Polygyny
- Thread starter SkyRider
- Start date
canada-man
Well-known member
a man can always live and be with with 2 or more women in a consenting relationship without going through a marriage ceremony
It was my understanding that the polygamy law had already been held constitutional as a result of previous legal maneuvering by the defence.
It's hard for me to have any respect for a law that dictates how two (or more) consenting adults must live their lives. (ex: polygamy , prostitution.)
it's quite a controversial subject. I find it interesting that the court looked, among other things, at the harms against men, which included: "the unequal distribution of spouses and related ostracism of younger men forced to compete for a scarcer supply of women; the creation of a false appetite for patriarchy; inflammation of male lust; and deprivation of the essential bond of mutuality that is unique to the marital institution."
https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2011/2011bcsc1588/2011bcsc1588.html
As if we live in a society where anything is distributed equally.
And for those interested in Sky's presentation of the topic: Polygamy refers to the practice of having more than one spouse. It is broader than polygyny, which refers to situations where one man has multiple wives, and polyandry, which refers to one woman with multiple husbands.
-taken from thegrammarist.com
We must hope, in these days of gender equality, that the Court does not limit its decision to polygyny alone, but pronounces upon the more general issue of polygamy.
-taken from thegrammarist.com
We must hope, in these days of gender equality, that the Court does not limit its decision to polygyny alone, but pronounces upon the more general issue of polygamy.
update: one found guilty, further challenge to constitionality is expected
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...c-men-accused-of-polygamy-expected-today.html
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...c-men-accused-of-polygamy-expected-today.html
This is concerning. The state ("Big Brother") telling you have many willing wives you can have.
I knew a lady who grew up in this area in southern BC. There was a fair amount of child molestation that went on in the 50's,60,s and 70's in this region. This was never a simple "Consenting adults living together in harmony" case.....
That IS an interesting point though. Pooling of wealth or any other resource to a few individuals is detrimental to overall society, so why wouldn't the pooling of partners be? At a time when Western society is already faced with an epidemic of singles, mass polygamy could exacerbate things.
That said, simply disallowing marriage doesn't really solve that overall problem.
Well, we keep voting in governments that are statist, so it is predictable that more and more control and regulation over our private lives will ensue as the government continues to get bigger and bigger. In fact, I am not so sure there will be any concept of privacy, in any meaningful way, in the not too distant future.
I would like to debate this point. An intelligent and rich individual like Bill Gates should be allowed to have as many wives and children as he can afford. This will improve the gene pool and benefit society as a whole.
This sounds bad but we have too many dumb and poor people pro-creating people who end up on welfare. Back in the days of Empire these kids would be pressed ganged into the Royal Navy and sent to fight the French. Now they just form gangs and shoot each other and/or innocent bystanders.
The verdict simply says there is indeed a law against polygamy and that they broke that law; free-will or personal choice wasn't at issue in the matter. However it certainly was part of the controversy surrounding the case, with allegations that teenage girls were smuggled into Canada to be married to a senior citizen who is a leader in that Mormon sect. The allegations ranged from 'brainwashing' through 'cult-indoctrination' to 'human-trafficking' and 'sex-slavery'.
If all the men and women were mature adults, and there was no power relationship I think there'd be a fine Charter case for leaving their polygamous marriage alone, deferring to their right to decide for themselves. And for leaving the hows of managing the various CPP survivor rights , child guardianships, power to make medical care decisions, inheritance and other matters that come with two-person marriages to be sorted out by many other Courts down the line.
But I don't think this is the case.
What is the origin of this law? Most of us can't even deal with one wife so it's an unusual man or woman who wants multiple wives.
Bigamy and Polygamy have been illegal in the West since 285 AD. In England it became a criminal (as opposed to ecclesiastical) offense in 1604 [The Bigamy Act 1604 (1 Jac 1 c 11)].
So this is nothing new, all the fuss in this instance was the Defence arguing that the Charter made this all illegal (even though I have little doubt that if they had prevailed, the Government would have exercised 'not withstanding' moving forward).
The ruling is not about who can live with or have sex with whom but rather how the legal contract of marriage applies.
It also reminds me co the Capone business. The government is acting against a nasty cult by using an easy to prove set of charges.
A lot can be said and argued about this issue. In no particular order:
- I say there won't ever be mass polygamy so I can't see it as being a practical problem. It's not easy to keep a bunch of bitches happy enough to stay in a union like that in Canada where they can very well find their own man so not many men could ever hope to get and keep together a polygamous family. And men already compete for women, and poor men don't do all that great anyways, so maybe they should not be complaining about lack of access to women.
- There sure is mass pooling of wealth and that doesn't concern us as long as the poor get enough welfare money to not revolt.
-There's some data that there's more gays than lesbians out there (In The Netherlands in 2009 3.6% of the men and 1.4% of the women identified as gay) so, again, poor men should not be complaining about lack of women...
- if gays can marry why can't rich people live like king Solomon and many others lived according to the Bible?
etc etc.
