MK
05-19-2001, 09:35 AM
I don't know how widespread the news on this case has been, but here in Utah (as you can imagine, if you know anything about Utah history) it is a big deal.
Anyway, just to give a summary, this man in Utah who is NOT a member of the LDS church (Mormon), but a cast-off version of it-- the reformed version-- they just changed their name recently to set themselves apart a little better-- anyway, this man has been living a family lifestyle which the government considers to be illegal. He has five wives (and 25 plus children), whom he lives with all together. The state of Utah has been prosecuting him. At one of his media interviews early on in the case, he explained that his own definition of a family differs from the definition held by the state, and can't understand why they want to prosecute him for merely having different family values.
Although Utah banned plural marriage in its Constitution in order to become a state, it has no specific anti-polyamy law on the books. The news article also stated that this has been the first major polygamy case in the nation in five decades!
Well, yesterday the jury found him guilty. He faces possibly 25 years in prison and oodles of fines.
Sooo... what do you think? One of the attorneys stated that this will cause other practicing polygamists (and there are many in this region, extending into Arizona) to go further into hiding. Something was also mentioned about having a conflict with first amendment rights, and freedom of religion. In a closing statement, Greene states that he never really considered himself to be legally married to any of his wives, and that in the eyes of the government he considers himself single. But, stated Greene, in the eyes of God he considers himself married. Personally, I think that in itself is a conflict of his own religious beliefs, but who am I to judge, eh?
The one thing that I question is, that an apparently very closely bonded, cooperative family unit will be broken up. Is that right, even though the formation of this family may not have been right in the first place?
Another question to think about is, what would have been the result if Greene had been pronounced NOT guilty? Definitely all the people who practice plural marriage in this area would appear more confident when they go out in public, but what about others who currently do not practice it. Do you think there are a lot of men who would like to take on more than one wife, but do not only because it is illegal? Do you think legalizing polygamy would make women more likely to be abused-- not treated as equal marriage partners, like in the "dark ages"?
Anyway, just to give a summary, this man in Utah who is NOT a member of the LDS church (Mormon), but a cast-off version of it-- the reformed version-- they just changed their name recently to set themselves apart a little better-- anyway, this man has been living a family lifestyle which the government considers to be illegal. He has five wives (and 25 plus children), whom he lives with all together. The state of Utah has been prosecuting him. At one of his media interviews early on in the case, he explained that his own definition of a family differs from the definition held by the state, and can't understand why they want to prosecute him for merely having different family values.
Although Utah banned plural marriage in its Constitution in order to become a state, it has no specific anti-polyamy law on the books. The news article also stated that this has been the first major polygamy case in the nation in five decades!
Well, yesterday the jury found him guilty. He faces possibly 25 years in prison and oodles of fines.
Sooo... what do you think? One of the attorneys stated that this will cause other practicing polygamists (and there are many in this region, extending into Arizona) to go further into hiding. Something was also mentioned about having a conflict with first amendment rights, and freedom of religion. In a closing statement, Greene states that he never really considered himself to be legally married to any of his wives, and that in the eyes of the government he considers himself single. But, stated Greene, in the eyes of God he considers himself married. Personally, I think that in itself is a conflict of his own religious beliefs, but who am I to judge, eh?
The one thing that I question is, that an apparently very closely bonded, cooperative family unit will be broken up. Is that right, even though the formation of this family may not have been right in the first place?
Another question to think about is, what would have been the result if Greene had been pronounced NOT guilty? Definitely all the people who practice plural marriage in this area would appear more confident when they go out in public, but what about others who currently do not practice it. Do you think there are a lot of men who would like to take on more than one wife, but do not only because it is illegal? Do you think legalizing polygamy would make women more likely to be abused-- not treated as equal marriage partners, like in the "dark ages"?