Polygamy has 'no place in Canada': justice minister

A discussion about the significance of the federal justice minister says polygamy has 'no place in Canada,' after calls for clarity on the issue from the British Columbia attorney general.

CTV News Channel: Justice Minister Rob Nicholson

The federal government is introducing a bill to end the practice of giving double credit for time spent in jail before trial, and was peppered with questions about polygamy.

CTV News Extended: Minister Rob Nicholson

The justice minister takes questions from the media on polygamy and the constitution.

Canada AM: Discussing Canada's polygamy laws

University constitutional law professors Grant Huscroft of UWO and Beverley Baines of Queen's discuss what the court must consider when trying to clarify the polygamy laws, and how long the process is expected to take.

Watch: See all Videos in the Player

A A | Email This Email | Print | Comments (94) Tweet

Minister of Justice Rob Nicholson is seen during a news conference in Ottawa, Friday Oct. 23, 2009. (Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

View Larger Image

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Fri. Oct. 23 2009 4:31 PM ET

The federal justice minister says polygamy has "no place in Canada," after calls for clarity on the issue from the British Columbia attorney general.

"The prohibition on polygamy is certainly consistent with Canadian values," Justice Minister Rob Nicholson told reporters Friday at a news conference

He said the federal government is prepared to defend the law, which prevents people from being married to more than one person at one time.

His comment comes the day after B.C.'s attorney general said Canadians and the justice system need clarity on whether or not polygamy is a crime.

On Thursday, the B.C. government said it decided to seek an opinion rather than appeal a court ruling that quashed polygamy charges against Winston Blackmore and James Oler. Both are leaders of breakaway sects of the Mormon Church in Bountiful, B.C. The mainstream church banned polygamy more than 100 years ago.

Blackmore was accused of having 19 wives and Oler three.

The charges were dropped because B.C.'s attorney general did not have the jurisdiction to appoint a second special prosecutor to consider charges against the men

On Thursday, Joe Arvay, the lawyer for Blackmore said his client wants to participate in the hearing, to make sure the court hears his side of the story. Lawyers for Blackmore and Oler argue the law is a violation of their charter rights to religious freedom.

At the news conference, Nicholson said the law is constitutional and complies with both the charter and the Canadian bill of rights.

"The prohibition on polygamy is consistent with Canadian values and I am confident it'll pass constitutional muster," Nicholson said.

He would not elaborate on what argument the federal government will be presenting in court to defend the law.

One constitutional law professor says that even if polygamous marriages do end up allowed, they may still pose legal problems.

"It would mean that those religious sects that use polygamy as their marriage form could go ahead and do it religiously but it would not make the marriage legal," Beverley Baines, a law professor at Queen's University told Canada AM.

The province will specifically ask the B.C. Supreme Court if the law barring polygamy is consistent with the charter and will also ask what role the law has in governing relationships between consenting adults and relationships with youth.

There have been allegations in Bountiful that teenage girls have been married to middle-aged men, and that some have been sent to the United States to marry older men in sister sects there.

"It's very crucial that the women involved in polygamous relationships...are given an opportunity to testify," said Baines.

The RCMP have launched numerous investigations into Bountiful since 1990, but prosecutors have repeatedly shied away from laying charges.

University of Western Ontario law professor Grant Huscroft told Canada AM the province should have acted earlier.

"The province got it into its head that the laws were unconstitutional. These are federal laws," said Huscroft.

"Rather than go ahead and charge and let the accused persons raise the argument about the law being unconstitutional, they got paralyzed into not doing anything and that's allowed basically a generation of polygamous conduct in British Columbia to go on," said Huscroft.

The charges were eventually laid under former B.C. attorney general Wally Oppal proceeded with polygamy charges against Blackmore and Oler despite earlier legal opinions that the polygamy issue should be referred to the court as a test case.

CTV legal analyst Steven Skurka told CTV News Channel that this could be a long court battle.

"I think this is going to be a real test for the court," Skurka said. "I'm not predicting which way this will end up, its certainly going to be a close call."

Comments are now closed for this story

CB in AB
said
0 0

It appears that a lot of people are unaware wording of the actual law about polygamy:Polygamy293. (1) Every one who(This means men and women engaged in a polygamous relationship)(a) practices or enters into or in any manner agrees or consents to practice or enter into(i) any form of polygamy, or(This would include:•polyandry: the practice or the condition whereby a woman has more than one established erotic/sexual male partner•Polygyny: the sociological practice of one man having more than one female partner.)(ii) any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the same time,(This could be used to prosecute anyone having an affair while married to or living with another partner)whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding form of marriage, or(b) celebrates, assists or is a party to a rite, ceremony, contract or consent that purports to sanction a relationship mentioned in subparagraph (a)(i) or (ii),is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.Since everyone is equal in the eyes of the law, and charges were going to be laid, all of the parties involved in the marriages should be have been charged, otherwise there is an unequal application of the law.Also, since it has been suggested that at least 1 partner will have an affair in 80% of partnerships, we would have to build a lot of jails to hold those breaking paragraph (ii) of this law.If it is proven that anyone is marrying a person under the age of 16, there are laws to deal with that issue. Otherwise, contrary to what some people are suggesting here, all of age people have the power and intelligence and the right to make their own decisions regarding their lifestyle.

Ian
said
0 0

Ryan, only in a dream world will you have polygamy being practised as an honest loving relationship between consenting adults. The reality is that polygamists want power over women so that they can bring as many children as possible into their particular sect. There may be some consent, by the women, but for the most part, young girls are told by their father that they must marry the older man without complaint. It's time we evolved and got with the 21st century don't you think? If polygamy is to be viewed as a socially accepted practise, then polyandry (women with more than one husband) should also be allowed.

