Supreme Court set the stage for allowing polygamy in America

  • Follow Opinion columns

The April 2008 raid of the polygamist colony in Eldorado, Texas, revealed glaring similarities to Muslim polygamy in the arena of human rights and societal dysfunction. An analysis that totally disregards religion and merely compares those effects by scientific means should not be regarded as “hate speech.” Rather, it could be a blueprint for reform.

THE INEVITABLE similarities are misogyny, child cruelty, illiteracy, poverty, xenophobia, pedophilia, brutality, overpopulation and inbreeding.

Women suffer hideously in polygamous societies, but it is actually worse for men. Though the number of wives is limited, the truth is that one man can take dozens of wives by replacing them when their fertility is over. Each wife taken robs another man of a family and the community of his genes. A primordial biological drive exists for males to sire offspring. For the alpha males, no detail is spared – pre-pubescent girls are married to maximize child-bearing, and birth control is forbidden. In monogamy, the responsibilities of a family dampens that urge.

The distrust of outsiders is not just because of discrimination or laws. The polygamous community gins up fear and hatred of others to ensure nobody leaves voluntarily, to justify cheating outsiders, to avoid diluting inheritances and keep women compliant.

When only a select few males contribute their genes, the result is inbreeding, because it becomes impossible to avoid marrying cousins. Much to their embarrassment, DNA testing among Muslim couples is required in many Islamic and European countries to reduce genetic diseases. In Eldorado, the fourth generation produced at least one profoundly retarded child with a very rare recessive expression – fumarase deficiency.

CHILDREN NEED a father’s influence, but that is numerically impossible. Wives must compete against one another for benefits. The husband becomes the final arbitrator who can punish his bickering, conniving wives with beatings. Boys learn this is acceptable treatment of women. Poverty is endemic to polygamy because only a few offspring can inherit a business or estate. Limiting the size of families is lifting India and China out of poverty. Having the time and assets to love and nurture all children is essential to building, rather than squandering capital.

The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints dumped unwanted, pre-pubescent boys downtown in major cities. They became known as “Lost Boys.” Being unprepared by their cloistered life inside the compound, they were forced into prostitution and drug-dealing. Dumping them was a mathematical imperative, since naturally a polygamous society becomes overburdened with excess males. Their own parents did it willingly!

Men without wives and families – i.e., drones – are more prone to violence, rape, pedophilia and suicide. They must be sent to war, exiled, castrated or removed by internal violence to stabilize the society. The corrosive psychological effects of polygamy draw the drones to conflict like flies to a dirty diaper. Syria is merely the latest slaughterhouse. These poor men actually are unwitting victims of polygamy. To emphasize my point, Turkey banned polygamy after World War I, resulting in a prosperous, relatively peaceful country, even with no oil.

THE COWARDICE of our media, academics and leaders is tragic. If they could work to end this practice by a frank and rational approach, the world would greatly improve over time. Instead, the Supreme Court has set the stage for legalizing it in the United States.

While readers may scoff at the idea of polygamy dominating the U.S. landscape, it doesn’t have to all at once. When it becomes legal, sects will isolate themselves, multiply and Balkanize. In their euphoric quest to free mankind of religious constraints, the Left eventually may regret gutting monogamy.

(The writer lives in Grovetown.)

Comments (12) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
angedelune
238
Points
angedelune 07/14/13 - 06:35 am
4
3
SO...

how exactly did the supreme court set the stage for polygamy in america? the article never explains this. nor does it explain how the "Left" gutted monogamy.

deestafford
30327
Points
deestafford 07/14/13 - 07:16 am
3
1
The Supreme Court's reasoning was not based on any

law in The Constitution as shown by Kennedy saying the only rationale for the Congress passing DOMA was fear, bias, discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry. Not once did he cite any part of The Constitution as a legal basis.

