Thank you for participating. You are hitting the nail on the head, if I may say so

As far as we can tell, Isaiah 4, as well as Isaiah 3 of course and many other chapters of the book of Isaiah, is prophesy indeed, that is, therein is described what is going to happen. And the polygamy scenario we find here is not only described, but also qualified:
“In that day the branch of the LORD shall be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the land shall be the pride and honor of the survivors of Israel.” (Isa 4:2)

Thank you again for your contribution. Although I am aware that I am assuming a lot here, it is very refreshing to meet a God fearing women who is able to accept that polygamy is a valid form of marriage according to the Law Word of Yahweh.

Grace and Peace,
Talitha

—————

Judge Walther is not even allowing discovery, which just saves the defense attorneys time and trouble. Why waste the effort, when the outcome is preordained?

What I want to know is whether the girls who married at 16, in many cases their families were poor, and they married, in part, to escape poverty–a Hinkley Grandneice, [West Salt Lake] had all of her girlfriends marry at sixteen, and so did a Cedar City neice.

Another friend married a 35 year old neighbor to get away from a abusive stepfather. [Delta] These were all monogamous cases, and include a niece in Foster Care who tried to get married to get out of the system and the judge declined. [She later married the same over age boy after he finished law school, at 24.]

It was a sad case of always a bridesmaid never a bride, until all of a sudden it became a big, terrible crime
to marry a girl under 18 in 1997. And now people in very
isolated communities are having their doors kicked in
by TAC squads.

I understand the big deal about forced marriages, but
cultural trend change slowly, particularly when it comes
to patterns of marriage in rural Utah.

All marriages among religious polygamous communities–
the Romany, Orthodox Jews and Fundamentalist Mormons
were legal and their children legitimate for about
twenty years under a federal law called the Smith Act.

It went out with Newt Gengritch’s sweeping return to the dark ages platform. I think it went to the Supreme Court,
so, when things cool down a better law could be
drafted.

Back to underage girls marrying older men–is it just a matter of polygamy? Maybe the state should pass a law
requiring everyone writing out marriage licences to
wear better glasses.

Why the ponderous spin. A newspaper campaign asking
all editors and managers of news outlets to carry content
on the change in law–letters to the Jeff’s type before
the fact.

The media circus has hurt a lot of innocent people and it
looks like it’s only getting worse.

Kathleen

I never thought or intended to say that what this group does wrong is the polygamy part, but if polygamy was legal, they would certainly benefit from it, that’s just simple logic. Whether you like it or not, your probably well meant fight will benefit people who do not deserve such benefits.

No, we do not like the fact that polygamy is illegal, but we do not care a whole lot either. Much like we do not try to convince the British to finally drive on the proper side of the road, we do not try to convince the US government to legalize polygamy, based on what we read in John 15:19. Why try to fight a law in a Kingdom you do not belong to ?

Are we active against decriminalizing polygamy ? No, I guess not. We have been contacted by someone who was planning a TV show and wanted to interview people who fight to decriminalize polygamy. Since we don’t, we are not available for such an interview, and stated this on our site here “for the record”. The “see, here is why” post just gives one reason for this position: Most people we have met who practice polygamy are ungodly freaks, and only a very small minority actually has an understanding of biblical plural marriage. This does not mean that most polygamists are godless freaks, it only means that we haven’t met many who aren’t.

Grace and Peace,
Talitha

This is really to assume that what that group is doing WRONG is engaging specifically in polygamy. This is not differentiating polygyny from immorality. In esence you are saying that to fight against considering Polygamy a crime [meaning put in jail specifically for it] is to advocate what those people are doing.

That is not true.

In all reality, to advocate Polygamy and then have no desire to decriminalize it; and in fact say “See this is why we don’t” on a site called “Christian Polygamy” is a little less than pointless.

The “crime” of Polygamy is punishable by jail, the “sin” of Polygamy is determined in heaven. The sin should not be a matter of State, but obviously the “crime” is. These three totally different words and meanings are often confused with each other: legal, criminal, and sinful. We agree on the sin(not specifically), and we agree on the legal(no need), but it is the criminal that the government attacks US over. In order for you to not be attacked by the state for doing what you belive is good, it needs to be decriminalized.