Hmmm
said
0 0

Polygamy in itself is immoral for christian reasons. Many relgions and groups have practices it. What if they are not married, and living in a polygamous common law situation, then that's supposed to be different? What they should be concentrating on is forcing minors to be ina relationship with an adult, and the human trafficing of minors and adults alike. As well as any abuse that might go on. It's our moral obligation to protect those that need it, not matter what religion they are.

Ian
said
0 0

Of course there are those out there who think it's OK for old men to marry as many 16 year old girls as they want. What's wrong with one wife? I would have more respect for these people if there were cases where a woman had more than one husband, but that would never happen would it. No, because it's not a matter of religious freedom, it's a matter of control over women. For those who use the argument that the government should keep out of people's business unless it's harmful, that is such a lame argument. If government didn't make laws there would be anarchy and everyone would do whatever they wanted to whomever they wanted.

ARJAY
said
0 0

@DougSorry Doug, but I don't understand your comment. You don't want the police to pull you over for random checks- neither do I. I believe in individual liberty, and keeping the State out of my life as much as possible. But that's the argument in favour of allowing polygamy- the State has no right to tell me how to live my private life, unless I am infringing on someone else's right to live theirs. So you seem to be arguing both for and against freedom in your post- which is it? As for the idea that Canada is founded on "Christian values", that is correct in the sense that our laws are based on English precedent, which was developed in a Christian country. But Canada is a secular nation. We separate church and state to avoid religious conflict. Why should one religious group dictate to the others what the laws should be? Why should religious groups dictate anything, except in their own churches? It is incredibly arrogant to assume that because many people are Christian, that therefore the rest of us are bound by their views. Secularism prevents discord by removing the state from the equation. If you want to see what happens when that doesn't work, check out England in the 17th century, or Yugoslavia in the 20th.And as for the idea that the bible forbids polygamy- check out King Solomon. The Patriarchs had many wives. Are are Christians now throwing out the Old Testament?

Jay - Victoria
said
0 0

Most people would agree that the government has no business in any aspect of consenting adult's personal lives as long as they are not infringing on anyone's rights. Why should we need the government's "license" (which means permission) to enter into a relationship with another? I suggest that we don't. Religious institutions should issue their own marriage licenses in accordance with their beliefs and these should be recognized as legal unions. Consenting adults is the key to this. Child abuse is a separate isssue and should be dealt with as such.

DC in AB
said
0 0

The Dominion of Canada was founded on Anglo-Saxon/Christian and French/Christian principles. Although I agree any Canadian should have freedom to practice whatever religion he or she would like, I DO NOT condone things such as Sharia law (says that a man may beat his wife, as she is merely a possession), or polygamy. We have to draw a line somewhere, and this is where it should be drawn. Mormon people stopped practicing polygamy over 100 years ago. If we allow this, we are taking one giant leap backwards. It is completely unfair to draw comparisons to gay marriage. Gay marriage is still typically monogamous. Gay marriage is a union between TWO people, and only extends the rights of gay people to that of heterosexual people and thus is a good thing. Polygamy extends the rights of those individuals choosing to practice beyond that of anyone else.

Doug
said
0 0

Prepare for a new class of divorce settlements, cases and screwed up children. What happened to being normal in Canada does every weird view and way of life have to be respected and as some would want us to do adore "alternative" lifestyles? I'm just a normal hard working 25 year old non-religous white guy where is my lobby group? Where is my yearly parade down the Danforth? Nicholson won't be able to stop this, and why is he trying to insttute random police pullovers and other legislation that attacks people going about their daily buisness, can I have some small freedoms back please instead of having to put up with these changes.

One Wife to Live
said
0 0

The problem arises when people accept any man made theology as regilion, simply because someone puts the label of religion on it. If only the Bible was used, then of course polygamy is wrong. But of course who just wants to use the Bible, because then you get judgement, heaven and hell and a lot of stuff that will simply cramp your lifestyle! How do you get religious freedom in a country that doesn't believe in God?

DVG
said
0 0

Okay Christian Conservatives, are you ready to deal with the Muslim families that have more then one wife in their house holds. This is a can of worms that should be left alone. Religion has no place in politics, but our Christian leaders believe it still does obviously. The women that are adults and choose to be in these relationships should be able to deal with what they dealt themselves. Are we not all equal or are we trying to state that adult women are weak minded humans compared to man, so they need government intervention to protect them?

ARJAY
said
0 0

As usual, more heat than light on this topic because people are confusing two issues.The first issue is whether adult human beings have a right to arrange their personal lives as they choose. Feminists and right-wing Christians want to dictate to women how to live their lives- they have no right to do so, any more than society has the right to tell gay people who they can marry. Ironically, conservatives always complain about government interference in our lives, yet immediately support more laws when it means imposing their own values on everyone else. Ironically, feminists always talk about giving women choices- if they make the ones feminists want.We would be better off to legalize polygamy and then place controls on age, rather than the current situation.But that's the second issue: how young girls- and boys- are currently affected by the polygamous sects. Apparently people are unaware that it is perfectly legal for a girl under 16 to marry- with her parents' permission. The reason for this law is so that girls who are pregnant can marry their boyfriends, so children are not born out of wedlock.These religious sects take advantage of that loophole, with mothers and fathers giving permission for their daughters to marry older men. Meanwhile, young men are forced out of these communes so they will not be competition.We could and should prevent both of these practices, not by making polygamy illegal, but by changing the law regarding the age of consent, removing parents' ability to use the loophole. This would both preserve individual rights, while protecting children.Will anything sensible be done? Of course not. Feminist ideology and Christian dogmatism will either restrict personal liberty, or end in a court decision legalizing polygamy. And this only happens because people don't do a logical analysis of the situation.

Terrry Ritchie
said
0 0

The federal justice minister says polygamy has "no place in Canada," the news item says.But polygamy IS Canadian. It's North American -- maybe excluding Mexico.How many wives does the average Canadian have in one lifetime? 2.3 Stats Can says. How many husbands does the average Canadian wife have? Probably similar, I'd go so far as to bet.How many people stick with their original marriage? Don't even ask. Two out of three don't, in the end, even if the stats say it's only one out of three divorce. That's not accurate. What about the run-around rate?It's nothing but sheer hypocrisy to condemn polygamy that is open, honest, shared and upright.All you're really condemning is the bonding.Good luck.

Chris
said
0 0

Let's see! John married Mary, Susan, Jennifer and Louise. Mary is married to John, George, Henry and Arthur. Susan is married to John, Jim, Tom and also Arthur. Jennifer is married to John, Scott , Mike and Eric. Louise is married to ..... all these ladies have several children and are not always sure which hubby is the father. When one of them dies, all of the other spouces have to get the pension.................

Darryl Spencer
said
0 0

Existing law can and should be used to prosecute men who have sex with underage girls. Hopefully, polygamous marriages will not be recognized as legal by the courts. Yet, how far do we expect the government to go? Do we expect them to outlaw consenting co-habitation? What happens with men who secretly maintain multiple mistresses or girlfriends for years?

ericw
said
0 0

There is clearly a limit to religious freedom .... like no human sacrifice, no cannibalism ... and no polygamy

Joseph - YVR
said
0 0

This debate is missing the whole point.. There is one side of two or more women living with one man, or two or more men living with one woman, or a whole bunch of people living in a commune, and our law can do nothing to prevent it. So arguing whether these arrangement are moral or not and whether they should be called marriages or not on religious or whatever grounds is pointless. These arguments will be in courts forever and eventually polygamists will probably win under the Charter of Rights.The other side, however is that the kids (both female and male) are clearly getting hurt in these relationships, and we do have laws to protect them. Now, is hurting kids in a polygamous relationship any worse than hurting kids in monogamous relationship?All I see here is a smokescreen of religious freedom being used to hurt the kids while our politicians and legal system are paralyzed to address the issue in a fear offending the Constitution or the Charter of Rights.Why don't we change the question from: "Is polygamy legal or not?" to "Does one have a right to hurt any of their family members on religious or cultural grounds?"After that we just have to decide what "hurting" means, but for that we are already mostly covered by our law.

David
said
0 0

No thinking woman consents to polygamy. It exists because lecherous old pedophiles in isolated, insulated communities coerce women who know no better. And uninformed consent is no consent. I hate to say this but just because we use the blanket of religion to cover what is clearly morally repugnant, it is no reason it should be permissable. Many things written in religious texts are not allowed in our society.The slippery slope didn't start with gay marriage.It started when people became confused that individual freedoms don't have reasonable limitations.Just becuase someone wants to do something doesn't make it morally neutral.

PV
said
0 0

This should be tolerated if is in common agreement of the parties involved and nobody is harmed. Government shouldn't get its nose on private citizen's lives.

al, thunder bay
said
0 0

what can i say? change the charter of rights or leave them alone. that is the question. BTW what does the charter says about marriage?

charlotte cooper
said
0 0

Ok people what is wrong with the picture - old guys wanting young immature children/women for the purpose of their own self enjoyment and the women not knowing their rights. Have you EVER heard of WOMEN doing this NO! So why are MEN so special to get away with this act - think about it people - nothing short of the old ways of other countries. This is Canada and WOMEN do have rights and freedoms. Men - can you aford to pay alimony on all these women or do you just brain wash them into thinking this is right and society accepts your old ways! This is the 21st Century not the age of men going to battle and being killed and that is why men had to go forth and populate with so many women. We now have a choice in life who we can Marry or Live with over time. The time has come for change again to the Legal System for Women's Rights - no some horny guy that wants all he can get for his own pleasure.

Lunt
said
0 0

What sane man would want more than one? I get enough hot tongue and cold shoulder for supper from one wife.....couldn't eat anymore......

Mike Macdonald - Winnipeg
said
0 0

Crypto zoology (religion) seems to be a common thread in many of the comments, both for and against. It should not, however, determine public policy, nor be the basis for Canadian law. I say, Mr. Blackmore, go for it. Conversely, to any of the Mrs. Blackmores, if you wish to become Mrs. Smith-Blackmore-Jones-Whomever, you go for it, as well!

Michael Gillis
said
0 0

The issue is not really polygamy--no one would want to make adultery illegal again, would they?--the issue is freedom. The real question is whether or not they young women were coerced into marriage.

Kerry
said
0 0

Everyone is so worried about morals and rights, but no one is commenting on the practical issues. Which wife is the dependant on the employer health care plan? Who gets the pension benefits when the man dies? Who's the benficiary on the RRSPs? How do these men financially contribute to enhance the lives of so many wives and children? How do you look at the joint income of so many people to fit them in a tax bracket? If the government recognizes the multiple spouses, there are a lot of legal ramifications that aren't present in a two person union, whether heterosexual or homosexual.

Lisa in BC
said
0 0

I don't see the similarity between allowing same sex marraige and allowing polygimous marraige. Same sex marraige give the right to two people that love eachother the right to marry. Polygamy gives men the right to have multiple wives and subjugate them. It gives men the right to force young girls to marry them and basically be a brood mare for them. There is no similarity to the two things. Now I am not a feminist by any means...I believe in equal rights for both men and women. A couple of comments really irritated me, especially the one saying that allowing for same sex marraige would eventually lead to legal insectuous marraige. Now this is ignorance at it's finest. Using the fact that same sex marraige is allowed to support polygomy is just ridiculous. The are not even close to the same issue. Not allowing polygomy is protecting the rights of so many people. Not allowing same sex marraige is squashing those same rights.

