Dear readers: I am combining my responses to two questions from opposing
viewpoints. This appears to be a timely topic due to the recent development
with the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints
(FLDS, not to be confused with the Salt Lake City-based LDS):
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/p/polygamy/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier
Dear Miss Iris: This week I saw on TV a police raid on church that practiced
polygamy. I don't understand why such creeps exploit girls like this, and
how perverts like them are tolerated. As a feminist, I cannot stand
this epitome of patriarchy in which women are "collected" as though they are
trophies and exploited like house slaves. - Linda, Bend, Oregon.
Dear Miss Iris: I believe in polyamory and I think this recent assault on
the FLDS community unfairly attacks a family bonded by mutual covenant. It
is apparent to me that the husband of this household is at least wealthy
enough to take care of his wives and children. The government is
overreacting based solely on a complaint from the small minority of
disgruntled household members, in a sensationalistic and photo-op-seeking
way, and that's not fair to anyone. - Alice, Eugene, Oregon. (p.s.: I'm
married happily, unfortunately for legal purposes just to one spouse; the
other spouses I can't "marry" them even if I weren't married to him.)
Dear Mrs. Alice and Miss Linda: The problem underlying the recent case of
FLDS polygamy isn't really about whether they loved one another (a CNN
report mentioned they did love each other very much so) but is about how the
husband (and by extension his church, which espouses a highly patriarchal
belief system) exercised his absolute power over his spouses. Whether or not
this is a polygamy or a monogamy, there was a clear indication of domestic
abuse and violence, and I believe there is a world apart of difference
between this and what Mrs. Alice calls "polyamory."
I, for one, believe that
(1) For Christians especially for biblical literalists, there is no explicit
proscription against a marriage with multiple spouses, except perhaps for
presbyters and deacons -- and by extension for bishops, who are essentially
the "fullness of priesthood" -- (1 Tim 3:2,12; many churches, however, also
allow single men and women to become a presbyter or a deacon, although this
verse appears to require a monogamous marriage); indeed, King Solomon had
300 wives and 700 concubines (1 Kings 11; though some scholars believe this
is a rhetorical exaggeration --
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Solomon.html ), and
Abraham had Ishmael through Hagar the concubine. On the other hand, both the
Hebrew scriptures (c.f. Malachi 2:16) and New Testament (Matthew
19:3-9) treat the topic of divorce in a very negative light. -- Also
see *Readings
in Social Problems*, by Albert Benedict Wolfe (Boston: Ginn & Company, 1916;
p. 599 - http://books.google.com/books?id=8dhAAAAAIAAJ ).
(2) An honest polyamory is far superior to a dishonest monogamy that
destroys a family and devastates children. In many cases, an "open" marriage
often helps people avoid the high degree of emotional dependency and
resulting psychological manipulation, and allows members of the household to
act more maturely and in a more transparent manner. Too many monogamous
relationships, married or unmarried, are caught up in abuse, control and
violence, and as such it is difficult to establish the alleged moral
superiority of monogamy over polyamory.
(3) The case against polygamy based on the allegation of "sexism" would hold
up only if the structure of one male and multiple females in a marriage.
It is also important to note that the concept of family and marriage today
is very different from that of centuries ago (much to the dismay of those
who call for a "traditional family values", which really dates back only as
far as the late 1940s). In the past marriage was primarily a civil contract,
and the idea of free marriage based on love, or church endorsement (and
officiation) of a marriage, are a relatively new phenomenon (c.f. *A History
of Matrimonial Institutions Chiefly in England and the United States* -
http://books.google.com/books?id=TAmxOMQdU9kC ).
viewpoints. This appears to be a timely topic due to the recent development
with the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints
(FLDS, not to be confused with the Salt Lake City-based LDS):
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refer
Dear Miss Iris: This week I saw on TV a police raid on church that practiced
polygamy. I don't understand why such creeps exploit girls like this, and
how perverts like them are tolerated. As a feminist, I cannot stand
this epitome of patriarchy in which women are "collected" as though they are
trophies and exploited like house slaves. - Linda, Bend, Oregon.
Dear Miss Iris: I believe in polyamory and I think this recent assault on
the FLDS community unfairly attacks a family bonded by mutual covenant. It
is apparent to me that the husband of this household is at least wealthy
enough to take care of his wives and children. The government is
overreacting based solely on a complaint from the small minority of
disgruntled household members, in a sensationalistic and photo-op-seeking
way, and that's not fair to anyone. - Alice, Eugene, Oregon. (p.s.: I'm
married happily, unfortunately for legal purposes just to one spouse; the
other spouses I can't "marry" them even if I weren't married to him.)
Dear Mrs. Alice and Miss Linda: The problem underlying the recent case of
FLDS polygamy isn't really about whether they loved one another (a CNN
report mentioned they did love each other very much so) but is about how the
husband (and by extension his church, which espouses a highly patriarchal
belief system) exercised his absolute power over his spouses. Whether or not
this is a polygamy or a monogamy, there was a clear indication of domestic
abuse and violence, and I believe there is a world apart of difference
between this and what Mrs. Alice calls "polyamory."
I, for one, believe that
(1) For Christians especially for biblical literalists, there is no explicit
proscription against a marriage with multiple spouses, except perhaps for
presbyters and deacons -- and by extension for bishops, who are essentially
the "fullness of priesthood" -- (1 Tim 3:2,12; many churches, however, also
allow single men and women to become a presbyter or a deacon, although this
verse appears to require a monogamous marriage); indeed, King Solomon had
300 wives and 700 concubines (1 Kings 11; though some scholars believe this
is a rhetorical exaggeration --
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso
Abraham had Ishmael through Hagar the concubine. On the other hand, both the
Hebrew scriptures (c.f. Malachi 2:16) and New Testament (Matthew
19:3-9) treat the topic of divorce in a very negative light. -- Also
see *Readings
in Social Problems*, by Albert Benedict Wolfe (Boston: Ginn & Company, 1916;
p. 599 - http://books.google.com/books?id=8dhAAA
(2) An honest polyamory is far superior to a dishonest monogamy that
destroys a family and devastates children. In many cases, an "open" marriage
often helps people avoid the high degree of emotional dependency and
resulting psychological manipulation, and allows members of the household to
act more maturely and in a more transparent manner. Too many monogamous
relationships, married or unmarried, are caught up in abuse, control and
violence, and as such it is difficult to establish the alleged moral
superiority of monogamy over polyamory.
(3) The case against polygamy based on the allegation of "sexism" would hold
up only if the structure of one male and multiple females in a marriage.
It is also important to note that the concept of family and marriage today
is very different from that of centuries ago (much to the dismay of those
who call for a "traditional family values", which really dates back only as
far as the late 1940s). In the past marriage was primarily a civil contract,
and the idea of free marriage based on love, or church endorsement (and
officiation) of a marriage, are a relatively new phenomenon (c.f. *A History
of Matrimonial Institutions Chiefly in England and the United States* -
http://books.google.com/books?id=TAmxOM
0 comments:
Post a Comment