Gilbert, I think it is important to settle this issue once and for all, does polygamy violate the Charter? So I for one, am glad that they were charged with polygamy.
BCCLA calls for charges to be dropped in polygamy cases
- Thread starter L Gilbert
- Start date
Gilbert, I think it is important to settle this issue once and for all, does polygamy violate the Charter? So I for one, am glad that they were charged with polygamy.
I'm not sure how you got the idea I'm in favor of old men exploiting and abusing children. Perhaps you can quote me.
You also seem to have difficulty understanding the concept of "consenting adults".
People who found homosexuality immoral tried to keep it illegal by using cases where men had sodomized young boys to make their point. They portrayed all homosexuals as child abusers.
Fact is, homosexual men are no more likely to be child abusers than heterosexual men. Homosexual and heterosexual women are far less likely than men to abuse children. If you are going to point to a few cases to support your point, you'd have a better chance arguing that being a man should be illegal.
People who find polygamy immoral are trying to keep it illegal using the same argument. They portray all polygamists as child abusers too. Child abuse is not polygamy. Its child abuse and we already have laws which protect children from exploitation and abuse. I agree that some polygamists have abused children. Throw the book at them for that crime. But if polygamy involves only consenting adults, then its not my business, yours or the states.
My point is that consenting adults involved in polygamous relationships should have the same rights as consenting adults in monogamous relations. A father should have parental rights regarding children of his second wife as his first wife. A second wife should have property rights and survivor benefits relative to the other spouses in the relationship. Divorce law is going to have to be more flexible.... and so on. That's what I'm arguing. I am not arguing in favor of 50 year old men sexually abusing children.
Well we seem to agree on one thing. This has to go before the courts. They may loose in the lower court. But since this is the first case since the Charter became the guiding principle of Canadian law, they will be able to apeal to the Supreme Court. When their case is judged based on the Charter, they will win. Consenting adults have a charter right to make personal choices without state interference.
They may loose in the lower court. But since this is the first case since the Charter became the guiding principle of Canadian law, they will be able to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Earth_as_one, we have a difference of opinion here, I think polygamy is going to lose. Anyway, if polygamy loses in the lower courts, it is highly unlikely that Supreme Court will consider the case.
Supreme Court would almost certainly have considered the same sex marriage case, since the lower courts went against the established norm (they ruled in favor of SSM). But if lower courts rule against polygamy (as I think is highly probable), chances are that Supreme Court may not even hear the case.
Earth_as_one, we have a difference of opinion here, I think polygamy is going to lose. Anyway, if polygamy loses in the lower courts, it is highly unlikely that Supreme Court will consider the case.
Supreme Court would almost certainly have considered the same sex marriage case, since the lower courts went against the established norm (they ruled in favor of SSM). But if lower courts rule against polygamy (as I think is highly probable), chances are that Supreme Court may not even hear the case.
Polygamy is back in the BC News:
VICTORIA, B.C. - Canadians and the justice system need clarity on whether or not polygamy is a crime, British Columbia's attorney general said Thursday in announcing that he will ask the B.C. Supreme Court for an opinion on the federal law barring multiple marriage.
Mike de Jong said the government has decided to seek the opinion rather than appeal last month's court ruling that quashed polygamy charges against the leaders of a controversial polygamous religious sect in southeastern B.C.
Joe Arvay, the lawyer for one of the men, Winston Blackmore, said his client wants to participate in the hearing, to make sure the court hears his side of the story.
"I would think that Mr. Blackmore would want to participate in the process so long as the process is fair, and the process will only be fair if the (case) is able to make sure all of the relevant facts are put forward …
VICTORIA, B.C. - Canadians and the justice system need clarity on whether or not polygamy is a crime, British Columbia's attorney general said Thursday in announcing that he will ask the B.C. Supreme Court for an opinion on the federal law barring multiple marriage.
Mike de Jong said the government has decided to seek the opinion rather than appeal last month's court ruling that quashed polygamy charges against the leaders of a controversial polygamous religious sect in southeastern B.C.
Joe Arvay, the lawyer for one of the men, Winston Blackmore, said his client wants to participate in the hearing, to make sure the court hears his side of the story.
"I would think that Mr. Blackmore would want to participate in the process so long as the process is fair, and the process will only be fair if the (case) is able to make sure all of the relevant facts are put forward …
"Mike de Jong said the government has decided to seek the opinion rather than appeal last month's court ruling that quashed polygamy charges against the leaders of a controversial polygamous religious sect in southeastern B.C."
God damndest cop out I've heard. I think somewhere there is a book laying out the laws of the and what is a crime and what isn't. Maybe someone should have the gumption to read the fricken thing.
God damndest cop out I've heard. I think somewhere there is a book laying out the laws of the and what is a crime and what isn't. Maybe someone should have the gumption to read the fricken thing.
I admit I too was a tad confused at their news. I thought that law was well laid out years ago. What a mess! What a way to trash a whole lot of marriages if they let that pass. There is already way too many divorces and that will really bring them on. Not much point in getting married anymore if they are going to allow multiple spouses. Someone with more brain than brawn has to step up to the plate.
It is not that simple, JLM. Did he really practice polygamy? Did he register all his marriages with the state? Did he have multiple wives in the eyes of the government?
My understanding is that polygamists register only one marriage, one wife with the government. And if that was the case here, there really was no polygamy. What consenting adults do on their own is not government’s business. There is no law against one man living in sin with many women. If they had registered multiple wives for the same man, if officially he had many wives, they the government would have him cold.
But as it is, it was a gray area. If only one wife is registered with the government (I assume), it is not really polygamy is it?
Anyway, on what grounds did the court throw out the charges?
We'll keep it male to make it easier for you....:roll:
Registering more than one wedding or wife with the state makes you a bigamist.(if you have not divorced your first wife). The "state" considers it polygamy if a man and multiple women live as husband and wives. They share the same house, have children, etc. Getting married by the "state" is not necessary.
DeJong deciding not to appeal the case means he's concerned that a charter challenge will be lost and will verify this by just asking for an "opnion" from the courts. If the courts comeback with an opinion that the present polygamy laws are contrary to the charter then I'm sure that the Province will back off on any more polygamy charges so that a costly Charter fight will not have to be made.