So about that polygamist sect from Texas.. I have a few offensive things to say.

This church has been around for longer than the laws for consent age and the outlaw of polygamy. It is unconstitutional for the state of Texas to say what is and isn't allowed in a religion. This is going to set a standard for all religions. Once they successfully outlaw this, they can then take your kids and say you're abusing them for speaking out against abortion, or homosexuality or whatever. Why are the majority of American's so willing to lose their own freedoms?? In many states, with a parent's consent, a 16 year old girl can be legally married. How is this any different from that?

What's most unfair about our society and the prejudice that we continue to produce is that it's completely acceptable to have as many sexual partners as you desire. Continue to have children with women, and then not pay child support, or care for the children or women. Then we turn around and look down on polygamy which is a situation where though the man has multiple partners, he takes care of them all. Rather than have affairs, or "two families in different states", these women and children know about and help each other.

We frown on marriage and having children as a society. I was watching a show tonight where the lady was talking to a couple about finances, and said, "you cannot afford the luxury of staying home with your child." WHAT?! How is that normal? Why is actually raising your own kids considered a luxury!? Since when was women's liberation about being forced to work? I thought it was about being able to work?

Our country and the people in it, have legalized birth control, condoms, abortion, etc.. in order to enable people to have sex with as many partners as possible. We have made it alright for a woman to live with a man and not be married to him, we have completely and totally changed the views that stayed consistent for all of humanity, but then speak out about anything that is the way it always was. If we are so free in our sexuality, and have "evolved" so far, then why aren't we seeing this as yet another form of family?

We will say that it's alright for two men to be married, but not a man and two women?? If one can argue that people are born gay, how is it not possible to evaluate the "I just don't think I'm meant to be with one woman" that sexually promiscuous men use? How is it not possible that some people are born to need two, three, etc.. wives?

For thousands of years people were married at 13, 14, 15, 16 etc. Girls get their period at a young age not so they can feel special, but because at that time they are physically able to have babies. In today's America, while girls are ready physically to reproduce, we have forced children into drawing out their childhood years and therefore made them not emotionally ready for children. But in the Edorado society, the girls are raised without a long, drawn out childhood, and therefor completely ready for marriage, and children.

All throughout history, polygamy and young girls marrying older men has been accepted. Who gives our government the right to change something that has been accepted completely without question for thousands of years ? The people who are "disgusted" and "outraged" at the polygamist sect from Texas. Why? because as unconstitutional and unfounded as it is, by reacting with prejudice and anger, you are proving to the government that they can use the media to convince you that anything is wrong.

When are the majority of American citizens going to realize that it's not about disagreeing with their beliefs.. it's about believing in being allowed to have beliefs?

Good blog, Tashina. Good blog. If there's ever been anything you and I agree on, it's been inalienable rights, woman's rights, animal rights, baby rights, pretty much all the rights no matter how left that seems.

I see your point and have to agree. Mostly.

My grandfather believed in polygamy as per his religion, but not in the sense most people think of when they think of polygamy. He had three wives (my grandmother was 2), but it was more like divorce as he wouldn't continue to be sexually involved with the first or second wife once the third one came along. However, they all knew of each other, the kids went to school together, and he monetarily provided for all of their needs from housing to clothes and food, etc. It's very much like the current American society's model of divorce/child support, except seemingly more responsible and honorable, for what it is.

So on that level, I do agree that there can be many forms of family, even in the case where there are current multiple partners in a marriage (even though I couldn't do it, I don't doubt there are people who could). Even though from a religious standpoint, I don't condone it, I don't think it should be any more illegal than one night stands.

However, I do think that there is some concern for the underage girls who are sometimes unwillingly forced into marriage. I'm surprised that your stance seems opposite of that. I think in the case of children, overprotection is the side to err on, even if a 14-year-old girl "wants" to marry a 56-year-old man. Although there are some extremely mature 14-year-olds who probably DO truly know what they want, I believe the law should err on the side of prohibition for the lowest common denominator of 14-year-olds who don't know any better and cannot be held fully accountable yet as to their "wants." Make sense?

I know *I* was a very grown-up 14-year-old (and don't we know a whole LOT of those) but I wasn't given full freedom to express that "grown-upness" and with good reason. I don't at all see a problem with a prolonged innocence, which is definitely different from a prolonged childhood. And the innocence is what I think they're ~really~ robbing these young girls of. One can be prepared for the act of raising children without having to act on it.

From what I've read (both in the media and in releases made by LDS and the polygamist sects), it seems like these girls are given very little choice in the matter and are simply doing what they believe their religion demands of them. Growing up Catholic and living in a Southern Protestant wasteland riddled with guilt and obligation has instilled a sense of duty to my religion and country, but having a choice and being sure others have a choice has always been most important.

Anyway, those are my two cents (and two kudos for a very very intelligent, brave, and poignant blog). Thoughts?

Why is THIS generally accepted as "hot":

But THIS is creepy and wrong?

How strange that we as a society have glorified sex and multiple sexual partners, but not the idea of all those partners coming together to take responsibility for the results of sex (children, the most common consequence of sex. lol). As a whole, we generally think it's perfectly acceptable to share lust with as many people as we can, but not love?

Also, I had to laugh when I saw these photos accompanied by the statement that idealized polygamy (where the men have abs and great hair and the women are all playboy bunnies) has about as much to do with real polygamist life in Utah as Sex in the City has to do with single life in Manhattan:

POLYGAMY IS THIS:

NOT THIS: