From: <CEvans1950@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 07:56:53 EDT

Hello,

Here we can see where heavy-handed Christians have subverted the law.

It is quite obviously an individual decision whether to participate in a plural marriage or not. If sane adults want to unite in a traditonal form of marriage according to their personal consciences it is no business of the governemment to establish mainstream Chrisitan "morality" as though it were proper law.

In all reality, the Mormons do indeed have the bibilical high ground on this one: the bible is replete with examples of polygamous marriages and as far as I recall Jesus never rails against it specifically.

I think that revisionists have tried to interpret his words as being against it but I recall no specific, clear changes from plural to single marriage mandated by him.

I tend to agree with the governor's original view that "illegalizing" polygamy is an un-consitutional imposition of religion by government. One must realize that many fundamentalist Chrisitans in this nation are desperately willing to subvert the constitution and the freedom upon which this nation was founded.

They are, indeed, the proverbial "fifth columnists" who shall destroy this nation if they aren't recognized for the disloyal un-American subversives that they truly are.

Sincerely,
Caroline

Utah Gov. Clarifies Polygamy Views

By ROBERT GEHRKE
.c The Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - A week after causing an uproar for saying the practice of polygamy may enjoy constitutional protection, Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt insisted he doesn't condone plural marriages.

At a press conference Friday, Leavitt said that the practice of polygamy is against the law "and should be," but he did not advocate more aggressive prosecution of the crime.

He also said that discussions with federal, state and local prosecutors had convinced him the state's constitutional ban on polygamy is similar to laws against fornication, adultery and sodomy - virtually unenforceable.

Facing that obstacle, the governor said prosecutors are better off concentrating their resources on violent criminals rather than target polygamists whose prosecution would be difficult.

"If you pump resources into polygamy and cohabitating, murderers and rapists will walk," he said.

Leavitt speculated last week that polygamy may be protected under the First Amendment guarantee of religious freedom. On Friday, he acknowledged he has learned that multiple marriages are not so protected.

"Although the recent furor over polygamy has been unpleasant, the recent discussion has a positive consequence if it focuses attention on a lifestyle where abuses too easily can be shrouded in silence and secrecy," he said.

The remarks came the same week polygamist John Daniel Kingston was bound over for trial on charges that he beat his 16-year-old daughter for fleeing her arranged marriage to her uncle, Kingston's brother. The girl, who is now in state custody, told police she was David O. Kingston's 15th wife.

There has not been a polygamy prosecution in Utah for 45 years, and Leavitt said he did not expect that record to change.

There are an estimated 30,000 polygamists throughout the West, many of them living in enclaves scattered around Utah.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which brought plural marriage to the state, banned the practice in 1890 without renouncing the religious doctrine.

Leavitt said polygamy is difficult to prosecute because plural marriages generally are conducted privately and cannot be documented. Still, he said the law should remain on the books to reflect the state's moral stance against the practice.

The Women's Religious Liberties Union - made up of polygamist wives and their supporters - called on the governor Friday to repeal the state's ban on polygamy.

AP-NY-08-01-98 0328EDT

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.