Roy
said
0 0

Polygamy is not the problem in Bountiful, child abuse is. Church and state should be separate and if religous, superstitious or spiritual practises violate the rights of citizens, the authorities should take action.

JJ-EDM
said
0 0

We live in a society which is in a constant conflict between the rights of the majority and the rights of an individual. Democracy is not perfect in a sense that 51% of people can tell 49% what to do. We all know that, and we still like it here, despite the fact that sometimes we end up on the 49% side. One thing is politics, the other is the "morality of the nation" or "Canadian values". I am not too sure what those are, except self-righteousness expressed by groups or individuals. To me, any issues such as polygamy, abortion, capital punishment, same sex marriage, prostitution, etc, are and always will be controversial and very subjective. What is moral to one person is immoral to another. Will a Supreme Court ruling change that? No it will not. A court ruling is not a panceum for our perception of morality. If we end up on the "loosing" side of the argument, perhaps with time our attitudes will change as we get used to some of these "immoral" things around us to a point where we, or our kids will not see them immoral anymore. This is called social "enlightment" and what I love about the Canadian society, that it can happen here unlike in many other places on this planet.So what do we do with polygamy? Well lets have a broader look at the problem. Do I have a problem with many consenting people living happily together (married or unmarried) and calling themselves a "family". No I don't. Do I have a problem with hurting little girls or boys in the process? Yes I do, and it does not matter if it happens in a polygamous or monogamous relationship. So lets solve this REAL problem.

Portes
said
0 0

I have a suggestion. Just try it and see how your wives and girlfriends will react. I bet that you will be running faster than a gazalle from a lion. I agree with the Minister and I hink that all people who have a grain of decency in them will agree. Only those who want to keep females down will object and I am a happily married man for 36 years

Murray Martindale
said
0 0

"The prohibition on polygamy is certainly consistent with Canadian values" How is polygamy any different than "same-sex" marriage...Both morally and legally??

G, in NS
said
0 0

Thank goodness for someone attempting to keep some kind of order in a country where the hole in the moral fabric has become so large that it would seem that there are no moral laws anymore. For those that promote that consenting adults do what they want ,I suspect you would be the first to screem at the decline of todays youth and as we sit back and watch the next generation surface with no moral consepts in many cases , we shake our heads and blame it on video games. I lay the blame right in the laps of those that consent to ""allow concenting adults run their lives based on their fleshly lusts" .. A generation up and coming, lacking respect for everything and everyone and morals as low as they go. And where does it come from.????? those that go before with nothing to offer except "if it feels good do it attitudes. God help our nation cause it sure has gone past helping itself.

KC in Ottawa
said
0 0

I think the real injustice comes not from the polygamy itself, but from the obvious breaches of trust and abusive control that is accompanying the act in many of the cases that are seen in the media. When a man marries an underage girl, polygamy is not the crime - statuatory rape is! I think we also have an aversion as a society to the idea as we assume that polygamy is inherently sexist, but that is largely due to the fact that the religious organizations that do practice polygamy indicate that men should take many wives. Outside of a religious context, there is nothing which says women cannot take many husbands (or wives as the case may be). I don't think it would be right to dismiss polygamy out-of-hand based on a gut reflex to current injustices that accompany the act, or out of a fear of that which is different. The way polygamy is practiced in other countries can be quite respectful, and is usually governed socially by a set of rules that prevents taking 18 wives (2 being the norm, and 3 in special circumstances). Of course, I was raised by a mother who thought having another mother around the house to help wrangle my brother and I wouldn't be a bad idea, and I don't disagree now that I have children of my own.

MJ
said
0 0

Then lets not just talk about the BC situation - their are immigrants coming to this country with more than one wife and we are supporting them!!! Stop all of it!!!

SS
said
0 0

I personally could never participate in polygamy and be ok with it, but if there are consenting adults that can be in that kind of relationship and be happy, then who am I to tell them otherwise? Fact is, there are people having affairs all over the place. I don't like that either, but that's not considered a crime. So why should a fully consentual arrangement be a crime?The problem is, polygamy is understandably associated with those 'dirty old religious men' and 'cults' grooming young girls so they know no better, or they can't escape something they don't want. That practice is wrong of course, and I am totally against that. There need to be laws that can help protect girls from that kind of environment. Religion cannot be allowed to be used as an excuse for sexual abuse and rape. If we could just get past that, we could use many current laws against that true problem.FYI - for the curious, there is something called Polyandry. That is where there is one woman who has multiple men. It's practiced in some cultures (or maybe just one) in Africa I believe (as I remember it from the program I was watching). I don't think this practice was based in religion (although I'm not sure). But of course, you wouldn't likely find that around here. :PYou're not going to stop people who want to have multiple partners from having them, married or not. The focus should be on protecting the innocent young ones, so they can be educated and allowed to make their own choice when they come of age. Just MHO.

Peter in MB
said
0 0

We have to draw the line some where. Polygamy is just another forum of in-slaving women and taking advantage of women with no education. Hmm� kind of sounds like the Middle East where women have no RIGHTS!!! . I consider myself a gentleman. And think that women should be treated equally.I am surprised that more women�s rights groups are not speaking out against this. This is Canada in the year 2009, not the Middle East in 12 AD. I would like to think we have evolved since then. If we don�t stop here what will be next, Sheep and bestiality. give your head a shake people.

Metro
said
0 0

Actually, given that multiple marriages already exist, I think there may be good reasons to recognize them.The problem is regulation. How to determine whether a person chose freely or was coerced?If we decide to recognize multiple marriage, it should be confined to adults over some appropriate age, say 25, and it should be polyandry, not polygamy (-andry means "multiple spouses" as opposed to multiple wives).I'm interested, too, to hear what the religious zealots who came out so hard against gay marriage have to say about this?Will they support religious freedom for others, or only for themselves?

Liberal Canadians wimps
said
0 0

I think the only thing that should not be allowed is normal decent people having any rights, and that we should demonize them when they try and make us accountable. I am all for honour killings, same sex, multiple partners, 14 yeah old wives, growing my own pot, light sentances for criminals, workers that are required to take drug tests but welfare losers that don't.

D.H.
said
0 0

In some cases the people in a multiple marriage may be happy with their choice or at least have been raised to think that they are. In others, no doubt coercion based on religious fear mongering has been involved; caught between marriage and social suicide � to be cut off from parents and siblings. Not much freedom of choice when one�s economic and educational background has left one emotionally and physically isolated. An enslaved mind is a piteous thing.

Gary
said
0 0

I believe that people are clouding their judgements with personal believes. If people are using polygamy to abuse underage children then they should be prosicuted under present laws, the same way they prosicute gays when they go after children. Otherwise whos' believes do you go by. We have opened pandoras box a long time ago and so must allow freedom of religion with the realm of our criminal laws. Polygamy has been around as long as religion and has been persecuted by it the whole time, just as being gay, abortion, divorice and adultery. While I don't personal agree with some of these aspects, religious fanaticism has destroyed many good countries so lets keep Canada open minded and protect those at risk with strong enforcement of our criminal laws.

James
said
0 0

As long as a person is not forced to do things they don't want Whats the problem.The government has made a mess of our world by making laws with our personal freedoms. An example !( statistics from the US in a different)Per year in the US Prescription drugs kill 106,000, alcohol kills 74,000, tobacco kills 6 million, illegal drugs kill 10,000, marijuana has killed Zero people.These laws on personal freedoms kill a lot of people, so it's bad for the government to make laws pertaining to personal choices. My doctor recently prescribed pot for me. He told me there is no prescription drug that is as safe to treat the condition I have.

Ben
said
0 0

Laws are laws!!!! If we allow people to break the laws under the guise of religious freedom, we opening a potential floodgate. It really isn't that hard to start your own religion. What is to stop a group of people from starting a religion that pracites human sacrifice. Will the government not charge them with murder or manslaughter for fear of infringing on their religious freedom?I used to live 20 minutes by car from Bountiful. I would love to see an end to this bizzare practice. There are other countries that allow poligamy, go there. It's time for Canada to step up and stop people from breaking the law and claim it is their right to do so.

david
said
0 0

If all are of legal age and they are marrying of their own VOLITION, than it is absolutely none of our business. The Justice Minister is speaking from his own Christian background. Keep religion out of government. If legal and willing adults, then butt out. The women look after each other and each others' children - it sounds rather nice in some ways. I do question the sanity of the men who want a housefull of women who can easily keep HIM in line!

Ottawa_Man
said
0 0

So...... you can have as many girlfriends/boyfriends as you want, at the same time and live with them all under the same roof and have as many kids as you want with them, just don't marry more than one. Is that what the government is saying? Doesn't make much sense to me

Steve
said
0 0

I've got a better idea; how about "governments messing around with religious institutions and civil contractual arrangements like marriage has 'no place in Canada'." Let me get this straight (pun intended) two men can marry each other, but three can't? Who are they trying to kid. I predict in the end, when this crashes and burns, both left and right will blame 'the courts'. Thanks for tossing away millions of dollars on a lost cause.

Portes
said
0 0

I support the Minister's approach and I agree with him. I know that if I came home and told my wife that I had another wife what would happen,as is the case with most Canadian women. They are right, a man can't be faithful to 2 women at the same time, as somewhere along the line one will get more attention than the other and then all hell will break out. I would not want to be around when that happens as I think that most men would feel the same way

Alex (Toronto)
said
0 0

Religious freedom allows people to believe what they wish, but it does not grant anyone exemptions from criminal law in terms of behavior that harms others.It is clear that what is happening in Bountiful is not about acts between consenting adults or about the modern definition of marriage as creating mutual rights and obligations between individuals. This one-sided subjugation of women has nothing to do with "marriage" as defined in law. If three wives of a man all divorced him and claimed 50% of his property, how could he meet all those obligations?Our society does acknowledge different levels of maturity relating to different levels of complexity in social interaction. There may be a time where society needs to acknowledge multiple relationships, but the age limit on such should be at least 21 years old, to ensure real consent of all parties.

PBW
said
0 0

P_B Toronto notes "Why not make everything legal? Prostitution, drug dealing, etc., etc., when it comes right down to it everything is a breach of someone's rights ", and another poster points out that polygamy is contrary to the UN protocol to which Canada is a signatory.

Others claim that polygamy is a right between consenting adults, while yet more defend the rights of religious groups to practice polygamy. But no poster has bothered to defend or refute any other reason for polygamy. If we determine that polygamy is not a right, and that our secular laws must prevail over religious practice, what reason is left to support polygamy? I suspect - though I do not KNOW - that the practice arose in tribes that had to fight for survival, and constant skirmishes and minor wars brought about the need to breed males to defend the tribe. Given that the fighters were the young men, it would have been the older males having multiple wives, who bore the future fighters.Since that reason is barely tenable in the twentieth century - though some in war-torn nations might disagree - I see no reason why our laws should not reflect our adherence to the UN protocol and draft marriage laws in such a way that Charter claims of "rights" in this instance be disallowed, and our civil laws take precedence over religion in EVERY case.

JB
said
0 0

Hypothetically, if it is legal, that means companies who offer benefits to the families of the employees now have to pay for these "extra" wives? that means the premiums go higher and GUESS who pays for that? take a guess.

worser
said
0 0

Religion ruins everything. (yes, even yours)

Marce
said
0 0

Rights and freedoms have to have rules,otherwise we would all own a gun and we could kill ANYONE whose disagrees with us.

polypure
said
0 0

Forcing young girls into underage marriage is already a crime so arrest them on those charges. If consenting adults want to engage in polygamy, it is no one else's business.I am a poly living with 2 bisexual women, I fear if section 293 is upheld they could come after me. If this only applies to Mormons, since we are Catholic, I guess we would be in the clear.However does this mean Mormonism is off limits to our family? If we convert to LDS, would we then be subject to arrest under 293?

reidjr
said
0 0

But where do we draw the line does freedoms of relgion trump canadian law not matter what.

Jack, Hamilton
said
0 0

Interesting. He might want to talk to his immigration minister about not letting in THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of people every year from nations where polygamy is acceptable. Or does he not realize that changing the nature of the population that dramatically will likely lead to drastic and unpredictable changes in the basic law of the country.

john Morley
said
0 0

The polygamy charge was too contentious to be successful. If these men are are spiritual leaders and teachers why were they not charged with the same crimes that regular teachers and priests are when they take sexual advantage of their teenage wards. JHM

Andre in Halifax
said
0 0

Certainly in interesting issue. I do not like the argument that poligamy should be illegal because it goes against "Canadian values". Wasn't there a town in Quebec that tried to enshrine it's local values and got it's nuckles rapped pretty hard for it? One of the commenters said "If they make Poligamy legal I hope they let women marry as many guys as they want and see how the men like that." My thought is "Why not?". If that is how the group views it's marriage then good for them, more love to go around. HOWEVER! IF anyone is forcing marriage on underaged girls (or boys for that matter) or creating a community that brainwashes it's people into thinking they must submit to this, then the law should come down on them. Let's keep an open mind, but let's also protect those who are vulnerable. Laws should reflect reality and protect people from abuse while leaving people the freedom to decide for themselves how best to live their lives.

Ga�ts
said
0 0

Hopefully, people will start to uphold Canadian laws instead of constantly trying to undo them [I won't hold my breadth].When you remove the standard of morality, there is no longer a defined line between right and wrong and what's moral and immoral. It saddens me that a lot people have started a habit of believing that anything goes which leaves them with no self-respect or dignity only to end up passing this belief down to their children.

Kevin
said
0 0

Deuteronomy 12:88 �You shall not do according to all that we are doing here today, everyone doing whatever is right in his own eyes,...Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice. Proverbs 21:2 Every way of a man is right in his own eyes, but the Lord weighs the heart. 1 Peter 3:12 For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayer. But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.�

tc
said
0 0

I don't know whether any of these wifes are underaged and forced into the marriage but I am sure they are raised to think that this is the way it should be (brainwashed?).

Like any other children growing up their perspective on life has alot todo with how they were raised and what they were taught. If all their life they have been told they must marry these guys and it is normal for them to have multiple wives than that is how they will think. Personnally, I think it is a way for these guys to have themselves a small harem and hide behind the religious freedom bs to do so.

CAl_anotherCanadian
said
0 0

The government has better things to do than this. This "justice" minister obviously has an agenda. If the polygamous relationships are working out for those involved then let it be. Subjugation of the masses of Canadian to the rule of law by a handful of CLOWNS back east is what is really wrong here!My best advice for the "justice" minister is to seek out your physician, maybe he can determine the cause of your anal retentive mentality.

L L
said
0 0

So long as the girls in these "consentual" relationships are 18 or over I dont see a problem with this. Same goes if some woman wants five husbands to support her and please her needs. This is supposed to be a free country after all. If they are under 18, this is rape and unlawful confinement and should be stopped immediately.

PVT
said
0 0

Gay marriage used to be illegal too. Give it a couple more years and polygamy will be permissable - there is no doubt about that. After that, who knows? Child marriage? Inter-species marriage? It's a slippery slope people and like it or not - we are on it.

simon
said
0 0

Need CLARIFICATION here. Can somebody help?Polygamy = One man with more than one wife.Polyandry = One woman with more than one husband.Are these two definitions correct?If Polygamy is illegal, Is Polyandry Legal?

CK
said
0 0

First off, let me be clear. I am against polygamy.However, since Canada decided to redefine marriage, citing violiation of chart of rights and protection of minorities, they have to apply the same arguement to polygamy. Muslim men are allowed to have 4 wives, and other religions promote polygamy. Are they not minorities? Shouldn't their rights and freedom be protected? The moment Canada legalized same sex marriage, I knew this day will come.

Daniel
said
0 0

Historically - from my understanding - polygamy is less about religion and more about building up populations for greater chance of conquest. Five men of the same thinking having 4 wives and 4 kids for each wife. I doesn't take long before they have a little more power over 5 men with just 1 wife...etc...etc.

The Truth Hurts!
said
0 0

I claim that any law that prohibits polygmy can be struck down in court as illegal because it infringes on personal freedoms. Even though the current Conservative government is a group of religious fanatics but clearly they are ignorant on their own bible. Jacob, the bibilical figure, was married to two women and was having sex with their maids as well. David, the person that we all name our children after his name. had a 100 wives at the same time (excellent stamina). Polygmy is needed in certain situations and whether authorities allow it or not it will continue to take place!

Em
said
0 0

Straus: Haha - what woman in her right mind would want multiple husbands?! I think one is enough for most of us ;)T: I couldn't agree more. We have to remember it's the young girls that are at risk of abuse here. And many ARE abused in Bountiful. People should read more about this. There's a book called 'Keep Sweet' - it's quite telling of all that happens in a polygamist setting, and Bountiful specifically. It's about time the government did something about this.

Jerry O'Connor
said
0 0

Finally...a government elected representative who is willing to say in black and white what needs to be said publicly about "polygamy". Hopefully with the backing of the "federal" government, the B.C. provincial attorney general will now find the strenght, courage and conviction to go forward and clean up the mess in Bountiful B.C. and anywhere else in Canada where such situations exist and continue to flourish unchallenged. The federal government must also take an active and supportive roll to see to it that justice is dispersed once and for all. Not just simply more words are needed to be added to this horrible injustice against women and children who are manipulated by the warped minds of men who hide from society to satisfy their perverted sexual and illegal desires. We need action accompanied with those words.Polygamy in Canada "HAS ALWAYS" been illegal...period More importantly, it is a crime against the children who are underaged and exploited for the sexual desires of that of the elder men of these so called communitties that force their will on minds of children and women who have been brained wash into not knowing any different.

daniel young
said
0 0

There are a number of issues at stake:1. the criminal act of abusing young girls2. having mutiple partners recognized by law3. the righs of the individual.Our society should have zero tolerence for abuse of underage girls. The men and women ochetsrating these acts should be severely punished.However, individuals should have the right to structure their lives as they wish. If a couple wishes to bring another person into their lives, they have the freedom to do so. And the law should recognize and protect this choice. Whether I agree or disagree with this choice should not matter.

Richard in Ontario
said
0 0

Once again Trudeau's Charter of Rights and Freedoms will prevail. For those that think that polygamy is not right, you might just have to relax and watch the SCC rule that it's ok... PET"S document is destroying the moral fabric of this country bit by bit.

Dean
said
0 0

So when can the Bountiful people be prosecuted or when can I sign up for an extra wife or two? Let's not have a double standard here please.

KT
said
0 0

I don't know why the government is so hung up on the Polygamy issue, they should charge them with sexual interferance of a minor and throw them in jail with all of the other pedophiles. Anyone who uses their religious influence to molest children should be charged accordingly, whether they are Catholic or Fundementalists (to name two).

MHB
said
0 0

Of course, polygmy has no place in Canada but adultery is most welcome. I really do not know if two women agreed to share one man in a big family why would this be considered a crime? We talk alot about being a free society but the reality is that we are free only to do what the others are doing!

Richard
said
0 0

The justice minister is ignorant. If men are marrying or having sex with young girls, there are already statutes on the books outlawing those criminal acts. If there's evidence of abuse, then arrest them, but don't go after people who legitimately choose to marry more than one person. One charge has nothing to do with the other. It's akin to going after the Hells Angels on tax evasion charges rather than murder - it's silly and it doesn't tackle the problem. Also, It is not the government's job to tell us who to marry and who not to marry. Marriage itself is a complete anachronism, a religious institution, so the state should stop giving special legal status to married couple regardless of the type of marriage.

Pat
said
0 0

As long as everone is of legal age, the government should not get involved period!As someone already mentioned. Any decision by the goverment to ban or restrict marrages of any type will lose in court because to the Canadian Charter of Rights.

mystic_eye_cda
said
0 0

Why is it illegal for a group of consenting adults to be married but not illegal for someone (usually a man) to have a "secret family" with kids where at least one of the partners doesn't know.If my husband and I had a friend move in to our home, that would be legal. If one or both of us had sex with the roommate that would be legal (since adultery is not a crime any more). Making polygamy illegal just give another tool to those who abuse young women. Women in abusive polygamist societies are often told that they can't leave because polygamy is illegal and they will lose custody of their kids or be thrown in jail. Sure it makes alimony and visitation decisions if a union breaks up more difficult but by that argument we shouldn't allow people who grew up in different locations to marry because if they divorce and one moves back home it would make visitation/enforcing alimony more difficult.As long as the marriage involves truly consenting adults, and there is no domestic abuse or child abuse (should there be children involved) who the heck cares? Surely society has better things to worry about than who is sleeping with whom, and what they want to call their relationship.

Rock
said
0 0

Yes I remember very well at age 12 knowing I wanted to marry the 65 year old lady next door...pity there was a law against it...DOH...all you people out there suggesting it's ok for little girls to be herded and shipped around to dirty old "religious" men ought to be totally ashamed of your self. Don't be fooled into thinking it is anything less filthy, grow some brains for heavens sake.

bunny
said
0 0

I agree with him.The case in BC, young under age girls were at risk.No, this is not right, not at all

Marty
said
0 0

Poligamy is one of two things: dirty old men finding a religious sanction for enforced pedophilia or just a typical case of a man wanting to sleep with several women without consequence. Sorry to those I have just offended but this is just a big excuse to do whatever the heck they please. It is a disgusting practice that dimishes women and disrespects the bonds of marriage. Someone else pointed out the gay & lesbians, but you know what- they are only allowed to marry one person as well. And to those of you who say that consenting adults can do whatever they like, well keep this thought in mind. Our society has degraded to the point it is today because people are taught to seek their own self-gratification . No one cares about society as a whole. This practice diminishes society no matter how you spin it. Stop making excuses for all this crap and get some backbone and put an end to it.

Diane Buffel
said
0 0

If the polygamist unions are between CONSENTING adults, then that is their right. A problem arises when young girls are FORCED into unions they do not want to be in.

Wolf Starchild
said
0 0

Why is being gay okay and poly not okay?Just a few decades ago being gay would have sparked the same controversy that being poly does today.Polygamy is a choice, and we should be able to control our own lives and relationships the way we choose.They say "Polygamy is the new gay"

Ryan
said
0 0

Religion excuses nothing. That said, where's the immorality in a marriage of any sort? What happens between a married couple, trio, octet, etc. is their business, and nobody else.If there is coercion, abuse, etc, then those are crimes in and of themselves, and should be prosecuted. But what if the polygamous family are not members of some weird religious sect. Say there IS no coercion, or abuse. Say there's just a loving, honest relationship between a man and his spouses: why should this be forbidden?One commenter noted: "Some countries alow it but, so they should go there."Imagine that: citizens having to flee Canada for their freedom to live their private live, flee Canada to pursue religious freedom, to the lands of liberty in the middle east.Is that so far fetched as to be laughable, or so close to home that it hurts?

