Just another WordPress.com site

Posts tagged ‘laws’

Do bigamy laws prevent justice?

In this article it shows where a marriage was abandoned, and the man remarried. After his death his "legal" wife and his wife at his death ended up in court over his pension. I think it should have been divided between them, but the judge ruled that the second marriage was void because the bigamy laws made the first marriage valid since there was no divorce, and therefore the second marriage was invalid. Is this a good example of where the bigamy laws prevented a man from taking care of one of his wives?



Keywords: [tag]bigamy[/tag], [tag]laws[/tag], [tag]marriage[/tag], [tag]prevent[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]




The Laws of the Land

Shalom and Blessings to all in the Lord,

for me the biggest hurdle for accepting biblically based plural marriage was acceptable was coming to grips with the laws of the land verses the laws of God. For example, many conservative scholarly Christians actually admit that there is nothing wrong with a man having more than one wife. However, they default to the concept that believers are obligated to follow the states mandates regarding marriage.

Here is one authors position on the topic. I submit this because I think its interesting that uses the First Century believers as an example:

"The world of outer darkness is a law to itself, and orders it to suit its own notions of right. The Law of Moses allowed a plurality of wives, and divorce, and punished the ‘social evil’ with death. Jesus, who was ‘made under the law,’ did not interfere with the law, but forbade divorce upon any other ground than the wife’s unfaithfulness. The apostle, whose authority he declared equal to his own in teaching the things of the Deity, allowed divorce on another ground, and for the sake of peace to the Christian party. But to carry out this gospel liberty would place a man or woman as a criminal at the bar of Gentile justice and law. Therefore, Peter has said: ‘submit yourself to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake’ provided, of course, that in so doing, his precepts were not transgressed; this apostolic tradition applies also to their ordinances of marriage. They [the world] forbid two contemporary wives, allow divorce on unscriptural grounds, and tolerate the ‘social evil’ to any extent without punishment. Hence a saint, regulated by the word, would have only one wife at a time; he would seek divorce only on scriptural grounds, and avoid the ‘social evil’ as the plague." J Thomas 1866

The biblical passage that the author refers to is found in Romans 13: 1-7

"1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has …


Keywords: [tag]god[/tag], [tag]law[/tag], [tag]divorce[/tag], [tag]laws[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]



Bigamy laws of Texas challenged…

I did a Google search for Texas and bigamy and the third thing I came across was this article in the San Angelo Standard Times:

FLDS to target state bigamy laws
Nielsen’s next hearing is Sept. 13

* By Matthew Waller
* San Angelo Standard Times
* Posted August 24, 2010 at 2:16 p.m., updated August 24, 2010 at 9:06 p.m.

http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2010/au … or-oct-25/

While I consider some of the practices of the FLDS to be flawed it seems that those who understand Biblical Marriage would have a vested interest in seeing this case won by the defendant. Is there anything we can do to support the defense and therefore the decriminalization of bigamy?

Once it is decriminalized an individual living in Texas would then be able to take his second wife and attempt to get a marriage license for her. When they turn him down he will not have to worry about criminal prosecution and can therefore file suit against the state for the right to legally marry his second wife and thereby challenge the anti-polygamy laws. It seems to me that we have a considerable interest in this trial and that it could potentially lead us down the path we have been attempting to go down.

The attorney defending the case is Kent Schaffer. Please at least send him an email showing your support. I am going to ask him what I can do to help including testifying to my beliefs as a Christian if that would be of any value to their case (unlikely). Perhaps if there were biblical scholars that could give testimony that would carry more weight with the courts…



Keywords: [tag]bigamy[/tag], [tag]texas[/tag], [tag]laws[/tag], [tag]2010[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]



Federal bigamy and anti-polygamy laws

After considering a recent ruling by a Federal Judge that the Federal DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) was unconstitutional because it interfered with States rights to define marriage; I started wondering about the Constitutionality of the Federal bigamy and anti-polygamy laws.

It seems obvious to me that the Federal bigamy and anti-polygamy laws dictate to States that they have to follow specific religious doctrinal guidelines when it comes to defining marriage. Clearly the Federal Government was never granted the powers to enact, much less enforce such laws governing marriage, by the Constitution. In fact the bigamy and anti-polygamy laws seem to contradict the spirit of the Constitution which grants the free practice of religion. If marriage isn’t a religious institution then I don’t know what is.


Keywords: [tag]federal[/tag], [tag]laws[/tag], [tag]bigamy[/tag], [tag]anti[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]



A Potential Legal Route to Overturn Anti-Polygyny Laws

Over the last few days I pulled out several legal texts to read again over various ideas and I think there might be a way to legally argue and overturn (not establish) the laws that forbid polygyny. If so this would give all people the right to assemble as they see fit and for the assembly itself or the people in the assembly the right to call it whatever they so desire.

Of course if this route were to be followed it would give any person the right to form their own family however they agree to do it so long as it was done peacefully. But this would then be an inclusive approach not an exclusive approach, which seems to fit better with the 1st Amendment purpose. I’m not sure if anyone has tried this approach or not (if so I’ve not seen or heard of it).

In many cases people have focused on only one part of the 1st Amendment clause. Normally the focus has been: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Then they argue that polygyny is a religious issue.

But the "marriage idea" has been ruled to be more of a civil (whole societal) issue than a religious one since all people in general marry regardless of their religous status. Thus these arguments, though with some real weight, don’t seem to have the amount of weight as we would like for them to have. Furthermore, those who go this route often go too far and argue that we need to make laws giving the permission to marry when marriage is not a permission issue but an innate right that people are born with (even though they have to physically mature to be able to mate).

But there are two other clauses that are in the 1st Amendment. This Amendment also says: "the right of the people peaceably to assemble."

In reading my legal texts I have discovered that this phrase is not directly the same as the next phrase which says: "and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." In my mind I’ve always though…


Keywords: [tag]people[/tag], [tag]laws[/tag], [tag]right[/tag], [tag]assemble[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]



In all fairness…

Has a Muslim in a plural marriage ever had a government entity file charges against them for violating the bigamy or anti-polygamy laws?

I have found a few instances of abuse and underage marriage where charges were filed but not specifically bigamy or polygamy charges. I also noticed that plural marriage in the Muslim community is on the increase.

Aly Hindy, a well-known imam in Toronto, Canada had this to say:

"This is in our religion and nobody can force us to do anything against our religion."
"If the laws of the country conflict with Islamic law, if one goes against the other, then I am going to follow Islamic law, simple as that."

Knowing that most states will not file charges for polygamy alone it seems that the laws are being applied fairly consistently…that is not at all…so then what is the point in having these "laws"?


Keywords: [tag]charges[/tag], [tag]laws[/tag], [tag]marriage[/tag], [tag]polygamy[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]



Tag Cloud