THE PRACTICE OF POLYGYNY IN AN HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT (CALIFORNIA, FOR
EXAMPLE)
COPYRIGHT (c) 1997, 2002 BY L. TYLER
P.O.Box 620763
San Diego, CA92162-0763
oldservant8@yahoo.com
oldeservant@excite.com
This file may be copied and distributed publicly if it is not changed.
PART ONE OF TWO PARTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
1. A legal polygynous covenant for a polygynous union event.
2. Federal law and the practice of polygyny.
3. California law and the practice of polygyny.
4. The Biblical basis for diligent discretion in polygyny
5. Possible legal polygynous wedding covenants/contracts
AN AFFIRMATION AND COVENANT OF INTIMATE UNION FOR LIFE
*********HIS PART*****************
I,_________________, accept _______
as my own woman, before God and the angelic
witnesses here present. I do solemnly affirm,
declare and accept my responsibility before God to __________ as my
own woman, in all
honor and love, in all service and duty, in all faith and tenderness,
to live with, comfort, keep, unselfishly and compassionately cherish
_____,according to the ordinance of Jesus Christ in the holy bond of
our union before God. I accept the ordinance ofKing Jesus that
indicates that any heterosexual intimacy of ours is to be experienced
only within the holy bond of our union and according to His Word. I do
solemnly affirm, declare and accept my responsibility in our union to
be _________'s loving and faithful intimate partner, to love and to
unselfishly cherish her in plenty and in want, in joy
and grief, in health and infirmity as long as we both shall live. I
hereby leave and separate myself and my allegiance from my parents and
family to loyally bond with ________ as one in our intimate union,
submitting to each other according to the Word of God in the reverence
of God. I commit myself to her with all of my heart, to live wisely
with her; not domineering or
tyrannizing her but repectfully, unselfishly
cherishing her, feeding her the Word, holding her up in prayer, taking
care of her and humbly leading her by my example, by the grace and
enabling of Jesus Christ.
**************HER PART**********
I,_____________, accept _______________
as my own intimate partner for life, before God and the angelic
witnesses here present. I do solemnly affirm, declare and accept my
solemn responsibility in our union to ____ as my own intimate partner,
in all honor and love, in all service and duty, in all
faith and tenderness, to live with, comfort, keep, unselfishly and
compassionately cherish _____, according to the ordinance of Jesus
Christ in the holy bond of this our covenanted and intimate union. I
accept the ordinance of King Jesus that indicates that any
heterosexual intimacy or ours is to be
experienced only within the holy bond of our
intimate and covenanted union and according to His Word. I do solemnly
affirm, declare and accept my solemn responsibility in our union to be
______'s loving and faithful marital partner, to love and to
unselfishly cherish him in plenty and in want, in joy and grief, in
health and infirmity as long as we both shall live. I hereby leave and
separate
myself and my allegiance from my parents and
family to loyally bond with ________ as one in
our intimate union, submitting to each other
according to the Word of God in the reverence
of God. I commit myself to him with all of my
heart, to live wisely with him to follow his lead in the Lord, showing
him honor and respect in all matters.
************(in unison) ************
We covenant before God and all present, that we are intimate partners
for life, bound together in our solemn and intimate union to be one
flesh in the Lord until death part us. We covenant before God and His
angels that it is our solemn and lifelong responsibility to
unselfishly and compassionately cherish each other in our intimate
union according to His Word, the Holy Bible, and to His glory and
honor. Pray for us.
_________________________
The Couple's Signatures and Date
Witnessed by God and His holy angels.
or he writes out his part to her and she writes out her part to him
and sign them.
INTRODUCTION OF THE LAWS AGAINST POLYGYNY
Bigamy is the "criminal offense of willfully and knowingly contracting
a second marriage (or going through the form of a second marriage)
while the first marriage, to the knowledge of the offender, is still
subsisting and undissolved.">a Bigamy is the "state of a man who has
two wives, or of a woman who has two husbands living at the same time.">a
"A married person is guilty of bigamy, a misdemeanor, if he contracts
or purports to contract another marriage, unless at the time of the
subsequent marriage . . . . . the actor reasonably believes that he is
legally eligible to remarry." Model Penal Code #230.1 >a [>a Deluxe
Black's Law Dictionary, p. 163, West Publishing Co. St. Paul, MN]
Polygamy: "A person is guilty of polygamy, a felony of the third
degree, if he marries or cohabits with more than one spouse at a time
in purported exercise of the right of plural marriage. The offense is
a continuing one until all cohabitation and claim of marriage with
more than one spouse terminates. This section does not apply to
parties to a polygamous marriage, lawful in the country of which they
are residents or nationals, while they are in transit through or
temporarily visiting this state." Model Penal Code #230.1>b [>b Deluxe
Black's Law Dictionary, p. 1159, West Publishing Co. St.
Paul, MN]
The sticky issue in the WEST/OCCIDENT is that "a married person is
guilty of bigamy, a misdemeanor,"
a) if he signifies that he is contracting another marriage while he is
still married to another.
b) if he implies that he is contracting another marriage while he is
still married
c) if he claims or professes to be contracting another marriage while
still married
d) if he engages in a wedding/marriage given in other than the exact
words.
In the WEST/OCCIDENT, "person is guilty of polygamy, a felony of the
third degree , if he marries . . . more than one spouse at a time"
a) signifying that is exercising the right of plural marriage.
b) implying that he is exercising the right of plural marriage.
c) claiming/professing to be exercising the right of plural marriage.
d) engaging in the exercise of the right of plural marriage using
other than the exact words of marriage or of a wedding.
In the WEST/OCCIDENT, A "person is guilty of polygamy, a felony of the
third degree , if he . . . cohabits with more than one spouse at a time"
a) signifying that is exercising the right of plural marriage.
b) implying that he is exercising the right of plural marriage.
c) claiming/professing to be exercising the right of plural marriage.
d) engaging in the exercise of the right of plural marriage using
other than the exact words of marriage or of a wedding.
I understand these provisions to mean that anyone who wants to
practice polygyny in the WEST/OCCIDENT must not publicly, or in writing,
a) signify that he/she is contracting another marriage while still
married to another.
b) imply that he/she is contracting another marriage while still married
c) claim or profess to be contracting another marriage while still married
d) engage in a "wedding/marriage" given in other than the exact words
(see the alternatives to the use of loaded words like
"wedding/marriage" in union celebrations or union ceremonies)
e) signify that he/she is exercising "the right of plural marriage."
f) imply that he/she is exercising "the right of plural marriage."
g) claim/profess to be exercising "the right of plural marriage."
h) engage in the exercise of "the right of plural marriage" using
other than the exact words of "marriage" or of a "wedding". (There
must be no claim to the right of plural marriage in the union
celebration, no claim to the right to exercise plural marriage in the
union celebration, no use of synonyms for "marriage" [matrimony,
wedlock, etc.] or for "wedding" [marriage, nuptials etc.]).
i) cohabit with more than one spouse at a time, signifying that he/she
is exercising the right of plural marriage.
j) cohabit with more than one spouse at a time,implying that he is
exercising the right of plural marriage.
k) cohabit with more than one spouse at a time, claiming/professing to
be exercising the right of plural marriage.
l) cohabit with more than one spouse at a time, engaging in the
exercise of the right of plural marriage using other than the exact
words of marriage or of wedding for the relationship or event. (There
must be no claim to the right of plural marriage in the cohabitation,
no claim to the right to exercise plural marriage in the cohabitation,
no use of synonyms for "marriage" [matrimony, wedlock, etc.] or for
"wedding" [marriage, nuptials etc.] in the cohabitation.)
"The showing of minimal numbers of prosecutions does not establish an
abandonment of the State's laws or an irrational revival of them here.
. . . . Mere failure to prosecute other offenders is no basis for a
finding of denial of equal protection." (See U.S. v. Salazar, 1983. P.
107) The courts follow the waves and tides of society. Right now it is
neither important , popular or cost efficient to prosecute bigamy/
polygyny cases now. The tide can turn at any time. If you believe in
the cycles of our culture as I do, you now how well the cultural tide
can turn. Consider the following:
1700- 1730, 1800 - 1830 and 1900- 1930 were times of majority rule and
the minorities be damned. If you were a woman or a minority, watch out
and step back. It was a time of heavy handed rule by the majority for
the majority. Many of the majority indulged themselves excessively and
at the expense of the minorities. It was a cultural Catholic and WASP
world, a time of ghettos for the minorities, who were thankful when
the majority left them alone or ignored them.
THE PENDULUM HAD SWUNG TO FAR CONSERVATIVE SIDE.
1730 -1750, 1830 -1850 and 1930 - 1950 were periods when the
government faced a series of crises that kept it from dealing with
major wrongs in society. The government was doing well if it could
just keep the lid on the pot of society. It was not a time of minority
rights because women, Jews, minority races and ethnic minorities
essentially had no government recognized rights other than those for
all in the Constitution, but their rights were ignored in "benign
neglect". The government was too busy coping with wars, collapsing
economies and a struggle to keep the country unified.
1750 - 1770, 1850-1870 and 1950-1970 were periods of great social
turmoil and dramatic cultural crises resulting in legislated reforms
and moves towards democratic goals.
THE PENDULUM HAD SWUNG TO THE LIBERAL SIDE.
1770 - 1790, 1870 - 1890 and 1970 - 1990 were periods of general
malaise and disillusionment with the reforms and democratic advances
of the '50's - '70's. The dreams died and many of the new and more
democratic laws suffered from "benign" neglect. An erosion of personal
liberties began, but things didn't become as bad as they were before
the reforms. The people turn inward, more preoccupied with themselves
and their issues than the culture's issues. They werere burnt out and
tired of cultural reforms and movements.
1790 - 1810, 1890 - 1910 and 1990 -2010, if the cycle continues to
hold true, the rights of minorities will almost be totally neglected
by an exhausted and self-centered population AND THE PENDULUM WILL
SWING TO THE HARD CONSERVATIVE SIDE. The individual will
have to survive the best he can in a cold and uncaring world---unless
China or Russia ignite World War III and the great war of Revelations
Six ushers in the Tribulation, with scenario #1, one third of the
world's population dying within a month of the outbreak of The War; or
scenario #2, one third of the midEast's population dying within one
month of such a war.
Whatever the scenario, we who believe in polygyny, and especially
those who practice it need to think defensively and think survival in
a world that grows colder, harder, more insensitive and more evil day
by passing day. If I were practicing polygyny, especially if I were
raising children in polygyny, I would take every precaution, every
defensive measure and exercise every discretion to protect my loved
ones and my home from the packs of wolves and hyenas that are out
there waiting for us to make an unnecessary mistake that would expose
and our loved ones to their fangs, to the great pain and loss of our
loved ones. We must be wiser than serpents and foxes, yet harmless as
doves and sheep, remembering how easy doves and sheep die. Thank God
that we are doves and sheep indwelled and shepherded by the Lord Jesus
Christ, the thankful possessors of eternal life and the hope of living
eternally with the God who is Unselfish and Compassionate
Cherishing, Truth, Light, Life and the Way.
1. FEDERAL LAW AND THE PRACTICE OF POLYGYNY
Federal Law (Federal Reporter, 2d Series, #760, pp. 1065-1071):"Utah
was justified, by compelling interest, in upholding and enforcing ban
on plural marriage to protect monogamous marriage relationships."
(U.S.C.A. Const. Amends 1,14)
In Reynolds v. U.S., 98 US (8 otto) 145, 25, L.ED. 244 (1878; p.
1068), "the Supreme Court affirmed a criminal conviction of a Mormon
for practicing polygamy, and rejected the argument that Congress'
prohibition of polygamy violated the defendant's right to the free
exercise of religion." In the 1972 Yoder case, "The Supreme Court has
recognized the continued validity of [the] REYNOLDS [case]."
In YODER (p.1069), the court cited REYNOLDS in support of the
proposition that it "is true that activities of individual's, even
when religiously based, are often subject to regulation by the states
in the exercise of this undoubted power to promote the .. . . .
general welfare, or the Federal Government in the exercise of its
delegated powers." The Reynolds case against polygyny/bigamy was
reaffirmed in 1983 (Bob Jones Univ. v. U.S.).
>>The Court has already made up its mind that, in the USA, you may not
practice polygyny as a right in the free exercise of your religion.
