• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Bigamy laws of Texas challenged...

Scarecrow

Scarecrow

Member
I did a Google search for Texas and bigamy and the third thing I came across was this article in the San Angelo Standard Times:

FLDS to target state bigamy laws
Nielsen’s next hearing is Sept. 13

* By Matthew Waller
* San Angelo Standard Times
* Posted August 24, 2010 at 2:16 p.m., updated August 24, 2010 at 9:06 p.m.

http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2010/au ... or-oct-25/

While I consider some of the practices of the FLDS to be flawed it seems that those who understand Biblical Marriage would have a vested interest in seeing this case won by the defendant. Is there anything we can do to support the defense and therefore the decriminalization of bigamy?

Once it is decriminalized an individual living in Texas would then be able to take his second wife and attempt to get a marriage license for her. When they turn him down he will not have to worry about criminal prosecution and can therefore file suit against the state for the right to legally marry his second wife and thereby challenge the anti-polygamy laws. It seems to me that we have a considerable interest in this trial and that it could potentially lead us down the path we have been attempting to go down.

The attorney defending the case is Kent Schaffer. Please at least send him an email showing your support. I am going to ask him what I can do to help including testifying to my beliefs as a Christian if that would be of any value to their case (unlikely). Perhaps if there were biblical scholars that could give testimony that would carry more weight with the courts...

http://www.biresandschaffer.com/bio/KentSchaffer.asp
 
Scarecrow, how about we send to the lawyer the short idea/article on the freedom to assemble peaceably idea and see if that can be incorporated into his argument/brief. We could print it and mail it to the office there or email it do whatever.

The lawyer probably already has thought about this. But then again, there is a chance like me that he too has overlooked it. It is so easy to focus on the freedom of religion piece and to miss the assembly piece or to even associate it with the right to petition piece even though some cases have shown the phrase to distinct on it own.

Whatcha think?
 
I just used the email link on his page and sent this...

It is my understanding that you will be representing Wendell Nielsen. I am interested in seeing you successfully defend this case. I am and have been a Christian for many years. I am not a biblical scholar, but from the thorough studies I have done I truly believe that from a biblical perspective there is nothing sinful about a man having more than one wife, neither can I find any evidence condemning it in the scriptures. A few publications I found interesting that may be helpful to you are "Polygamy, Bigamy and Human Rights Law" by Samuel Chapman..."The History and Philosophy of Marriage or, Polygamy and Monogamy Compared" published 1869 (very good historical information), and "Man and Woman in Biblical Law" by Tom Shipley. I have all three in pdf format and could email them or burn them on a disc and mail them if you would like me too. If there is any way I can be of service to you or this case please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best wishes, and God's speed!

I would highly recommend that you contact him and present the information we have discussed. Perhaps we will meet in Texas soon... : )
 
I just came from doing a little research for "other interested parties". I live in the same city where Rozita Swinton lived when she made her false report that caused the raid in Texas. I verified that one of the two addresses listed for her doesn't even exist, and I am now in the process of working with an attorney to discover who paid CASH to bail her out of prison. This is getting very interesting, and I will do everything possible to see to it that the government does not get away with this and I hope the authorities involved become publicly shamed in the end. In 1953 there was a raid in Arizona that raised such public outcry that public officials did not get voted back into office. We need to see similar results as well as the decriminalization of the bigamy laws. The raid was based on a false report and therefore the search warrant and eventually the raid itself were illegal. The report should have been verified as authentic before any search warrant was issued. The courts however are still considering the evidence acquired during the illegal raid as legally obtained - that should tell you there are some people very afraid to admit the government screwed up on a large scale. If they get away with this none of are safe even in our own homes. I have a vested interest in this case being defended successfully for many reasons, and none of them include condoning the actions of the FLDS.
 
I just received this reply from messages I sent with information or links to information that may prove helpful to the bagamy trial in Texas...



Thank you for sending me all of this information. Feel free to send us whatever you have and we will read and possibly use it in trial.

Best regards,










Kent A. Schaffer
Bires & Schaffer
JP Morgan/Chase Bank Bldg.
712 Main Street, 31st Floor
Houston, Texas 77002

713-228-8500
kentschaffer@gmail.com
www.biresandschaffer.com
 
Kent Schaffer who is the lead attorney in this case to challenge the Constitutionality of the bigamy (and therefore the anti-polygamy laws as well) notified me that the best way to communicate with him is through his direct email address:

kentschaffer@gmail.com

Any thoughts, resources, or testimony will be very welcome by Kent and helpful in his arguments.
 
Interesting news today...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39064659/ns/us_news/

Seems that California Proposition 8, which a Federal Judged ruled unconstitutional, will not be challenged after all...

So now if we are able to support the efforts in Texas to have the bigamy laws overturned...does this not also set precedence for our interests as well?
 
Scarecrow said:
Interesting news today...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39064659/ns/us_news/

Seems that California Proposition 8, which a Federal Judged ruled unconstitutional, will not be challenged after all...
Click to expand...
:?: i think that the article said the exact opposite, that the federal judges ruling will not be challenged. or am i missing something again?
 
Call me paranoid, but I just really think it's a bad idea to try and ride the coat tails of the homosexuals.
 
Sorry, my statement was a bit confusing. The ruling of the Federal Judge that overturned Proposition 8 will not be challenged.

Unfortunately to most it appears that we are riding on their coattails. I think rulings like those of this Federal Judge, and the decisions by the Governor and Attorney General lend credibility to our arguments though. It will be more difficult to rule against us without looking like hypocrites themselves since:

1) Polygyny has been practiced throughout recorded history. It's a common thread between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
2) There are laws that protect individuals from under age marriage, abuse, etc...that apply to all forms of marriage.
3) There are numerous productive families of this nature currently practicing this form of marriage.
4) The original laws prohibiting Biblical Marriage were done so to force an errant religious doctrine on an entire population.
5) Legalization would prevent the widespread abuse of plural "single mothers" receiving public assistance.
 
I agree that it is a bad idea to link up with the homosexual agenda, but it is also obvious that the efforts to break up the monogamy monopoly by homosexuals will (inadvertently) help polygamy. Homosexuals like to distance themselves from this because they believe (and perhaps rightly so) that it hurts their case with the monogamists. My impression is that homosexuals like the monogamy monopoly. They do not want to break it up so much as they want to get in on what they perceive is a good deal (government protected marriage).
 
but it is also obvious that the efforts to break up the monogamy monopoly by homosexuals will (inadvertently) help polygamy.
Click to expand...
so i cringe and feel dirty when anything within me cheers as they score any points against the monogamaniacs. if the state would only realize that it has no business regulating relationships, but they will never give up the power.
 
"they will never give up the power"

So true...our only hope is that we are able to somehow transition away from "marriage" and have all unions of any nature simply be recorded as civil contracts...one can only hope...and a little effort doesn't hurt either...
 
I agree that not getting too close to the same sex agenda is the right approach. However, If the street needs fixed in front of your house and you and your gay neighbors call in to the local government to get the street fixed, it does not meen that you are living on gay street, just that your street needs fixed. And if it gets fixed it is ok to thank God for the better streets. Domestic partner laws that apply to everyone could fill in a few pot holes.
 
I find it odd, that so many are ok with gays getting poly accepted on their coattails, but constantly treat obama "like a dog", who is child of poly family. Wouldn't he be obvious person to lobby for poly recognition?
 
I have been covering this and many other polygamy/polygyny news on my site at http://mrscottyl.blogspot.com The Governor of California is pro-homosexual marriage, so this is why the state will not appeal, and from what I have been told, since it was the State that was sued, they are the only ones who could appeal the verdict. No one else has the standing to do so. The problem for all of us in Texas (I am in Texas) is that the decision only applies to California because it is not being appealed. Texas is under no binding precedent in this case. As I get more info, I will be posting it on my site.

Scott
 
The rulings do not apply nationally as you point out. Perhaps the Federal Government is working behind the scenes to keep it that way. This method allows the states to appear to still have some level of autonomy and allows the people to maintain their pride in their state. Over time the Federal Government knows the individual state laws/amendments will be challenged incrementally until they reach the point that the minority few that continue to have "antiquated" laws/amendments will bow to the demands of society at large and either ignore enforcement or amend their laws/constitution.

I am eager for the day when the first state is willing to recognize a plural marriage. I will establish residence in that state (while maintaining my current properties) and take full advantage of the situation. I think that day is growing closer and closer, and at a much more rapid pace.

Clearly Obama does not oppose gay marriage, and the terminology he has used in explaining his position applies directly to plural marriage as well. 1) that no group should be singled out for persecution or legally inhibited - 1st amendment stuff, and 2) what people choose to do in their personal relationships/bedrooms is between them and not the government.
 
Clearly Obama does not oppose gay marriage, and the terminology he has used in explaining his position applies directly to plural marriage as well.
Click to expand...
there you go bringing logic to an emotional issue :D
kinda like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

your point is well made, except that the other side would need to be somewhat logical in its actions :roll:
i think that the template is:
1) judaism/christianity and their God is bad
2) anything that is in opposition to judaism/christianity and their God is good
(seems to be a somewhat common theme of some feller in the Bible with the name of lucifer)

i am not at all trying to discourage you here and i am not poking fun at what you believe might happen. i am just trying to say that when the other side will not play fair, it is like trying to nail jello to the wall.
 
I have never heard anyone in the government/lobbists/activists diss the Jews (note, not Israel, but Jewish people in general). Why are you prefixing your post with that, I think Christianity can stand alone in that regard.
 
Isabella said:
I have never heard anyone in the government/lobbists/activists diss the Jews (note, not Israel, but Jewish people in general). Why are you prefixing your post with that, I think Christianity can stand alone in that regard.
Click to expand...
how can we separate the jews from israel?
why does it make a difference that i include our predecessors who worship the same Creator?
whom akmadinnerjacket wants to wipe off of the face of the earth?
who hitler tried to wipe out?

in my little conspiracy theory there seems to be a slight connection, but hey, it is MY own little theory :D
yours can look any way that you want it to look like! ;)

btw; people who refer to their creator as "she" or the "mother god" are not included in my theory, so they are up for grabs if anyone wants them :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top