Now, the door is opened to nationwide homosexual marriage. Using the "rationale" of the majority of the SCOTUS that is one has the "right" to marry whom they love there is nothing to limit marrying multiple partners, a family member or a minor. If someone thinks differently, please explain your position using the court's ''rationale" not feelings or beliefs.

The Court's ruling is an example of "the tyranny of the majority" which the Founders warned against.

afadel
530
Points
afadel 07/14/13 - 07:45 am
1
5
White People: Please Keep Muslims Out of Your Culture War

This column is an example of using anti-Muslim prejudice and stereotypes to justify a position in United States culture wars. The idea that the SCOTUS decision preventing the Federal Government from squashing via DOMA same-sex marriages in states which legalized it is hardly likely to result in a legalization of polygamy, and, even if polygamy is legal, it is hardly likely to become popular and widespread in the United States. In fact, even in countries where it is legal, it is not popular and widespread.

http://www.lse.ac.uk/economicHistory/seminars/ModernAndComparative/paper...

But most importantly, to compare polygamy in societies across Africa and Asia with the Mormon splinter group's Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado, TX is offensive and misleading.

Most polygamous families are two wives, not the "dozens" Ms. Albert intimates. Polygamous families don't practice segregation from the rest of society, so there are no compulsory multi-generational polygamous, consanguineous marriages. There is no mechanism to create xenophobia, "justify cheating outsiders" and "avoid diluting inheritances."

Regarding genetic disease, in some cases consanguineous (primarily 1st cousin) marriages may increase the risk. Many societies worldwide allow 1st cousin marriages, and genetic testing is recommended in those cases to allow couples to assess their children's risk of genetic disease. But I know of no country which compels Muslims specifically to do genetic testing. This assertion of Ms. Albert's is another scare tactic based on falsehood.

Here is a description of Qatar's mandatory testing program.

http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/middle-east/qatar-starts-premarital...

Of course, Qatar is a very small country. No European country has mandatory testing.

And, again, that has nothing to do with polygamy as practiced outside of North American cults.

effete elitist liberal
3173
Points
effete elitist liberal 07/14/13 - 07:48 am
1
2
Court's "rationale"

While I am pretty sure it will make no difference to you, deestafford, the fact is that based on the Court's SSM decision, there is a clear legal difference be SSM and polygamy. The recent decision rested on the basic legal principle that the 14th Amendment's equal protection guarantee can only be set aside by a "compelling state interest." That means opponents of SSM had to prove the consequences of SSM are so bad that they override equal protection guarantees. Opponents failed to do so. The arguments against polygamy are MUCH stronger, as any brief review of the evidence of interfamily dynamics and the wellbeing of children of polygamy clearly show. The provable negative effects of polygamy constitute a "state interest" strong enough overcome equal protection guarantees.

afadel
530
Points
afadel 07/14/13 - 07:58 am
0
3
My Experience with Polygamy

When I was studying 2 months, in Kano, Nigeria, the family I stayed with consisted of a husband, two wives and their children. I did not interact with the wives, but the children seemed to function fine and I never noticed anything abusive. When I left, I gave gifts for the two wives and they both came out of the "women's section" of the house to thank me and wish me goodbye.

PhDAAA
5
Points
PhDAAA 07/14/13 - 08:00 am
3
2
This whole article is drivel.

This whole article is drivel. Just opinions without facts to back them up. The only thing that approaches facts is the FLDS lost boys part, which does say what the FLDS do to many of their young men. However, anyone with any knowledge of polygamy around the world knows that this does not happen in other polygamous groups. Using one example that does not fit other polygamous groups is very shoddy reasoning.

Nancy, do a bit of research, show us articles by scientists who back up your ideas, and maybe I will take you seriously.

carcraft
27816
Points
carcraft 07/14/13 - 08:49 am
3
1
I happen to agree with

I happen to agree with deestafford, the Supreme court set a very low bar for defining marriage and family. Marriage did exist to provide a stable platform in society to raise and nurture children. The regulation of marriage was a function of the state. DOMA was passed to prevent a constitutional amendment to define marriage. The wording of the Supreme court makes it clear that state constitutional prohibitions against redefining marriage are the next to go! So much for the tenth amendment! Muslims and fundamentalist Mormans will argue religious freedom and a "right " to the life style they choose.

deestafford
30327
Points
deestafford 07/14/13 - 09:36 am
2
1
EEL

Don't get the DOMA and the CA SSM cases mixed up. The DOMA case basically threw out the idea that marriage is between one man and one woman. The CA SSM case was thrown out because the party bring the suit had no standing because the state of CA failed in its constitutional duty to defend a law/amendment duly passed by the people of CA. The same thing that your beloved president decided in violation of his oath to defend the laws of the US did when he decided not to defend DOMA because HE felt it was unconstitutional. He has no authority or right under the Constitution to decide what laws are or are not constitutional.

By striking down the DOMA the SCOTUS basically laid to say any marriage, anywhere is legal. That is the next case to come before them. Using that "logic" how can one say one cannot have more than one spouse? They can't.

By the way, the 14th Amendment has been so misinterpreted as to equality when it was originally written for slaves and no one else. Another example of how justices screw things up by finding something that ain't there.

soapy_725
43949
Points
soapy_725 07/14/13 - 09:56 am
0
0
Maternal societies exist because the father is a non issue.
Unpublished

Maternal societies exist because the father is a non issue.

RMSHEFF
17786
Points
RMSHEFF 07/14/13 - 12:02 pm
2
1
DEE

You are correct. Overturning DOMA has opened the door for marriage to be anything you want it to be. It allows each state to define marriage and eventually will force other states to accept their definition.

Lou Stewall
363
Points
Lou Stewall 07/14/13 - 01:21 pm
0
0
Map showing the percentage of

Map showing the percentage of consanguineous marriages worldwide. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_...

The rates top 50% in places. Search the word "polygamy" and find innumerable scientific articles about genetic defects, financial reasons for the practice, "tribe and bribe" economies and charts on the mathematical progression of degrees of relatedness (which presupposes wives unrelated each generation, which is not the case).
How can critics escape the math of half the men being "drones", or cannon fodder if the other half have two wives?
I wonder why this article left out female genital mutilation?

palmetto1008
9782
Points
palmetto1008 07/14/13 - 05:57 pm
2
2
Polygamy?? I'm all for it.
Unpublished

Polygamy?? I'm all for it. Just wish I could afford more than one.

corgimom
36503
Points
corgimom 07/14/13 - 07:29 pm
1
4
Wow, another strange LTE.

Wow, another strange LTE. Where do they find these people, anyway?

It mentioned the US, China, India, Islamic countries, Europe, Syria, and Turkey, AND Texas.

The men in Syria are the unwitting victims of polygamy? REALLY?

"Men without wives and families – i.e., drones – are more prone to violence, rape, pedophilia and suicide." REALLY??? And she knows this, how?

Nancy Albert needs to understand that 25 states and Washington DC allow 1st cousin marriage, so her concern about inbreeding is misplaced. 6 states restrict it to older people or people unable to reproduce, but in 19 states in the US, it's perfectly legal to marry a first cousin.

Perhaps she should focus on that rather than Syria, Turkey, China, and India.

My husband says, "No, I don't want another wife, you're all I can handle!"

Darby
28323
Points
Darby 07/16/13 - 03:26 pm
1
1
"Nancy, do a bit of research, show us

articles by scientists who back up your ideas, and maybe I will take you seriously."

.
You may be on to something there. On the other hand, putting too much trust in "hand picked" scientists has just about driven us off the cliff with regard to "global warming" and "climate change".

Not sure that I'd be inclined to fall on my sword with regard to a scientist's conclusions regarding matrimony either.

Back to Top

Top headlines

Storm brings heavy rain, property damage reported

The National Weather Service in Columbia says the threat of severe weather has left the Augusta area, but not before leaving behind some property damage Sunday.
Search Augusta jobs