I would tell them that their practices are misogynistic and using the bible to justify their lifestyle is tenuous and opportunistic.
Though I don't think my views would be a vote getter.

Polygamy specifically isn't sexist. Polygamy is multiple partners. You would be referring to polygyny, one male and multiple females. There is also polyandry, one female and multiple males. These terms become important when you look at other species. The set up usually depends heavily on environmental resources, but cost of reproductive energy and parental care.

I didn't read the the other questions, but if no one is being abused, I don't see why they couldn't hold office. What you do behind closed doors is you business.

I'm pretty sure the communities in Utah are set up with one man and multiple women. I'm ready to be corrected if this is not the case but if it is, it's men behaving like pigs. IMO.

I dont see where a dude would find the time to hold office in this situation.

I was just putting that out there ceej. I hate this use of terminology.

Sometimes I want to just say the men are pigs, but in most cultures (maybe not Utah ) those men have to provide for all of their wives and cannot have more wives than they can afford. That is why most men in countries that practice polygyny only have one wife, cause culture or religion sometimes goes so far as to say each wife has to have her own household. I think it might be a form of socialism, where the man with the most provides for more wives and children.

I try to keep and open mind.

Could be rich CG...who knows?

*use = misuse

I don't think religion should come into place so I don't know how to address those questions - especially as it is a choice to marry several women and be able to support them. Unless the women are being forced to marry I don't feel it is right to attack them- even if I feel it is wrong and very misogynistic towards women that want to be in a monogamous relationship. Polygamy is still illegal isn't it? Or can you legally marry one person and just have those other "wives" live with you? In any case- I do wonder how a man with several wives and children possibly has time to run for office.

I think that as long as the polygamous relationships are consensual, between adults, and part of a system free from systemic spousal or (especially) child abuse, then they should be granted legal status and rights. That would certainly help to do away with the current abuse of the welfare system which I've read is practiced quite widely in fundamentalist, polygamist communities. It's unfortunate, however, that child marriage does seem to be a part of the system, at least for some. That's not acceptable.

I don't believe that this was about men in the polygamist communities running for office. I think the story suggested that for the first time the religious leaders of these communities are trying to provide a voters guide for their people. This is huge. For the first time they are reaching outside of their insular communities. Although I am a little disappointed that the editors of Sugar were not more specific about what communities that they are talking about. I live in Utah and in the open spaces of southern and central Utah there are many different communities some based on fundamental Mormon beliefs and some based on fundamentalist Christian beliefs. So blanket statements about a large and varied population can make it hard to form a valid opinion.

And no, in case anyone is wording, I do not agree with these communities. But as long as everyone is of legal age, and there is no abuse either of individuals or the state welfare system, then they can have at it. Sounds to confusing to me.

They should be allowed to run for office, but shouldn't whine at the intense media coverage their lifestyle would bring. And as long as a group isn't suspected of breaking the law, public safety funds shouldn't be disproportionately spent - but when there is reason to believe that child welfare laws are being broken (for example) then the government should spend what it has to. States just shouldn't be stupid, like Texas was.

I'm sorry but I think these communities treat women appallingly. You may say it's consensual adults but when the woman is brought up in such a cult they are groomed to believe that what they are embarking on is right and sanctified by god.

I think if it is between consenting adults, people can do what they wish. If I don't agree with that lifestyle I don't have to live it.

Obama and McCain should have answered this questionnaire simply because if you keep alienating groups of people because you don't practice the same religion as they do/ or believe what they believe you aren't promoting change, or putting country first, you helping continue a narrow minded view of what America should be. Polygamy is spoken of in the Bible as well as other religious text and is one of the oldest forms of marriage. I personally wouldn't be a polygamist, however if consenting adults choose to participate in this form of marriage they should have every right to do so and should be able to run for office and raise their families without being persecuted. And to lump all polygamy under the small umbrella of what you see on t.v. well is simply being uninformed there are many groups of people other than Mormons in this country that follow plural marriage they just hide it for fear of prosecution it and haven't had TV shows produced about them. What you see in the FLDS is not how many people practice plural marriage.

I see what you're saying, ceej (and I personally don't agree with the polygamous lifestyle one iota), but unfortunately I think there's only so much we can do to save people from themselves, as it were. The argument that the women can't make the proper decision for themselves because they were raised a certain way could also be made for people who do other things we don't agree with. Like, say, don't get divorced from a bad (but legal, monogamous) marriage because they were taught by their religion that divorce is against God, and etc., or pregnant girls and women who truly aren't ready for a child but carry it to term and keep it because that's what their religion says is right.

It boils down to people's rights to choose for themselves, even if we don't think they're 100% capable.

" I'm sorry but I think these communities treat women appallingly." And other groups religious and non religious don't treat women "poorly"? Can women be priest in the Catholic Church, Can a women be the Pope, I mean isn't that some how telling females that they aren't as worthy as men in a way? Again the FLDS is a relatively tiny group where religion is concerned and in some ways are unfairly portrayed I mean you would think they are about to take over the world the way people speak of them not all FLDS groups consider child marriage, incest etc appropriate behavior. Don't get my wrong I have my own beefs about some of their religious text, but at the end of the day I don't have to practice their religion of believe what they believe.

I would make the argument for abused women in terrible marriages as well. It's all abuse of women. Pedophiles groom children in much the same way.

JudeC I couldn't agree more, I was raised in church I went to Sunday School, Bible Study, and regular services from birth until age 14, that is when as a young adult I made the decision that I didn't want to practice this religion anymore even though the people I loved the most did. Women have choices, women have minds, and I don't believe there is any more "influence" in a polygamist society than any other religous society.

I think the Catholics view towards women sucks too! don't get me wrong I am not just targeting this particular group.
Anglicans that are now joining the Catholic church because they disagree with women being ordained.
Religion and it's antiquated views towards women infuriates me.
And I feel sorry for the snakes in West Virginia too.

Yes, but then do you think that, say, emotionally abusive marriages, even when the person abused chooses not to leave, should also not be recognized as marriages under the law? Or that a person should not be allowed to choose their own lifestyle because they were raised in a way that many of us believe to be bad?

I do see your points about grooming followers from a young age to accept the inequities and the various negative aspects of the lifestyle, however. But I think that the way for that to be addressed isn't by outlawing the practice of polygamy among consenting parties, but rather stricter policing of the practicing families to make sure that abuse isn't taking place.

Unfortunately we also can't decide for others whether what they teach their children (within reason) is right or wrong. Again, I don't agree with the polygamous lifestyle at all, and I do think that it's wrong on many levels based on my personal value system, but I recognize that other belief systems are as valid as mine in the eyes of an impartial law.

There is more influence because they have little contact with the outside world.

"And I feel sorry for the snakes in West Virginia too."

Nice one!

I do see that the more fundamentalist communities indoctrinate and shelter children to a far greater degree than other religions, but unfortunately (in this case) we as a nation have to be careful not to tread on freedom of expression of religion as long as no overt harm is being done to congregants or others.

I don't think it should be outlawed, that would drive it even more underground. I'm just venting.

I believe in religious tolerance, can't stand smug atheists or christians. I do think harm is being done here though, it's insidious and subtle but it's still harm

I understand, ceej.

Whenever a story about polygamy (especially that Texas story) comes out, I find myself racking my brains trying to figure out how we (as a country) could help to make sure the children aren't too brainwashed, without stepping on the Constitutionally-protected toes of the religion. It's a thorny issue.

And how to make sure they don't have to wear those appalling outfits...

Especially the bonnets!

or that poofy fringe

If people want to make a moral statement with the fashions of centuries past, I'd so much rather see them in some Victorian frills than that Little House on the Prairie roughspun nonsense

But you can buy it online
http://www.fldscrafts.com/index.php?cPath=1
they're really very modern!

They look itchy.

ITA with everything Jude said, and some others too.

I think Obama and McCain stayed away for obvious reasons though.

You KNOW there would have been a video out saying that Obama supports polygamy like 5 seconds after he turned that survey in.

I would think that the Polygamist's voter guide states that a man can have as many votes as he and his creator deem necessary to insure that their will is done.

Vote early and often polygamists - early and often.

"I dont see where a dude would find the time to hold office in this situation."

I don't think CG was referring to money.

I am with Jude on this, its a sticky issue and it has been (especially as of late) tied into the news with the Texas stories as it relates to the treatement of young women and children.

Though they practice "polygamy" the bottom line is its not, ever, one woman with loads of men. (Tsk, shame that. ) 'tis always, always, with these religions espousing (bad pun) such practices to be in the favor of the man - the man having the rights, the freedoms and the dominance under the guise of religious doctrine that still creeps me out to the core. Then there is the whole issue of children, especially young women, in these types of communities.

When does a lifestyle for adults become indoctrination of children?

Where do the lines lie between religious rights and the law, religious rights and the protection of children?

And finally, if we are going to acknowledge Mormon polygamy as a religious and/or lifestyle choice, can we deny them any right that we would extend to the gay community?

This is a tough one for me, and I can see my own bias because I am never hesitant to speak out for gay rights, and yet polygamy still gives me the heebie-harem-jeebies.

I have to think about this one awhile.