members who may become competition for young wives who are desired by the church's elders.

Is this consequence of polygamy significant enough a reason to keep it disallowed as a legally sanctioned practice?

2007-05-13 17:20:26 · 8 answers · asked by NHBaritone 7 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Here's the story:
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/18243/polygamy-texas

2007-05-13 17:25:09 · update #1

Here's another article.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy242.html

2007-05-13 17:30:18 · update #2

8 answers

can you cite sources indicating that they have ostracized unwed male members who may become competition for young wives, then I can adequately respond, please and thank you

Thanks for the link, wow I am in awe, not so much at the polygamy, I feel its necessary under certain circumstances ( war that has decimated the male population, leaving many unwed women about ), but the ostracizing of younger males, so the older ones get the young ladies, thats just dirty.
Your question, I say no, that said people should not be exiled so the older men get the younger ladies.

2007-05-13 17:24:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

If someone wanted to legalize polygamy, FLDS is a poor example in general. In addition to the article about younger men being ostracized and excommunicated, most of the "wives" are young girls forcibly married to older men who were not of thier choosing, and often beaten and raped into submission. In looking at the practice of culling out younger men who are competition for young brides, if you consider the amount of emotional damage it does to the males, and that it would cause further inbreeding within a group that is already way inbred, then I think that alone is sufficient justification to keep polygamy illegal, if the FLDS is to be used as our definition of "polygamy". When you consider that some of these elders have as many as 50 to 70 "wives", it's no wonder if a large number of younger males get thrown out in order to allow the older ones to build a harem. It amazes me that the FLDS has been able to continue this way for as long as they have, and I don't understand how it is that the laws havn't been enforced when they live such an abusive lifestyle. I'm not sure if this would be a consequence in a group that practices "polygamy" if it were a group where all the women are allowed to marry who they want to though, there would still be increased competition for available females, but the distribution would be different. If our definition were a group that practiced polygamy where people were free to choose thier own mates, and could bring in fresh blood to the gene pool from outside the group, that might be another matter.

2007-05-14 07:07:52 · answer #2 · answered by beatlefan 7 · 1 0

You know many people mistakenly think that polygamy is Always a bad thing, but let me tell you what I think. I am a Muslim woman and Islam says that a man may take up to four wives. Many Christians and others (Like the bible doesn't talk about the men having more than one wife!) say bad things about this practice, but there are valid reasons for it. First of all, it is the exception, not the rule. My husband certainly does not have another wife, and he would have to have my permission if he wanted one. Secondly, unlike the Mormons and some others, Islam limits the number of wives and sets down strict guidelines. For example, you cannot have 10 wives all living in the same house raising 50 kids. Each wife must have her own house and you must be able to treat them all equally. If you can't do that, then you should only have one in order to avoid sinning. Also, you must understand that back then there were so many men dying in wars and things like this that who was going to take care of all these widows and orphans? It was hard enough for a man to find a job, especially for a woman! It's also practical if a woman can't have kids, then she can allow her husband to take a second wife (if he can afford to), so that he still can. If the husband can't have kids then she has the option of divorce. I even have one friend who has a "co-wife" who told me that she enjoys the free time that she gets when her husband is gone half the time. Anyways, it's much better than the typical American way where he has a wife and a mistress - or two. That's why over half of the children born in the US are considered Illigitimate. At least, this way men are forced to take responsibility for their offspring. Besides, I don't see why anone would care what consenting adults want to do! Teena

2007-05-14 00:49:40 · answer #3 · answered by Teena 2 · 3 1

No, I don't think the exile of boys and unwed men is sufficient reason to make polygamy illegal. I personally would not pratice polygamy, and don't think it's an emotionaly healthy way to live, however, I do think polygamy should be legal. I don't believe in legally imposing my beliefs onto others.

On a side note, I don't have much sympathy for people that are ostracized from a church that I so completely disagree with.

2007-05-14 13:57:06 · answer #4 · answered by martin 4 · 0 1

These boys should not be tossed out of their communities like yesterdays junk mail. I also take issue with the arranged, forced marriages that reportedly take place, especially to young girls with men more than old enough to be their fathers. I feel these things are done out of an issue of control. If a young couple weds there is more balance, both finding what works for them and "growing up," so to speak, together. However, if an older father figure, who is already set in his ways, takes on a young impressionable wife he is automatically the dominate personality in the relationship. This allows for control of the lady and any children she bears until they become old enough to show signs of willfulness against the elders. At which time boys who may show signs of rejecting religious dominance could potentially be outcast so as not to weaken the power of the elder leaders.

Now is this alone a good enough reason to keep polygamy illegal? No.

I consider it a possibility that because polygamy is illegal it helps to keep these people in their cult-like religion. "The outside world doesn't accept our practices, they don't understand you like we do," are typical cult responses to the outside world. Although I would not like to see polygamy as the norm, I feel that grown adults are generally capable of making choices that are best for themselves and their lives.

2007-05-14 06:06:23 · answer #5 · answered by Aria 3 · 2 0

No. Polygamy, in and of itself, isn't the problem. Psychotic control freaks are the problem. I support any and all arrangements between consenting adults. But sometimes, that's another problem with a few of these groups, and the girls are often too young to make their own decisions. However, bad arrangements are often made in non-polygamous relationships, too, and nobody's moving to outlaw those relationships just because a few people can't manage to stay within acceptable boundaries.

2007-05-14 00:28:12 · answer #6 · answered by solarius 7 · 0 0

Yes. This is emotional and sexual abuse, of both males and females. It should always be illegal, everywhere.

But we both know that making or keeping such practices illegal, is not enough to stamp them out -- because as we can see, it's already not working.

The state government needs to find its backbone and start arresting those who have so shamefully mistreated these young people. Until that happens, such practices will continue, more or less openly.

2007-05-14 07:34:03 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 1 0

that story pissed me off- dont make me mad before bed

2007-05-14 00:23:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers