I’ve been posting in the last few days about the latest news on the polygamy front here in British Columbia this week, here:
http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,39779http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,40545The poster “drilldoc” says: “Hey, Winston was mentioned in "Under the Banner of Heaven". That guy's still around? Wow. There's mormon fundies all over, not just in Utah - Canada and Mexico as well as a multitude of states. Read the book. It's available on the Kindle.”
Yes, indeed, Winston Blackmore is the face, so to speak, of polygamy here in British Columbia. His mug appears in every newspaper article about polygamy and video of him with some of his many wives and children plays on every TV broadcast about the issue.
What’s happening here now is that a trial started Monday to determine whether the anti-polygamy law in Canada is constitutional. Obviously, the opinion either way will have a huge impact on some major issues in our society. If the law against polygamy stands, prosecutions could go forth against fundamentalist Mormon polygamists with dozens of wives (Winston Blackmore for one), if the govt so wills it (a former B.C. Attorney-General said that if polygamy is against the law it should be prosecuted; if not, the matter should be laid to rest, but the people of Canada need an answer on the matter).
If the law falls, the govt will have to prosecute individuals for specific charges in each case, such as the ever-present allegations of child abuse, should evidence be obtained (always difficult) but they will no longer be able to charge the sect leaders with “being in a polygamous union” as it will no longer be against the Criminal Code (once the federal govt implements the opinion of the Supreme Court of B.C., which is tasked with rendering an opinion as to the constitutionality of the law).
It seems like persnickety analysis and parsing of the letter of the law, literally, but I find it fascinating and am so glad they have finally done something decisive about this lingering sore on their backside for decades. One way or the other, officials will at least know which way to go with it.
If the law against polygamy is found unconstitutional, hopefully sane heads will prevail and it won’t be an automatic bestowal of pension rights and other benefits onto an unlimited number of “wives” per every polygamous man. How could a social system ever sustain such a burden?
The most important aspect for me, though, is to ensure that the children in such polygamous compounds receive a standard education, have choices in life, and of foremost importance, can live free from abuse. I hope that no matter what the outcome is, Bountiful will be more open to the outside community and that its people will have access to the resources they need (i.e., expert health care, higher standard of education, even some integration with outsiders).
There is a good overview of the nature and purpose of the current trial (called a 'reference trial', a matter of reviewing existing law and without a defendant or prosecution) and a great timeline about polygamy in B.C. on the Global News (B.C.) web site.
Excerpts (all text is taken direct from the web site unless otherwise indicated):
1. Description of Current Court Case about Polygamy:
Global News: Polygamy Court Reference
“Unlike a case where people are charged with a criminal offence, a reference is where the government is essentially getting the opinion of the court on whether the law is valid,” says Ron Skolrood, a constitutional lawyer in Vancouver, B.C.
References are brought to determine whether controversial legislation is constitutional. Such reference cases aren't technically binding, but the decision will constitute a legal precedent, the same way decisions of criminal cases do.
Other courts would likely adopt the eventual ruling, particularly if it is heard by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Has it happened before?
Many times. In 2003, the federal government asked for a court reference on same-sex marriage.
“It’s not unheard of for the government to bring a reference,” says Skolrood. “The government went to the Supreme Court [on same-sex marriage], and it became binding legislation,” he adds.
Courts have heard references filed by both the federal and provincial governments.
What is unusual about this court reference?
“This one is unusual because it’s going to the trial court,” says Skolrood, “whereas usually they would go to the appellate court.”
What will be decided?
“The issue that the judge will have to decide is, ‘Is polygamy inherently harmful?’” Skolrood says.
At issue is the current Canadian law against polygamy in Section 293 of the Criminal Code. The court will decide on its validity under the Charter, and whether a minor must be involved or abuse must have happened before a person can be charged.
The court will hear from more than 30 witnesses including legal experts, and people who practice multiple marriage in both a religious and non-religious context.
“Some people from the Mormon church can testify anonymously,” says Skolrood. They will not be charged.
http://www.globalnews.ca/story.html?id=38681252. Timeline - Global News site:
NG headline: History of Polygamy in Canada (intersecting with U.S. FLDS) (highlights extracted from longer article - direct quotes from the article unless otherwise indicated):
Polygamy Past and Present:
Canada is on the cusp of either legalizing polygamy or strengthening the 120-year prohibition against multiple marriage.
The reference case was initiated by B.C. attorney general Mike de Jong to finally get a clear legal lens through which to examine the fundamentalist Mormon community of Bountiful in southeastern British Columbia.
NG headline: In the beginning (in British Columbia, Canada):
1946 — Harold Blackmore (Winston Blackmore’s uncle) buys property in Lister, B.C. and what will later become known as Bountiful. Blackmore moves there with his wife and children and a few months later, marries a second wife in a "celestial marriage" in Utah. His second wife is his first wife's sister.
NG headline: What happens next (highlights):
June 14, 2004 — B.C. Attorney General Geoff Plant announces another RCMP investigation into allegations of child abuse, exploitation and forcible marriage at Bountiful.
July 20, 2004 —B.C. Civil Liberties Association calls for a full public investigation into every aspect of Bountiful but with particular emphasis on sexual exploitation and abuse and allegations that racism is being taught in the schools. BCLA maintains its longheld view that the polygamy law would not withstand a constitutional challenge, adding that, "The question of polygamy is an unhelpful diversion from the other allegations at hand."
April 2005 — Winston Blackmore holds a polygamy summit in Creston and admits to having married "several under-aged girls."
The same month, 15 of Blackmore’s wives attend a conference in Winnipeg discussing sexual abuse in isolated communities. They urge the government to raise the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16.
Dec. 8, 2006 — Winston Blackmore appears on CNN’s Larry King Live and admits to marrying several under-aged girls.
November 2007 - Warren Jeffs is found guilty of being an accomplice to the rape of 14-year-old Elissa Wall, who he forced to marry her 19-year-old, first cousin.
April 2008 - Texas authorities raid a compound near Eldorado, where the FLDS had built a temple that is similar to the LDS tabernacle in Salt Lake City.
October 2009 - B.C. Attorney-General Mike de Jong files a constitutional reference case in B.C. Supreme Court. He asks the court to rule on two questions:
1) Is the Criminal Code's polygamy section consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? If not, in what particular or particulars and to what extent?
2) What are the necessary elements of the polygamy offense in the Criminal Code? Does the law require that the polygamous conjugal union involved a minor or occurred in a context of dependence, exploitation, abuse of authority, a gross imbalance of power or undue influence?
http://www.globalnews.ca/story.html?id=3868264I haven't heard any updates today so far. Yesterday was almost entirely taken up by the judge hearing arguments about whether the trial should be televised or not (not usually done here in B.C.). He decided NO, to my disappointment. I like to see things as they happen, not through the filter of a reporter under deadline, with time constraints.
There are going to be interesting witnesses coming forth, some still living at Bountiful, others who have left, children, women and men, as well as advocates for one viewpoint or another, including non-FLDS people in favour of polygamy (an entirely different issue, imho), and reps from the Civil Liberties Association, Christian groups (against polygamy, I'm guessing, unless they side with Christian Polygamists), etc. Wow. It's a tangle but an interesting case, to be sure.
I'm likely going to continue writing updates, even if I'm the only one who reads them!
I appreciate any interest in this topic and will try to answer any questions anyone may have. Polygamy and its related issues are closely aligned to the origins of the Mormon Church and its founder, Joseph Smith, of course. I note in one of the comments by a constitutional lawyer (not involved directly in the case) that "Mormons are welcome to comment".
I'm sure the CoJCoLDS is thrilled to know that. They cannot get away from their association with polygamy, no matter how much they seek to run far far away from it.
When speaking to ex-Bountiful plural wives and their kids, I have asked "Do you consider yourselves Mormon?" The unhesitating response, across the board, is "Yes".
As their doctrines and practices and beliefs are identical, I too would say yes, FLDS are Mormons. Joseph Smith is their founding prophet. They use the BoM. Their meetings and sermons are similar. The most basic of LDS principles, inculcated into their offspring from birth, are also deeply ingrained in FLDS members. The only difference I see is that their prophets are no longer the same. As for polygamy, the only difference is a matter of time and degree, in that FLDS maintain the practice both on the earth and (in theory) in heaven, whereas modern-day LDS reserve it for heaven (although the sealing procedures can at least theoretically be viewed as practicing it still on the earth, at least in name and theory, even though they deny it).
I would so love for this trial to be televised to the world and let people make their own conclusions about how closely aligned FLDS groups are with the LDS Church (oh, sorry, I think the latest instructions from COB are to refer to the CoJCoLDS as "The Church of Jesus Christ").
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/23/2010 04:19PM by Nightingale.