The Canadian Constitutional Reference Case

An Iconoclastic Perspective

Should statute S.293 of the Criminal Code of Canada which makes the practice of polygamy a crime be decriminalized?  That is the question.

            The following is a quote from Daphne Braham of the Vancouver Sun:

Chief Justice Robert Bauman of the British Columbia Supreme Court must decide whether having multiple, conjugal partners is so inherently harmful to individuals and society it overrides an individual’s right to act on “sincerely held [religious] beliefs,” the right to liberty and freedom of association.  He must decide whether those individual rights trump the equality rights guarantee …

            After several weeks of affidavit submissions, testimony, cross examinations and closing arguments the people of Canada, as well as the United States, are anxiously awaiting the court’s decision.  However the court decides, pundits predict it will be appealed to a higher court. 

            In consulting the Internet, the consensus seems to be that Canada is more liberal than the U. S. which has caused some Americans to worry that the Canadian courts might be influenced by leftist leanings rather than following a strict interpretation of the law.  For example same sex marriage is more legal and tolerated in Canada, and so is Islam.  Like it or not statistics seem to indicate that the more conservative and Christian the community the less the community is apt to acceptant same sex marriage, sexual excesses like polygamy, and Islam.  It is believed the Islamic immigrants to Canada are bringing with them plural wives.  The Constitutional Test Case will therefore also affect Muslims as well as Mormons.   

THE IMPETUS

            Two notorious Mormon polygamists, Winston Blackmore and James Oler, each the leader of a polygamist group in and about Bountiful, British Colombia, were arrested for practicing polygamy in January 2009; but in September the charges were dropped due to a technicality. 

            This prompted the B. C. Attorney General to set in motion the mechanics for a court trial testing the constitutionality of the S. 293, the law prohibiting the practice of polygamy.  The two sides, for and against decriminalization, passionately went to work obtaining lawyers and gathering evidence for potential discourses substantiating their contentions.

NANCY MERESKA AND STOP POLYGAMY IN CANADA

            Nancy Mereska, director of the anti polygamy network, Stop Polygamy in Canada deserves a heap of credit in coordinating efforts against decriminalization.  Without funding she single-handedly recruited legal experts, dissidents from the Mormon polygamist subculture, and experts from academia.  Attorney Brain Samuels unselfishly agreed to represent Stop Polygamy In Canada pro bono and adjudicate the many affidavits from expert witnesses.  Samuels worked closely and professionally with the Canadian Attorney General in preparing the case.  Having had some experience with prosecuting and defense lawyers I thought the work of Samuels and the other attorneys opposing decriminalization was superb. 

THOSE FOR DECRIMINALIZATION

            Blackmore pled poverty claiming he could not afford to retain legal counsel and asked that the court compensate him so he could retain an attorney.  Attorney George Macintosh was subsequently appointed to represent him.   It was just one more example of how polygamists manipulate government into subsidizing their life style. 

            Mr. Robert Wickett was retained by Oler to represent the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, better known as the (FLDS).  The FLDS was joined by other “friends of the court” who apparently felt individual rights should trump societal rights.  The organizations I became aware of are as follows:

The Canadian Coalition for Free Expression (CAF)

British Colombia Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA)

Citizens for Free Expression

Canadian Polyamory Advocacy

West Coast LEAF (Women’s Legal & Education Fund)

            It is quite obvious from the titles that these are liberal organizations.  It is rather novel I think, that these liberal advocates are supporting Mormon fundamentalists who consider themselves ultra conservatives.  Of course the connection must be emotional as opposed to political or religious.  Their interest seems to be in the right to choose on the assumption that a woman should have the right to choose to be a plural wife.  This right of choice apparently takes precedence over the aberrations that often emanate from a polygamous lifestyle. 

            Having some knowledge of the Mormon fundamentalist lifestyle, this “right of choice,” I presume, extends not just to women but to men permitting them to brainwash and employ deception, coercion and abuse in manipulating the woman’s choice.

            I thought I was rather worldly having been a sailor, ranch hand, cop that specialized in sex crimes, a polygamist, muckraker and iconoclast but when I saw the word “polyamory” I had to go to the Internet for an explanation.  I’m no prude.  I’m keenly aware of the power of the sex urge and how it has destroyed careers and marriages.  But “polyamory” represents sex “without restraints.”  The only qualification it seems is consent and whatever sexual deviant act the mind can conjure is apparently okay, even welcome.  These are the people that trade wives, or husbands, or have group sex like the ancient Roman orgies.   It is called “freedom” but it is really an addiction, an addiction to sex, disguised as freedom.  The polyamories spend the better part of their time like the polygamists with five, twenty, and fifty wives dwelling on sex.

            To have the “polyamory people” rush to the defense of polygamy supports the thesis that Mormon polygamy is primary about sexual gratification as opposed to religious worship.

THOSE AGAINST DECRIMINALIZATION

            Those organizations (Friends of the Court) that are aligned with the Attorney General and Stop Polygamy in Canada are as follows:

The Christian Legal Fellowship

Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund

BC Teacher’s Federation

Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children

Beyond Borders (A Christian organization)

Centre for Constitutional Rights

David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights

            These organizations are concerned with sexual exploitation and education.  There are two private schools run by the Blackmore and Oler factions, receiving $2 million in government subsidies a year.  However, few students reach the 12^th grade, especially girls who are often married before they can graduate and it is apparently thought that boys working on polygamist owned enterprises takes priority over an education.  Students are taught obedience to prophet and bishop in and out of school.  Once again government indirectly subsidizes Mormon polygamy.

THE FLDS ARGUMENT

            According to newspaper accounts, lawyer Macintosh argued that the bigamy statute is too broad, that it included “multi-partner relationships” and relationships where everyone consented and no one is harmed.  According to The Canadian Press, in referring to the polyamourists he used the words “open and honest and committed relationships.”  Those are highfalutin words and could almost make a relationship between a sheepherder and a yearling ewe sound just as commendable, as disgusting as that may be. 

            Macintosh pointed out that the law was so vague that it tended to make criminals of women and children and that those in support of the law couldn’t agree on just exactly what it prohibits.  But of course the main argument seemed to be that the law prohibited the free exercise of religion as provided by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  The law obstructs adherents from attaining to the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, which can only be reached by abiding to the “new and everlasting covenant of marriage,” that is, plural marriage sealed by proper priesthood authority.  (More highfalutin words)

            Mormon polygamy is referred to as “a sincerely held religious belief,” implying that it is indeed a “religious belief.”  But what is it that makes it religious?   Is it the rhetoric (the wording, or instructions) or the acts (copulating with many women) that the instructions dictate that makes it religious?   

            It is presumed that the element of “consent” is what differentiates Mormon polygamy from promiscuity – the wives giving permission to their husband to have sex with other women.  However I find it ironic that “the polygamist’s Jesus gives the man permission with or without his wife’s consent.”  (See D & C, Section 132, Verses 64 and 65.)

            It is interesting that in those accounts where Joseph Smith used God to seduce plural wives there was little to no mention of “multiplying and replenishing” or “raising up a righteous seed,” whereas under Brigham Young those phrases were emphasized – presumably to mitigate and distract from the aura of lasciviousness. 

            Is Mormon polygamy Christian? The people who want the bigamy law struck down accuse Canada of religious discrimination, stating that “Christianity is the State sanctioned religion.”

            I find this extremely interesting because the Utah polygamists claim to be as Christian as the rest of Christianity, that is, as Christian as the Baptists, Catholics and Protestants.  But the Canadian Mormon polygamists, when they accuse Canada of sanctioning Christianity as the State religion, they are implying that Mormonism is something other than Christianity. 

            The LDS Church is ubiquitously thought of as a branch of Christianity synonymous with, for example, Lutheranism.  But it would not bode well for the LDS Church to publically correct the FLDS legal staff for obvious reasons.  To be placed in the position, even indirectly of defending the FLDS would impair the LDS Church image.

            I am inclined to support the FLDS in the supposition that Mormon fundamentalism is not Christian in the same sense as the New Testament, even though the FLDS employs the words Jesus Christ in their corporate name.  When plural marriage is the driving force and the foundation of Mormon fundamentalism, adopting the words Jesus Christ and claiming that the plural marriage revelation is a commandment from Jesus Christ, is nothing more than an artifice to give polygamy dignity and sneak it clandestinely within the margin of religion. 

            An objective examination of Doctrine & Covenants, Section 132, Joseph Smith’s plural marriage revelation confirms my contention.  Section 132 is all about power over believers, domination of women and multiple sex partners – all exclusively earthy pursuits.  The key giveaway verses are verses (4): (…if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.) – verse 7: (which gives power to only one man over the salvation of men, and power over nearly every aspect of the true believer’s life) – verse 47 (…whomseoever you bless I will bless, and whomsoever you curse I will curse…)[didn’t God say something like that to Moses?] – verse 54 ( …if she [Emma, Joseph’s monogamous wife] will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed…) – verse 64 (referring to first or monogamous wives: “…then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed…) – verse 65:  (which states:  “… [if] she [does not] believe and administer unto him [the husband] according to my word … she then becomes the transgressor.)  A woman under Section 132 has no choice but to comply.

            Power of one man is literally given over all others, especially women for the purpose of sexual intercourse.  When the Bible states that there will be no marriages in heaven, Mormonism circumvents that prohibition and even makes the seduction of other men’s wives a virtue.  In other words, the more women you can sexually inveigle the more powerful and exalted you will become.  This is the kind of thinking “cults” are made of.

            Polygamy by nature is corrupt.  Every social experiment with polygamy has resulted in sexual deviation and corruption.  Put another way, every social or religious undertaking that tolerated or commanded sex with multiple partners has had within it the seeds of perversion and corruption.  In other words, perversion and corruption are congenital aspects of a polygamous society. 

            When sexual restraints are lifted chaos is inevitable.  When polygamy becomes the social or religious norm, regardless of geographical location, culture or time, the same aberrations will ultimately surface – as history has confirmed.

ABERRANT POLYGAMOUS EXPERIMENTS

            Islam.   Mohammad, born in the year 610 married a 12 year-old child.  In Islam women are oppressed and forced to wear a specific garb.  Little girls are circumcised.  Women are treated as property and are compelled to conform to subservient rolls.  Women are put to death for social transgressions.  Martyrs are promised 7 or more virgin “wives” in heaven

            Munster.  The German city of Munster in 1534 under the guidance of John of Leyden established polygamy as the ideal form of marriage.  As the fascination with sex grew little girls were taken as wives.  They thought they were the chosen.  John of Leyden received revelation. Polygamy was justified by the ancient biblical patriarchs. They thought they were establishing the New Jerusalem.  Women were subservient to the men.  Multiply and replenish the earth was the ostensible motivation.  Neglect of women and children was common.  The government of the Munster community was socialistic.

            Brigham Young polygamy.  Brigham had possession of Joseph’s plural marriage revelation for 9 years and may have altered it before making it public.  William Law was shown a copy of the revelation by Dr Wyl and told Wyl that it was essentially the same as the one he read in 1843, but the 1843 version seemed shorter.  Nevertheless it was Brigham who jammed the revelation down the throats of the Saints.  Multiply and replenish the earth was the ostensible motivation.

            Polygamy was a revelation from God.  Children were taken as wives.  Blood Atonement was executed against apostates and perceived enemies.  Women were oppressed.  Incest overlooked.  Obedience to priesthood was paramount.  Polygamy like in Munster was considered the highest virtue.  Milking the Gentiles was religious thievery of non believers.  Old Testament polygamy the justification. Polygamy was to be practiced in heaven.  Neglect of women and children was common.

            Joseph Smith introduced the “law of consecration,” a form of socialism.  Brigham Young attempted to institute several United Orders, socialistic communities like unto the “law of consecration,” where one consecrated everything to the church and received back what the priesthood thought he needed to live on.   The division of labor was determined by the priesthood, even how one dressed.

            Contemporary polygamy.   The characteristics are easily listed.  Incest was considered pure.  Females are oppressed.  Women treated as property.  Women often neglected, forced to provide for themselves.  Elite and inferior families.  Blood Atonement.  Bleeding the Beast.  Milking the Gentiles.  Old Testament polygamy is the justification.  Everything is justified by revelation.  Polygamy is of the highest virtue.  Polygamy is the heavenly order of marriage.   The same dastardly deeds perpetrated in Brigham Young’s time occur today.

            The FLDS established a “socialistic trust called the United Effort Plan.  Apostolic United Brethren has established the Communities of Apostolic United Brethren, a socialistic nonprofit corporation.  The Kingston cooperative organization is socialistic in structure.  All of these socialistic experiments are managed and ruled over by priesthood – another way of saying oligarchy, or monarchy.   

            Church of the Firstborn.  There are several cults calling themselves the Church of the Firstborn, and nearly all have their roots in Mormonism.  There is the Firstborn church allegedly started by the late Joel LeBaron that you can find on the Internet.  Joel was murdered by his brother, Evril LeBaron.  But another brother, Ross LeBaron, also deceased, claimed he was the one who created the Church of the Firstborn.  Ross was an eccentric who was often a guest on a local radio talk show talking about UFOs. 

            Ross lived in a storage unit and was cared for by two young acolytes in exchange for tutoring.  They were Tom Green and Fred Collier.  After Ross’ death Green and Collier claimed Ross had passed the [priesthood keys] on to him.  Both attempted to garner a following.  Tom Green was the polygamist who was convicted of Child Rape, Bigamy and Criminal Non Support and served five years in the Utah State Prison.

            On April 20, 2011, The Salt Lake Tribune reported on another Church of the Firstborn [and General Assembly of Heaven] where the president, Terrill Dalton, and another member, Geody Harman, were having sex with a 15 year-old girl.  These people have a fairly sophisticated looking website.  But websites can be deceiving as far as integrity and honesty are concerned with their religious rhetoric [bullshit] which I suspect is intended to disarm potential converts.  In my opinion they are all cults designed to appeal to “certain” personality types.

            Socialistic experimental societies.  The name, John Humphrey Noyes and his Oneida Community epitomizes the radical New England, social experiments of the Nineteenth Century.  Noyes, born in 1811, was a contemporary of Joseph Smith who was born in 1805. The Oneida Community was both religious and socialistic, more exactly communistic.  And as it seems, the more socialistic the dogma, the more liberal becomes sexual cohabitation.  And eventually, unrestrained sexual behavior becomes dogmatic or coerced conformity as it did in the Oneida Community and FLDS.

            In contrast to Joseph Smith, John Noyes was well educated and came from a prominent family.  But he had some strange ideas that did not conform to the Yale Divinity School where his license to preach was revoked.

            Although Noyes’ theocracy was not as dynamic as Mormonism it did have some parallels.   They both sought to revolutionize the institution of marriage by permitting men to copulate with many women.  Joseph came up with polygamy; John Noyes created “Complex Marriage.”

            In order for these radical sexual deviations to be accepted there needed to be the illusion that God approved.  Although Noyes did not receive revelation wholesale like Joseph he convinced himself and his followers that he was an agent of God.

            Noyes professed that his communistic society was sinless and represented perfection.  He denounced the institution of marriage replacing it with Complex Marriage which meant that every man was married to every woman and every woman was married to every man.  In that regard he coined the phrase:  “Free love.”  But intimate, lasting relations between a man and woman were frowned upon as was the family unit.  (Complex marriage is kind’a like canine marriage.  Males copulate with whatever breed happens to be in heat.)

            Noyes invented new terms for “old dogma,” in other words fancy words like “complex marriage” for free love.

            He introduced the concept of “Male Continence,” meaning delayed ejaculation – as a means for birth control.  He wanted to keep pregnancy at a minimum, whereas Brigham Young emphasized “multiply and replenish,” and “building up a righteous seed,” as the impetus for copulating with many women. Brigham wanted a huge membership as a means of building up the Kingdom of God.  Noyes also thought he had established the Kingdom of God but for some reason discouraged multiplying and replenishing   

            Noyes introduced the concept of “Ascending Fellowship,” which was the righteous introduction of virgins to “Complex Marriage” by old men called “Central Members.” The old men were the spiritual patriarchs and got to pick the young virgins and of course these naïve pubescent girls had no choice but to comply.   And as we have learned, Brigham encouraged the young ladies to marry old men because they were tried and true and had a much better chance of being exalted. 

            Noyes introduced another doctrine, “Mutual Criticism,” which was a method of coercing conformity.  Non conformists were subject to group criticism or criticism from the whole community until they conformed.  Brigham and Joseph used priesthood and revelation to coerce conformity.

            Contrary to Mormonism which is male dominated by a “priesthood” Noyes made women equal to men and some women even served on the community ruling boards.  Nevertheless women were expected to wear dresses but many wore pants under their dresses just like women in the FLDS do today. 

            The Oneida Community heyday occurred after Joseph Smith’s death.  There were never more than 400 members but because it was so radical, especially where sexual permissiveness was concerned it received much publicity.

            Complex Marriage was the Oneida Community’s downfall just as polygamy was Joseph’s downfall.  Noyes was indicted for adultery and the people were severely persecuted.  Noyes turned control of the community over to his son who ruled with an iron fist.  As the community disintegrated the people reverted back to monogamy.

            The reader interested in more information about Noyes and other radical, religious socialist experiments can consult, Strange Cults and Utopians of 19^th-Century America, formerly titled, History of American Socialisms, by Dover Publications, Inc., New York.

            I believe there is a pattern.  When socialism and religion mix there is a tendency to lift sexual restraints.  You may not agree with me but I believe this is happening today, politically, in the United States.  As government has gotten bigger it has become more socialistic where individual instincts are more tolerated, right down to so-called “heretic” religious beliefs like polygamy.  Where fifty years ago homosexuality was considered a perversion, it is now a politically correct alternative form of sexual mating.  With socialization the importance of the family unit is eroded as we see with polyandry.    

            Even though socialization implies general equality an  elite or privileged oligarchy is ultimately formed.  As in Mormonism and Munster coerced conformity becomes inevitable.   Instead of the priesthood serving the people, the people are manipulated into serving the priesthood and its privileged few. 

            I have noticed here in the U. S. that as government gets larger the more it interferes with the daily lives of the people and the more it dictates to commerce, disrupting (laissez-faire) the free enterprise of goods and services – the law of supply and demand.  We see this today in the Obama administration’s  restrictions on oil production, driving the cost of fuel up, resulting in a rise in price of all goods, including food, that depends upon oil for transportation and manufacturing. 

            But we can’t blame big government solely on Obama.  Every time we elect a new President government gets bigger using the excuse of population expansion.    I saw this with local government while a deputy sheriff.  President Bush created the Department of Homeland Security.  I wondered then and still wonder what Homeland Security does that the FBI, CIA, NSA/CSS, Coast Guard and ICE doesn’t do. 

             Back to the subject at hand.  My point is that when polygamy is weighed for good or bad, the bad outweighs the good.  This is what I believe the Canadian Constitution Reference Case has portrayed.  A congruent polygamist society can only be maintained by coercion and fear.  Priesthood is a form of elitism and dictatorship – a corrupt theocracy. 

            Look at the history of the FLDS.  Oppression of women,  control of information, abject obedience to priesthood resulting in unrighteous dominion.  Centennial Park splintered from the FLDS over one man rule and the United Effort Plan, a communistic trust.  Wives and children have been taken from husbands and fathers with impunity.  Forced marriages.  Young boys expelled from the community.  Winston Blackmore splits from the FLDS over authority.  Right now there is a feud between the incarcerated Warren Jeffs and William E. Jessop over FLDS leadership.  All of which are the fruits of competition for power not just men against men but men against women.  The result is broken families and dysfunctional children.   Is this the kind of civilization the people of Canada and the U. S. want?  The FLDS places God’s law, at least their version of God’s law over man’s laws.  Will the Canadian Courts really allow “FLDS law” to take precedence over Canadian law?  If so the next step  would be to move over and make room for Sharia Law. 

            If you put a rotten apple in a bushel box with good healthy apples, will the rotten apple become good like the others?  FLDS form of government and behavior is a rotten apple.