B. Kelley, Ontario
said
0 0

It was bound to happen. Once we foolishly allowed for legal homosexual marriage we opened the doors to just about every other permutation from polygamy to child/adult marriage to incestuous marriage. The arguments that supported the same-gender marriage argument can be used to support all the others. This was predicted by constitutional experts and it is highly likely that the SCC will be forced by our fatally flawed constitution to side with the "anything goes" crowd. This will be just one more loop in the downward spiral into moral oblivion.

Jancis M. Andrews
said
0 0

On 18 October 2002 Canada ratified the Protocol on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and is legally obliged to uphold it. CEDAW states that polygamy contravenes women's equality rights and also harms their children. Women Living Under Muslim Law are also petitioning their governments to end this ancient Third World practice, where men treat women as sexual collectibles and reduce them to the status of concubines in harems. But this is Canada, not Saudi Arabia or Burundi, and we have a Charter that guarantees women equality with men. Polygamy should be kicked into the garbage can of history, where it should have been dumped years ago.

straus
said
0 0

It seems anything goes these days. It is scary to think of what's going to be "acceptable" two or three generations down the line.

Theiss
said
0 0

I read comments here to legalize polygamy, and I'm hoping that they are all coming from self-serving men.I am a man, and I completely disagree with the notion of allowing polygamy.But should the law is passed to allow polygamy, I certainly hope that it will also allow women to have multiple partners.Fair is fair. See how you guys like that..!

Tim
said
0 0

Good on you, Mr. Nicholson and the Conservative government! There was never even a question on this issue!

B. Lang
said
0 0

Notice how with these religions that practice this that it is always the man that can have mutiple wives and never the women having multiple husbands, where's the fairness in that. That fact alone should make this practice in Canada against the law.

sebbie
said
0 0

Well this is what happens once we opened pandora's box... now it becomes a slippery slope we try to climb out of..

T
said
0 0

I think a lot of people don't realize that it isn't women forced into polygamy (in most cases). It's young girls, who are uneducated and therefore have very little knowledge of anything else.By the time some of these girls are 17, they are pregnant with their third child. In theory, yes polygamy should be legal but the reality is that older white men are forcing it upon people (girls) through lack of education. Not to mention, the majority of these older men, want the young girls to themselves and throw a lot of young males off the compounds.So how do you regulate that if you make it legal? Comparing gay marriage to current practices of polygamy is like comparing apples and oranges. One is through consent and love and the other is from 'powerful' men telling young women what to do.

ss
said
0 0

While I certainly agree with the justice ministry, I�m sure our judges will have other ideas. If not now then later. Since the courts have already �re-defined� marriage once in this country, at some point in time I�m sure they will do so again, this time to allow multiple partners. How can they not? Marriage was �re-defined� as a case of a rights issue to allow people to marry whoever they wanted regardless of gender. How can the courts deny HOW MANY partners people want to marry (regardless of gender)?For those of you who disagree with this argument, go back ten years and see the reaction of same sex marriage and how farfetched that notion was at that time. Since the courts have given themselves the power to change social �norms� in this country, polygamy WILL happen. If not now, then later due to the precedent already set by same sex marriage.

PB_Toronto
said
0 0

Why not make everything legal? Prostitution, drug dealing, etc., etc., when it comes right down to it everything is a breach of someone's rights and over the past few years I have seen the issue of rights become so skewed from common sense or public interest, I have to question Canada's moral fortitude. I hate to see what we become in 50 to 100 years. Elightened or an immoral debauchery? I personally think the latter.

Winnie Hfx.
said
0 0

Whatever the laws are, I believe Polygamy should be outlawed. In Canada one wife, one husband, or two partners is the way it should be, it must be hard on the children when they are all from different mothers with only 1 father, doesn't make sense to me. Some countries alow it but, so they should go there.

DP
said
0 0

I think the government has no right to tell individuals on how to live their lives as long as there is no harm being done to anyone. So let it be unless someone in the relationship or close by screams abuse! Ignore the religious dogma and the need top control everything.

Edm Vic
said
0 0

Who are we to judge what is right and what is wrong? We allow gays/lesbians to marry but that is where we draw the line? As long as it is between consenting adults (18 & over) than it is time that we as a country & government keep our nose out of every bodies business.

Jaid in Toronto
said
0 0

Religious freedom is okay, but if it is known that this practice of polygamy is used to force say women into marriage (and they don't want), then this would be grounds to a possible criminal act. As much religious freedom one can have, you must also give those under your religion freedom to decide themselves what's best for them.You can practice your religion as long as it is not criminal in nature.

Today's Top Stories

Ian Lafreniere of the Montreal police speaks about the identity of the dismembered victim and the ongoing manhunt for Luka Magnotta, Friday, June 1, 2012.

Dismembered victim was Chinese student Jun Lin: Police

More 16 9

A picture of Luka Magnotta, taken from luka-magnotta.com

LIVE CHAT: Mind of a Killer - What drives psychopaths?

Mohammad Mahjoub is shown in this undated handout photo. Suspected terrorist Mahjoub has been ordered released from custody by a Federal Court judge pending a review of his case. (THE CANADIAN PRESS / HO)

11 lawyers, clerks ordered off national security case

Most Viewed News Stories

View More News Stories

Most Talked about Stories

Please let's not even entertain any protectionist responses to this issue. Canadian consumers go south to shop because of the cheaper prices. How about resorting to competitive pricing as a solution...that will keep Canadian shoppers at home.

George Nippers Bruce Mines On

New cross-border shopping rules take effect Friday

Got something to say? Share on CTV News

Pick your location

Top Stories -

News Sections

News Programs

Features

Browse: