Utah polygynist found guilty...
May 21, 2001 8:18 AM   Subscribe

Utah polygynist found guilty... (a follow-up to an earlier thread) the pre-appeals spin from his defense team is that he was "singled out" -- not that he was innocent, just "singled out". No pun intended.
posted by silusGROK (7 comments total)
I heard that he legally divorced his other wives, and simply continued to live with them as if he were married. Umm, so why was he prosecuted?

I'm not clear on why people are opposed to plural marriage in the first place (aside from religious reasons). The only situation that seems objectionable would be if a person enters into a second marriage without the current spouse being aware of the situation (having wives in different cities and such). But if all the wives are in the same household, who gives a damn?
posted by fleener at 8:46 AM on May 21, 2001

Vis10n, what is the general mood/reaction to the verdict? Do you think this could lead to more prosecutions?
posted by th3ph17 at 9:12 AM on May 21, 2001

Damn, I want me 9 wives so I can have a golfcourse.
posted by crackheadmatt at 9:19 AM on May 21, 2001

fleener, there are two major problems with Green's (and others') plural marriages: they often include "marriage" to underage women (Green's first "wife" was 13!), and Green defrauded state (and federal?) agencies to get welfare income.

th3ph17, the general reaction is positive and will likely lead to more prosecutions... of course, there is the defense spin that Green was singled out, so it isn't fair, blah blah blah. But a few indictments of others should put that one to bed.

A side note: polygyny as it was practiced by the Mormons had some interesting (read: positive) effects that don't appear to be evidenced in the modern practice: namely, sister wives would often team-up to take care of another's child(ren), freeing her to pursue specific interests. It was this help that allowed some early pioneer women to return back east to go to medical and law school... some of the first women in their fields.

I say this to balance crackheadmatt's statement about the "benefits" polygyny offers men.
posted by silusGROK at 9:53 AM on May 21, 2001

I do agree with Vis10n, Growing up near St. David AZ, i had some freinds who were from polygamist families. Often one wife would take care of the kids of another so the second wife could commute to tucson to attend the U of A.

There are also downsides to this. I have never seen any attractive women who are in poly-marriages. To Quote Mark Twain

"No - the man that marries one of them has done an act of Christian charity which entitles him to the kindly applause of mankind, not their harsh censure - and the man that marries sixty of them has done a deed of open-handed generosity so sublime that the nations should stand uncovered in his presence and worship in silence."
posted by crackheadmatt at 10:33 AM on May 21, 2001

Get outta line ... they'll come and take you away.
posted by Twang at 3:05 PM on May 22, 2001

It's my understanding that the authors of the polygyny statutes anticipated that people might try that (i.e. getting a divorce between marriages) so they forbid a man who is married to one woman from cohabiting with any others, even if he's not officially married to them.
posted by Octaviuz at 10:00 AM on May 25, 2001

« Older Attrition: Evolution.   |   Louisiana legislation decides that Darwin was... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments