In Canada, bail is ordinarily given to accused while they're awaiting trial. It's part of the presumption of innocence. No reason to keep someone in jail while we still haven't found him guilty of anything.
There are limits to who gets bail and even those who do get released often have to agree to certain conditions - surrender passport, report every so often to police, no drinking or drugs, stay X-hundred yards away from a particular place or person, etc.
But the condition imposed on Winston Blackmore, leader of one faction of the Bountiful polygamist community in southeastern B.C. is a first. He's free pending trial but - he has to stop getting married until the polygamy case is resolved.
Stop getting married?
The government knows that it has a slim chance of winning its case. A gaggle of Crown Attorneys have examined the case and opined it was a loser. Freedom of religion, they believe, will crush the polygamy law.
There's a real prospect that, should the government lose, polygamy could become lawful in Canada. I assume that would only apply to faiths that embrace the practice - like Islam or the Mormons or, my favourite, the Church of What's Happening Now.
I'm no fan of polygamy but I guess I could tolerate it so long as (a) it didn't create any undue burdens on society and (b) the women were adults and did it of their own free will, not subject to any intimidation or coercion.
7 comments:
"the women were adults and did it of their own free will, not subject to any intimidation or coercion. "
Which is the norm expected of _modern_ traditional marriage.
Legal polygamy will cause some interesting tax issues. Also, how property is due to one divorced spouse? How much child support?
One wife was enough for me.
Note that the usual suspects will blame same-sex marriage for this one. I'll laugh if this is indeed based upon a Charter freedom of religion claim, but, fundamentally, religion has nothing to do with polygamy legality in Canada, even if the case which goes forward comes from religious belief.
"One wife was enough for me." Mark, I hear that.
As I understand it, freedom of religion is the only snag that the polygamy law faces. Then again, what practices will not be tolerated if they're sanctioned by someone's religion?
We allow kids to wear kirpans to school. We allow Sikhs to forego helmets when they ride motorcycles. It's an intriguing question of just how far freedom of religion truly goes.
Religion or not, I personally have no problem with two or more consenting adults voluntarily entering into this kind of relationship. I'm not crazy enough to do it, but hey, no skin off my teeth.
My concern it the coercion and brainwashing that lets some but not all (or even a majority) polygamist marry and have sex with underage girls.
The crown should really have gone for sexual exploitation or invitation to sexual touching.
Yeah, the issue that people should have a problem with is the potential for sexual exploitation of children, not that there are more than one spouse. There are legal reasons for not allowing more than one spouse in the eyes of the law, but the law shouldn't impose a limitation on religious spouses.
I think we all agree on the free will factor but how do you deal with that? From what I've seen, these religions often indoctrinate children in preparation for polygamous marriage. I suppose that is a form of brainwashing, certainly cultural and religious indoctrination before the girl is capable of forming an independent, informed and considered view of this.
MoS,
Well, we already have the idea in law of informed consent and consent free from duress.
I think an arguement can be made that a brainwashed child probably made any consent under duress in this situation.
Of course, there is the civil route too. Allow this stuff, but as soon as one of the girls becomes old enough and recants, and can show duress, she will be awarded all of here exploiter's (husband) property.
Jeebus Mike, I like your idea. Brilliant. Allow the "child bride" on proof of duress/indoctrination negating free will to recover something in the nature of compensatory, possibly punitive, damages from her husband's assets. Let these guys know they're marrying potential time bombs. That might make the allure of several wives look like several potential problems to one's prosperity.
I love it. Brilliant!
Post a Comment