POLYGAMY DEBATE PROMPTS RLPA/RFRA AND
''RELIGIOUS FREEDOM'' DEBATE IN UTAH
by AANEWS
Click here to see an e-mail response to this artcle
Jay Leno is talking about it. So is the head of the Mormon Church, and so
is Gov. Mike Leavitt in Utah. The hot topic in the home state of the American
Saints is polygamy, a practice condoned and ensconced in the earlier doctrines
of the Mormon religion and still practiced in some isolated segments of the
LDS community. Although the church officially discontinued the practice in
time to allow Utah entrance into the Union (70% of the state's population is
identified as LDS), plural marriage has always been adopted as a life style
from some renegade Mormons. Polygamy is also banned under the Utah
Constitution as a third-degree felony, although enforcement of statutes has
not been a burning police or legal agenda since the 1950s.
But now, polygamists are speaking out, forming advocacy groups and "going
public." It is a development that is embarrassing the church, and focusing
new concerns on the whole issue of what is and is not legitimate "religious
expression." It is likewise a timely topic, with legislation such as the
Religious Liberty Protection Act on a front burner in Washington, D.C., and
versions of the legislation (based on the former Religious Freedom Restoration
Act) winding their way through nearly two dozen state legislatures. Polygamy
is being defended as an option and a "religious right," and despite official
condemnation, could end up being a contentious point of litigation if RLPA or
some similar measure becomes law.
Polygamy is also front page news in Utah.
* A group called Women's Religious Liberties Union is speaking out in favor
of the practice, and has delivered a "manifesto" to the office of Utah
Governor Mike Leavitt demanding that it be legalized.
* Another group, Tapestry of Polygamy, "has become a voice for women
fleeing polygamous marriages" according to the Salt Lake Tribune newspaper.
It charges that child abuse, statutory rape and incest are part of the
polygamous matrix, and has "become a voice for women fleeing polygamous
marriages." The WRLU responds by saying that the responsibility with any
abuses rests with individuals. At a rally in front of the state Capitol last
week, the group issued a statement declaring, "We will vigorously oppose those
who believe they must protect us from the results of our own judgments and
decisions."
One of the leaders of the Women's Religious Liberty Union is Mary Potter,
third wife of a former police officer who was fired in 1982 when he admitted
to being involved in a polygamous lifestyle.
A Tempestuous History...
Polygamy -- or, more appropriately, polygyny, a plurality of wives -- has
been of the most controversial aspects of Mormonism since its invention by
Joseph Smith in 1830. Polygamy was a widespread practice embraced by the
sect, also known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; so were
other doctrines, including a peculiar notion of the Trinity, and the teaching
that the faithful would achieve a form of godhood in future aeons, ruling over
their own planetary worlds. Smith claimed that his "Book of Mormon" was
revealed to him on golden plates from an angel, Moroni, and chronicled a lost,
arcane religious history of ancient North Americans disclosed to him "by the
gift and power of God." All of this began in a unique time in the American
experience, while the country was in the midst of the so-called Great
Awakening and religious fervor was percolating through much of the population.
Following its establishment Fayette, New York on April 6, 1830, Smith's
church began to spread, and followers mirrored the westward expansion of the
United States as settlements appeared in Missouri and beyond. In the midst of
so much religious excitement, though, intolerance soon followed -- doctrinal
quarrels which quickly turned violent. In some cases, the distrust of
Mormonism rested in fears of the sect as a competitive economic and voting
block. Smith became increasingly authoritarian and despotic as well, and
there were also reports -- denied by the church, but later confirmed -- of
widespread polygamy.
Internal splits, bickering over the line of church leadership succession
and other problems plagued the LDS, and in 1847 Brigham Young, a Smith
confidant and head of the sect's governing body, the Twelve Apostles, led a
Mormon exodus to the area now known as Salt Lake City, Utah. There, the
church repeated its pattern of establishing economic cooperatives and a
unified voting block, along with a church-sanctioned political party. In
1852, the policy of multiple wives was openly acknowledge; there is debate
over how widely it was practiced, however, and some studies indicate that it
was a lifestyle for nearly 20% of the members.
In 1852, the "Utah War" erupted when the federal government sent army units
into the area, seen by many as a check on any possible move toward political
secession and the establishment of a church-run theocracy. Legislative and
judicial efforts soon followed, with ending polygamy as a major objective.
Somewhat reluctantly, the church leadership under the tenure of president
Wilford Woodruff finally issued a declaration in 1890 officially renouncing
the practice. The way was then cleared for Utah to obtain statehood, and for
the LDS to move somewhat closer to the religious mainstream.
The polygamous lifestyle, though, has continued to be practiced in some
isolated areas with a long Mormon heritage. In 1952, the infamous Short Creek
raid was launched in Colorado City, a small LDS settlement on the Utah-Arizona
border. It became "a public relations disaster as widely distributed photos
showed husbands being arrested and children being dragged away from mothers.,"
notes the Tribune.
Leavitt: Polygamy Protected by First Amendment
Leavitt, described by critics as the "Governor from LDS" for his blatant
embrace of Mormon values, is now on the political hot seat following comments
made in response to the "Manifesto" from the Women's Religious Liberties
Union. After media reports that he "fumbled" in his initial response, Leavitt
called an impromptu news conference on Friday to clarify his position on the
demand that state laws against polygamy be repealed. Originally, he suggested
that any legal action against polygamy be shelved by Utah and other states,
and that the practice might be protected under the First Amendment as a type
of religious expression. That statement was followed by what the Tribune
described as "an avalanche of bitter feelings from a group of former wives and
children who had fled polygamous marriages." The Tapestry of Polygamy group
waded into the fray, charging that Leavitt's statement was a form of tacit
approval.
On Friday, Leavitt changed his tune, saying that after consulting with
prosecutors and other legal experts, he "learned this week that the First
Amendment guarantee of religious freedom is not among the reasons prosecutors
do not prosecute."
"There are people who practice it (polygamy) for reasons they believe are
religiously significant to them. This has been a long standing legal debate,
not just in Utah but in the United States (sic). If there are abuses of human
rights, if there are civil liberties that are being abused, and we need to
follow up on this, that would be very important and I think that's done."
It may not be polygamy per se that is under any legal assault, however.
Utah Attorney General Jan Graham declared on Wednesday that crimes within
polygamous groups should be pursuit while avoiding the more sensitive issue of
enforcing the state's bigamy statutes.
Leavitt added that "Polygamy falls into the category similar to
fornication, adultery and sodomy," and that "Utah is no different than any
other state in its approach."
"I do not condone polygamy. I am not sympathetic to its practice," he
declared in his Capitol office.
The RLPA/RFRA Time bomb
All of this could change, though, if legislation such as the Religious
Liberty Protection Act is passed at the federal level, or that sibling
measures (often called "Religious Freedom Protection" acts) kick in under
state statutes. RLPA declares that government must show a "compelling
interest" before placing any "burden" on religious groups or practice.
Constitutional legal expert Marci Hamilton, who argued the BOERNE v. FLORES
case in front of the U.S. Supreme Court last that struck down the Religious
Freedom Restoration Act, calls RFRA/RLPA legislation "the broadest and most
wide sweeping legal proposals affecting the First Amendment" in history.
What could RLPA do?
For starters, it could open the door for an incredible range of practices
which are of questionable legality now, all under the mantle of "religious
exercise." Local and state agencies may be reluctant to enforce everything
from zoning regulations to drug laws and even polygamy statutes. Polygamists
could also argue that certain types of behaviors considered abusive are, in
fact, First Amendment rights protected as a form of religious exercise.
Critics of RLPA also fear that the measure would become "a full employment act
for lawyers," as expensive and tedious litigation becomes the rule.
Would the measure increase liberty and personal freedom, as supporters
argue? Indeed, some civil liberties groups have embraced the "compelling
interest" aspects of RLPA/RFRA, but others are skeptical, and point out that
the measure is discriminatory.
"It creates a double standard in the application of law and justice," warns
American Atheists President Ellen Johnson. "RLPA is not about guaranteeing
legitimate rights for everyone -- it says that certain activities can be
practiced by religious believers, churches and faith-based groups, while the
rest of society cannot have these privileges." Polygamy is one such example,
she notes. "And where would it end? What if a Muslim sect wanted an
exemption from the bigamy laws? All that any bigamist would have to do is
declare himself or herself a 'believer'."
Another argument is that the Mormon polygamy, like that practiced in
Muslim countries and parts of Africa, is polygany, not polyandry -- an option
for women who wish multiple husbands. Critics say that polygamy, especially
in an authoritarian religious context, works well for men, but oppresses women
and even young girls through a notorious system of arranged marriages. The
latest Utah flap comes as polygamist John Daniel Kingston was bound over for
trial, charged with beating his 16-year old daughter who fled her arranged
marriage to an uncle. She was to be David Kingston's 15th wife.
And how far should government get involved in the question? Leavitt admits
that most polygamous marriages are "off the books" and take place privately.
There are an estimated 30,000 polygamists throughout the West, most of them
living in small communities and enclaves in and around Utah. And problems
involving child abuse and other family dysfunctions certainly exist in
monogamous marriages, too, and are not unique to polygamy. It may be that
polygamy is a "problem" best left alone by church and state... and one that
could become exacerbated by the Religious Liberty Protection Act.
An e-mail response by Alan
I am curious as to why this article cites polygamy and the
legalization of drugs as bad results of the RLPA or similar bills.
These acts would still allow government involvement
in cases where a compelling interest could be shown,
such as abuse or danger to others. By bringing these things
into the open, there is less room left to hide abusive behaviour.
As a Libertarian, I favour the legalization of these things
and anything else that the government does not have a compelling reason
to prevent. If such an act does so, on whatever grounds, it will be
a great improvement -- a rising tide raises all ships.
If, for example, 90% of drug users can stay out of jail
on the grounds of religious belief, it won't be all that long
before the whole ridiculous War of Drugs will also fall.
It probably wouldn't even take 90% -- maybe just 10%.
If it results in a greater number of religious sects and so forth
that too can be a good thing -- the more disagreement there is,
the less government prohibitions will be acceptable to a majority.
History has also shown that nations with a great diversity of sects
are generally the most stable.
I see nothing in the whole thing that should cause an Atheist alarm,
except the notion that an Atheist's convictions of right and wrong
are less important than a religious person's articles of faith --
but even so, such a bill is a net gain and a foot in the door
for everyone but those who would like to impose their own beliefs
on others.
Alan
About AANEWS is a free service from American Atheists. For
subscribe/unsubscribe information, send mail to
aanews-request@listserv.atheists.org
and put "info AANEWS" (minus the
quotation marks, please) in the message body.