I understand that you want to concentrate on Scriptural evidence suggesting that your version of plural marriage is Godly, but society is made up of people and people read your site. We all are society. Perhaps you like that your lifestyle is a crime, because you don’t think they will arrest you and take you to jail over it. This is probably true because it has all but been decriminalized already.

I’m not even remotely asking for you to become politically active over decriminalizing it, but at least not be active against it either, as this post suggests.

I don’t mean to argue, but only to give a prospective that you may want to consider.

All the best,
Pliggy

Thanks for the clarification. The “here’s why” is meant to say “here is why we do not fight to decriminalize polygamy”. Our point is that the fight against the government is pointless (pun intended).

And no, we do not think or meant to imply that what is described in that article is the result of polygamy. I only wanted to add to the previous discussion that people who fight to decriminalize polygamy fight for people like that group too, for evil and wicked people who misuse a tool of dominion given by God.

Overall we are on similar grounds on the whole plural marriage issue, it seems. We at Joshuah’s House did not differentiate between “legalizing” and “decriminalizing” so far, as, no matter how you slice it, you are seeking the states action, be that through legalizing or decriminalizing.

As for speaking against the “crime” polygamy - We have had discussions with many people who consider plural marriage a sin, to be precise, the sin of adultery. We have addressed that plenty of times, always pointing out that plural marriage is simply marriage in God’s eyes, according to what the bible tells us. As not every sin is also a crime and not every crime also sin, we have decided (so far) to concentrate on showing Scriptural evidence that plural marriage is not sin, and disregarded society’s opinion.

Grace and Peace,
Talitha

And then you say:
“There are so many weirdos out there who think polygamy is a great idea”
I infer that to mean
“… to call what said article informs us [is] about the result of polygyny”

Maybe I am jumping to conclusions.

There is a big difference between legalizing Polygamy and decriminalizing it. I agree that Polygyny is God’s law under the right circumstances, and I completely agree that the government should have absolutely no say in what consenting adults determine to be “marriage”; Marriage should never be, in and of itself, a crime. That is my point.

For a site that advocates Godly Polygyny, I would think that you would speak against the CRIME of marriage, not especially legalizing it or protecting abusers who use it to sin. That in reality is “wanting to keep it a crime”

If a lady freely enters into a polygynous relationship, and then finds it abusive or sees others abused, she herself is considered either a victim of POLYGAMY or a criminal herself. Real abuse is then hidden or not reported because she does not agree with either label. And thus only those who will blame Polygamy get much news coverage.

I find it amazing how easy it is for women to play the “stupid, and brainwashed” card when it comes to entering and exiting a polygynous relationship. It seems that only the ones who plead “stupid” are considered smart by society.

I would bet that most abused women only wish they could get the help that the (real or imagined) abused women who leave polygyny do (book deals, magazine covers). That is another good reason to live it

I am not sure what you are answering to as most of what you are saying has nothing to do with the post you chose to comment on, but anyway:

We do not “want to keep it a crime”, polygyny, that is, we simply think that the government has no say-so in relationships; God does. Since God’s Word is our only standard, we do not waste precious time and energy to wrestle with an illegitimate government. We “go the second mile” where required, as Jesus taught the Jews to do when they were under Roman occupation, but we do not accept the government’s influence in spheres where it should not have any according to God’s Law. Like we said before: God will take care of decriminalizing polygyny in His own good time, when this world comes to an end and Christ reigns with an iron staff.

It is indeed completely ridiculous to call what said article informs us about the result of polygyny. I wonder where you read that. It is the result of wickedness and evil, like we said in our post.

I don’t know what women who freely entered into a situation/ relatonship in which they then are abused would be glad about. Plenty of women make this experience within completely legal relationships, so I do not see what that has to do with decriminalizing polygyny in the first place. There is plenty of abuse in legal monogamous marriages, so I guess I am missing your point here.

If indeed they would be glad to see polygyny legalized, great, let them fight the fight if they think it’s worth it. We don’t. Politics, even Christian Reconstructionism, are not going to change the wickedness of the people. Do you believe that in Noah’s time, political activism of any kind would have changed the people’s attitudes ? God thought that nothing short of a flood was needed to take care of matters…

Grace and Peace,
Talitha