Excerpt:
As expected, the federal government Tuesday joined the B.C. government in support of Canada’s controversial polygamy law.
[…]If Canada were to allow polygamy, it would be contrary to international obligations that recognize the harms of multiple marriages, said Strachan.
Several interest groups also told the judge that they support the polygamy law, which was enacted in 1890 but has seldom been prosecuted in Canada.
Jonathan Baker, a lawyer for Real Women of Canada, said that when freedom of religion is raised by fundamentalist Mormons as a rationale for polgyamy, the court should examine whether the practice being engaged is in fact based upon religious belief:
“Was the marriage entered into in the honest belief that it was required to achieve eternal celestial bliss, or was it simply a matter of social pressure from the narrow, isolated community?”
Baker added that it was “no exaggeration to say that polygamy is an anti-democratic abomination” and that a finding that the law is unconstitutional would be inconsistent with the values and opinions of most Canadians.
[…]The court is expected to hear more opening statements Wednesday, including statements from groups that oppose the law and would like it struck down.
The issue of whether the law is constitutional was referred to the Supreme Court after polygamy charges laid in 2009 against two members of the small Interior community of Bountiful were quashed by the court.
The trial is expected to run until the end of January.
Canada has one of the most liberal policies in the world on same-sex marriage, and they are also notorious for their no-fault divorce laws and punitive family courts.
WINTERY KNIGHT 
Once you allow same-sex unions, then there really is no logical reason why any other union shouldn’t be allowed. Once you redefine what marriage is, then anything goes.
LikeLike
Wouldn’t a “liberal” society feel obliged to legalize poligamy (multiple wifes) and poliandry (multiple husbands)on the same day?
LikeLike
Honestly, I don’t see why not. If the commitment to 1) love self-sacrificially for life, 2) have children and 3) raise children, are not the goals of marriage, then anything goes. If spouses and children are like pets that you exchange depending on how they make you feel, then anything goes. It makes me sick.
LikeLike
Polygamy is terrible because it requires very little in the way of fidelity on the part of men. A married man can basically mess around with any woman who is not married. That’s a lot of other women.
Imagine being a married woman and your husband comes home one day and tells you that he’s dating someone else he met. He goes out with this woman, spends time with her, lavishes attention on her, and builds up a relationship. All the while, you’re still expected to treat him like your husband, to attend to all his needs (yes, ALL his needs) and all the while you know that he is actively pursuing this other woman. You have no grounds on which to complain, to tell him he’s wrong, to call him to change his ways. You’re supposed to be fine with it, because that it is culturally acceptable. Then he brings this other woman home as his second wife and you have to share your husband with her. She’s the new flavour of the month. She’s like the new car and you’re like the one he’s had for 3 years already. If I were a woman in such a situation I would wish to die.
@Retha: I can see polygamy gaining legal recognition in SA. I’ve already heard people advocate it. And our president seems to be leading by example… Ugh.
LikeLike
Until you wrote it up like that, I had naively assumed that he had to choose all of the wives at once.But you’re right – it would entail seeking out new wives while already having one wife. Basically what it is saying is that women should not be chosen by men in order to love them. It makes me angry. Women are natural givers, and it’s wrong to put them in a position where they exhaust themselves taking care of husbands and children.
I often complain about women’s emotion nature and the way they think that life is safe and fun and that they can create happy outcomes out of poor decisions magically by changing bad men after having sex with them. Well men also have a flaw, and that flaw is treating women as objects and not making long-term commitments to women and children who need sustained love and attention. This is our flaw that we have to work through, and women should be aggressive about testing men to see if they can deny that aspect of male sexuality. That’s why I think that women should value chastity in men. If he isn’t pursuing women as objects before he meets you, then affairs and polygamy are out of the question.
LikeLike
Read “Wife No. 19” by Ann Eliza Young, one of Brigham Young’s wives, or “In Sacred Loneliness” by another Mormon polygamous wife. Sad tales of what being just one of many is like.
LikeLike
Here it is online:
http://www.archive.org/details/wifenoorstoryofl00youniala
I don’t know how men could be so cruel to women.
LikeLike
Wow, I didn’t know you could get stuff like that on-line. I purchased a photo-reprint from the Utah Lighthouse Ministry, from where I’ve amassed a large volume of excellent sources on the LDS.
As for how men can be so cruel, it’s that old sin nature and the LDS do not have the Holy Spirit. Sex is a very important aspect of almost all the cults.
LikeLike