"Since Yoder [1972], the Court has said that statutes "making bigamy a
crime surely cut into an individual's freedom to associate, but few
today seriously claim such statutes violate the First Amendment or any
Constitutional provision." YODER p. 1069
In 1978, the Steward and J. & Powell decisions concurred in the
judgment that the "state may legitimately say that no one who has a
living husband or wife can marry. . . . the state has the undeniable
interest in insuring that its rules of domestic relations reflect
widely held values of its people. . . . . " YODER p. 1069 Majority
rule, or majority sentiment or majority values RULE and we all know
how the majority feels (especially the majority of women) about bigamy
and polygyny. Give this rule of law, it is futile to attempt to get
the Supreme Court, or any state, to change its provision. Bigamists
and polygynists are the minority, and neither a recognized nor a
protected minority. We must live our lives wisely in an hostile
environment, and not expect or ask for society's help or recognition.
"After Reynolds, though before Yoder, the Supreme Court upheld Mann
Act convictions for transporting at least one plural wife across
state lines either to cohabit with her or to aid another person in
such a project, despite a challenge based on the Free Exercise
Clause." (See Cleveland vs. U.S., 3294514, in 1946). p. 1070
In State v. Barlow (107 Utah 292-1944), "The Utah Supreme Court
rejected the defendant's free exercise challenge and affirmed their
convictions for cohabitating with more than one person of the opposite
sex." The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the defendant's appeal of the
Utah Supreme Court decision. p. 1070
"We find no authority for extending the Constitutional right to
privacy so far that it would protect polygamous marriages. We decline
to do so." 1985, see Roe v. Wade. p. 1070
>>>In such a state or where ever there exits a law against cohabiting
with more than one person of the opposite sex, wisdom would decree
that each wife would have to have her own studio/cottage/cabin
following the African polygyny model where the husband would make
the rounds visiting his wives dwelling in a fair and equitable manner
to fulfill his "duty of marriage" with each. With today's economy and
prices two female mates (of their own man) might go together and live
in a one bedroom or studio apartment. All could still come together in
one place for meals, fellowship, prayer and fun without violating the
laws against cohabiting with more than one woman. Again, I believe all
the taboo words must be religiously and conscientiously avoided (wife,
husband, marriage, wedding, spouse etc.) in such a hostile environment.
The "Constitutional right of privacy prevents the state from
criminalizing the non-prostitutional heterosexual activities of two
unmarried consenting adults when such activities occur in privacy of
home." Duling, 603 F. Supp. 960 (E.D. Va 1985). p. 1071
It behooves American polygynists that are legally married to be
legally UNMARRIED AND CONSENTING with any other covenanted sexual
partners they may have, exercising their polygyny in the privacy of
their home, sexually, verbally and editorially.
2. CALIFORNIA LAW AND THE PRACTICE OF POLYGYNY
California Law: (#284) "Every person who knowingly and willfully
marries the husband or wife of another . . . . is punishable by fine
not less than $5000 or by imprisonment in state prison." (7/1/'97)
Again we see the need for all parties to a polygynous relationship
should be legally single, not legally married. It is simply a
precaution against this kind of prosecution/persecution. State prison
is Hell and is daily filled with life threatening experiences, even on
the less violent classification levels, and should be avoided at all
costs.
"Bigamy is punishable by a fine not exceeding $10,000 or by
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state
prison." (#283 Calif. Penal Code; 9/27/'83; operative 1/1/'84) One
should not be so selfish and cavalier as to jeopardize their
family unity, their emotional, intimate and sexual union, for the
"cause" of polygyny. It is not worth the hardship of loss and
separation to you and your loved ones to be put in jail for practicing
your belief in polygyny that violates the specific laws of society. It
is a wiser course to practice one's faith, including polygyny,
"striving to live peacably with all men", seeking to give offense to
no one, by practicing it as instructed in Romans 14, i.e. privately ,
discretely and with great discernment so as not to unnecessarily
stumble or offend our weaker brethren who are still bound by the laws
and traditions of men.
To pracitce polygyny in California today, you must not:
>> 1. Be legally married to more than one "wife" at the same time (CA
Criminal Law #820)
>> 2. Be married in an officially recognized ceremony to more than one
"wife" at one time (CA Criminal Law 822; Fam Law #66))
>> 3. Be married in a state or publicly recognized common-law marriage
to more than one wife at the same time (CL 822; Fam Law
#65 & #66). Public here means the general public, not polygynous
families who join you in a covenanting event.
>> 4. Be married by state license to more than one mate at the same
time (CL822)
>> 5. Be solemnized in marriage to more than one wife at the same time
by an official recognized by the state (CL822). If the
polygynous "marriage" is "solemnized" by ceremony, rite or ritual, the
words "wife", "husband" and "marriage" should be avoided carefully (a
good thesaurus will help. See the
appendix. See Fam Law#65).
>> 6. Be authenticated in marriage to more than one wife at the same
time (in polygyny) in any way acceptable to the state
(CL822)
>> 7. File the marriage certificate of registry with the state, for
your polygynous marriage. (CL822)
>> 8. Conclude in an official civil manner or legally your "marriage"
in polygyny. (CL824)
>> 9. Publicly cohabit as husband and wife, publicly and mutually,
assuming marital rights, duties and obligations, including
sexual relations with more than one wife at the same time.(CL825)
[Public here is the general public, not one's polygynous associates.
Even though they may not cohabit as husband and wife, they may cohabit
as man and woman, man and his own woman, exclusive lovers, exclusive
love/life partners, exclusively devoted lovers, a man and his covenant
woman/lover/partner/pal, or viceversa for all the above (e.g. a woman
and her own man).]
>> 10. Have the reputation in a community of being married, nor deport
yourselves in the neighborhood as husband and wife (Fam Law 61 & 62).
Specifically you must not allow/permit/encourage common, general,
uniform, and undivided repute among witnesses/
neigbors that you are married to more than one mate at the same time.
(Fam Law#65, Re Estate of Gill; Hite v. Hite; Re Estate of
Baldwin). The reputation of being a man with more than one woman/lover
would be legal.
>> 11. Have any one other than the actual parties of the polygynous
uniting present at the "uniting" ceremony (Fam Law 62), since every
witness of the "uniting" is a possible "witness" of the polygynous
uniting in a bigamy trial. See # 5 above. If they are willing to take
the chance, there would be relative safety in having other
polygynously "united" couples present. I don't see any problem with
witnesses at a "covenant event", "union ceremony", or "bonding
ceremony" (not wedding ceremony, see ch. 3). It would be foolish and
risky to invite or inform the monogynous and/or the opponents of
polygyny to any such uniting event. It only takes one witness to files
criminal charges.
A man and his women who practice polygyny in Calif. must realize that
the admissions of polygyny by one of his mates is hard evidence for
the state in a felony bigamy case. The "testimony by a party to one of
the marriages in issue" (People v. Van Wie/O'Neal/Rauch) is hard
evidence. The danger of this can be reduced by a prenuptial witnessed
contract in which they bind themselves to be responsible for the
payment of all attorney fees of all parties involved if one of them
should ever admit practicing polygyny in such a way that their
admission or testimony results in litigation, criminal or civil; and
agreeing to the sale of all their present and future possessions to
pay for such attorney fees and all costs incurred by the one being
prosecuted/litigated for polygyny as the result of such an admission.
The testimony of any witness to a polygynous uniting is such evidence
(People v. Stokes/ DuFault). The testimony of witnesses of the
polygynous mates' cohabitation and their reputation of "being married"
is such hard evidence (People v. Beevers/DuFault). This can be avoided
by making no public claim that you all are husband and wives, by
publicly introducing and presenting you and your mates as exclusive
lovers, covenanted lovers or a man and his own women etc. and making
sure to use a covenant like the one at the end of this article.
Traditional wedding rings on the wedding ring finger should not be
used on the wedding ring finger since they are a public statement of
marriage. A wooden ring or a braided ring on the wedding finger could
be sufficient for the polygynous. But all life is full risks and there
is always the possiblity of a Judas in the crowd in every gathering.
One who opposes polygyny should never be invited or made aware of a
polygynous uniting. For those who feel led to enter into polygyny in
California, they must do so at their own risk and they must do it very
prudently, counting the cost before entering into it.
To be polygynous in California, your "marriages" must be without
benefit of the civil law, its protection and its requirements. It is
best if none of the members of a polygynous marriage is legally/
officially married to the husband of the family (Fam Law58). There is
no law against two or more single people living together and having
sex together, so a polygynous family can take on this
appearance/manifestation. The second or etc. covenanted woman in a
polygynous marriage can neither have nor seek protection or
recognition of marital rights or obligations by the state. The state
and the public must not know the true nature of the polygynous
relationship.
Rights and responsibilities may be drawn up and agreed to in a
private, but a witnessed contract (see examples below) could be used,
carefully avoiding the use of words like "husband" or "wife" or
"marriage". Such a contract must not have any language that represents
or presents the parties involved as husband and wife or wives.
Property rights, money distribution, bill payment, financial
responsibilities, child rearing duties, sexual relations,
inheritances, house keeping duties etc. can all be covered by a
witnessed (by God or by humans) contract/covenant between the parites
involved. I believe that every "wife" in polygyny should be given the
"power of attorney" in all matters of her own man in the event of his
incapacity or hospitalization, and every man in polygyny should be
given the "power of attorney" in all matters of each of his ow women.
Of course all parties involved should have carefully drawn up wills or
living trusts covering the disposition of their property and children
in the event of their death or incapacity.
There can be no state recognized ceremony or documents or
documentation. There can be no state recognized common law marriage of
the parties involved in the polygynous relationship. As stated in
Hebrews 11:13-16, our citizenship is in the heavenlies in the
spiritual realm and we await the City of God. So instead of being
licensed by the state, Christian polygynists must get the permission
to marry from their King, the Lord Jesus Christ. Instead of being
solemnized by an official of the state, the polygynous marriage must
be solemnized by the presence of God, His angels and His children. His
Word that He hates covenant breaking (Malachi 2) and that He hates the
break up of marriages----that Word gives all the necessary solemnity
to a sincere exchange of marital covenants between the polygynous man
and his own woman. The fact that He knows our hearts, the thoughts and
intents of our hearts, makes Him the only One Who can really
authenticate such a polygynous relationship. Nothing needs to filed
with God since He was there as witness and every word said and every
thought imagined are a matter of record with Him.
To conclude your polygynous uniting with cohabitation requires great
discretion on the part of those involved. They may not present
themselves as "husband" and "wives" to society in general and their
neighbors in particular (Boyd v. Boyd, 1962, CrimLaw825). A polygynous
husband must not address his own polygynous woman as wife in public,
in introductions or even in writing to those not intimately involved
in the polygynous relationship. Romans 14:16-23, especially verse 22,
makes it real clear that the practice of such controversial things
requires secrecy and discretion on the part of those who have the
liberty to practice it. To the world they may be only man and
mistress, or boy friend and girl friends shacking up. If the women
have their own separate residence, then when their own man comes to
visit etc. he would be presented/introduced as their own man, or their
own devoted and covenanted lover. Only in the circles of their
polygynous confidants and supporters may they be recognized as
"husband" and "wife", even though those words are not used.
In California "It is no defense to a charge of bigamy that the
doctrines and practice of polygamy are a part of the religion of the
accused" (Reynolds v. U.S.; Davis v. Beason). Polygyny in California
may not take the form of Common Law marriage, nor may it involve the
public presentation of the parties involved as husband and wife/
wives. To practice polygyny in California, you may not publicly
address your own polygynous mate(s) as wife and she (they) should not
publicly address you as husband.
But what is in the word "wife"? Isn't it the relationship, the
covenants that make the marriage, and not the words "husband and
wife"? If a wife in polygyny knows that her husband is an honorable
man before the Lord, a man of integrity, a man who honors his word and
his commitments, then she will feel just as much his wife when he
introduces her as, or calls her "my Beloved", "my Darling", "my
Lover", "my Lady", "my darling Helpmeet", "Blessed Companion", "the
Queen of my heart", etc. instead of "my wife".
If a husband in polygyny knows that his mate in polygyny is an
honorable woman before the Lord, a woman of integrity, a woman who
honors her word and her commitments, then he will feel just as much
her husband when she introduces him as, or calls him "My own Man", "My
Mate", "Beloved", "my Companion", my Partner" etc. instead of "my
husband". There are many names for a wife and a husband other than
"wife" and "husband". Love and creativity can join forces to develop
names that are uniquely yours in your marriage that speak to you of
the intimate and confidential nature of your polygynous relationship.
It is the covenant before God that makes the relationship, not the
names or titles.
One must be extremely careful when polygynously courting. If the
relationship goes bad, the offended party has hard evidence of your
intention to get that party to engage in "the crime of polygyny". All
of the legally sensitive words mentioned above should be avoided when
describing one's marital status or intentions in all correspondence,
email and phone communications. You should not make hard evidence that
you intend to engage in "the crime of polygyny", that you have engaged
in it, or that you are engaged in it. Romans 14:19-23 should be
observed in this matter at all times with all parties, carefully,
privately and discretely guarding your personal liberty to be polygynous.
END OF PART ONE OF TWO PARTS.
THE SONG OF SOLOMON
```[ The Shulamite to her friends]
**(1:2.) He should kiss me with the kisses of his mouth!
```[The Shulamite to Solomon, in the
hearing of her friends]
**For your [sexual] loving is better than wine. (3.) Your ointments
smell sweetly;
Your name is an ointment poured forth:
Therefore do the [marriage-age] virgins love you. (4.) Lead, drawing
me along!
```[Her friends , the Daughters of
Jerusalem ]
**--We will run after you!
```[The Shulamite to her friends ]
**The king has brought me into his chambers---
```[Her friends, the Daughters of
Jerusalem to Solomon; or Solomon's
concubines/wives to him]
**-We will be glad and rejoice in you,
We will remember your [sexual] loving more than wine.
```[ The Shulamite to the king ]
**They love you uprightly.
```[The King about his Black Shulamite]
6:8 There [are] sixty queens, and eighty concubines, and virgins
without number. 9 But My dove, My undefiled is one [alone]. She [is]
the [only] one of her mother. She [is] the choice of her who bore her.
The daughters saw [her] and blessed her; the [other] queens and the
concubines [of the king] saw her, and they praised her.
EXAMPLE)
COPYRIGHT (c) 1997, 2002 BY L. TYLER
P.O.Box 620763
San Diego, CA92162-0763
oldservant8@yahoo.com
oldeservant@excite.com
This file may be copied and distributed publicly if it is not changed.
PART ONE OF TWO PARTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
1. A legal polygynous covenant for a polygynous union event.
2. Federal law and the practice of polygyny.
3. California law and the practice of polygyny.
4. The Biblical basis for diligent discretion in polygyny
5. Possible legal polygynous wedding covenants/contracts
AN AFFIRMATION AND COVENANT OF INTIMATE UNION FOR LIFE
*********HIS PART*****************
I,_________________, accept _______
as my own woman, before God and the angelic
witnesses here present. I do solemnly affirm,
declare and accept my responsibility before God to __________ as my
own woman, in all
honor and love, in all service and duty, in all faith and tenderness,
to live with, comfort, keep, unselfishly and compassionately cherish
_____,according to the ordinance of Jesus Christ in the holy bond of
our union before God. I accept the ordinance ofKing Jesus that
indicates that any heterosexual intimacy of ours is to be experienced
only within the holy bond of our union and according to His Word. I do
solemnly affirm, declare and accept my responsibility in our union to
be _________'s loving and faithful intimate partner, to love and to
unselfishly cherish her in plenty and in want, in joy
and grief, in health and infirmity as long as we both shall live. I
hereby leave and separate myself and my allegiance from my parents and
family to loyally bond with ________ as one in our intimate union,
submitting to each other according to the Word of God in the reverence
of God. I commit myself to her with all of my heart, to live wisely
with her; not domineering or
tyrannizing her but repectfully, unselfishly
cherishing her, feeding her the Word, holding her up in prayer, taking
care of her and humbly leading her by my example, by the grace and
enabling of Jesus Christ.
**************HER PART**********
I,_____________, accept _______________
as my own intimate partner for life, before God and the angelic
witnesses here present. I do solemnly affirm, declare and accept my
solemn responsibility in our union to ____ as my own intimate partner,
in all honor and love, in all service and duty, in all
faith and tenderness, to live with, comfort, keep, unselfishly and
compassionately cherish _____, according to the ordinance of Jesus
Christ in the holy bond of this our covenanted and intimate union. I
accept the ordinance of King Jesus that indicates that any
heterosexual intimacy or ours is to be
experienced only within the holy bond of our
intimate and covenanted union and according to His Word. I do solemnly
affirm, declare and accept my solemn responsibility in our union to be
______'s loving and faithful marital partner, to love and to
unselfishly cherish him in plenty and in want, in joy and grief, in
health and infirmity as long as we both shall live. I hereby leave and
separate
myself and my allegiance from my parents and
family to loyally bond with ________ as one in
our intimate union, submitting to each other
according to the Word of God in the reverence
of God. I commit myself to him with all of my
heart, to live wisely with him to follow his lead in the Lord, showing
him honor and respect in all matters.
************(in unison) ************
We covenant before God and all present, that we are intimate partners
for life, bound together in our solemn and intimate union to be one
flesh in the Lord until death part us. We covenant before God and His
angels that it is our solemn and lifelong responsibility to
unselfishly and compassionately cherish each other in our intimate
union according to His Word, the Holy Bible, and to His glory and
honor. Pray for us.
_________________________
The Couple's Signatures and Date
Witnessed by God and His holy angels.
or he writes out his part to her and she writes out her part to him
and sign them.
INTRODUCTION OF THE LAWS AGAINST POLYGYNY
Bigamy is the "criminal offense of willfully and knowingly contracting
a second marriage (or going through the form of a second marriage)
while the first marriage, to the knowledge of the offender, is still
subsisting and undissolved.">a Bigamy is the "state of a man who has
two wives, or of a woman who has two husbands living at the same time.">a
"A married person is guilty of bigamy, a misdemeanor, if he contracts
or purports to contract another marriage, unless at the time of the
subsequent marriage . . . . . the actor reasonably believes that he is
legally eligible to remarry." Model Penal Code #230.1 >a [>a Deluxe
Black's Law Dictionary, p. 163, West Publishing Co. St. Paul, MN]
Polygamy: "A person is guilty of polygamy, a felony of the third
degree, if he marries or cohabits with more than one spouse at a time
in purported exercise of the right of plural marriage. The offense is
a continuing one until all cohabitation and claim of marriage with
more than one spouse terminates. This section does not apply to
parties to a polygamous marriage, lawful in the country of which they
are residents or nationals, while they are in transit through or
temporarily visiting this state." Model Penal Code #230.1>b [>b Deluxe
Black's Law Dictionary, p. 1159, West Publishing Co. St.
Paul, MN]
The sticky issue in the WEST/OCCIDENT is that "a married person is
guilty of bigamy, a misdemeanor,"
a) if he signifies that he is contracting another marriage while he is
still married to another.
b) if he implies that he is contracting another marriage while he is
still married
c) if he claims or professes to be contracting another marriage while
still married
d) if he engages in a wedding/marriage given in other than the exact
words.
In the WEST/OCCIDENT, "person is guilty of polygamy, a felony of the
third degree , if he marries . . . more than one spouse at a time"
a) signifying that is exercising the right of plural marriage.
b) implying that he is exercising the right of plural marriage.
c) claiming/professing to be exercising the right of plural marriage.
d) engaging in the exercise of the right of plural marriage using
other than the exact words of marriage or of a wedding.
In the WEST/OCCIDENT, A "person is guilty of polygamy, a felony of the
third degree , if he . . . cohabits with more than one spouse at a time"
a) signifying that is exercising the right of plural marriage.
b) implying that he is exercising the right of plural marriage.
c) claiming/professing to be exercising the right of plural marriage.
d) engaging in the exercise of the right of plural marriage using
other than the exact words of marriage or of a wedding.
I understand these provisions to mean that anyone who wants to
practice polygyny in the WEST/OCCIDENT must not publicly, or in writing,
a) signify that he/she is contracting another marriage while still
married to another.
b) imply that he/she is contracting another marriage while still married
c) claim or profess to be contracting another marriage while still married
d) engage in a "wedding/marriage" given in other than the exact words
(see the alternatives to the use of loaded words like
"wedding/marriage" in union celebrations or union ceremonies)
e) signify that he/she is exercising "the right of plural marriage."
f) imply that he/she is exercising "the right of plural marriage."
g) claim/profess to be exercising "the right of plural marriage."
h) engage in the exercise of "the right of plural marriage" using
other than the exact words of "marriage" or of a "wedding". (There
must be no claim to the right of plural marriage in the union
celebration, no claim to the right to exercise plural marriage in the
union celebration, no use of synonyms for "marriage" [matrimony,
wedlock, etc.] or for "wedding" [marriage, nuptials etc.]).
i) cohabit with more than one spouse at a time, signifying that he/she
is exercising the right of plural marriage.
j) cohabit with more than one spouse at a time,implying that he is
exercising the right of plural marriage.
k) cohabit with more than one spouse at a time, claiming/professing to
be exercising the right of plural marriage.
l) cohabit with more than one spouse at a time, engaging in the
exercise of the right of plural marriage using other than the exact
words of marriage or of wedding for the relationship or event. (There
must be no claim to the right of plural marriage in the cohabitation,
no claim to the right to exercise plural marriage in the cohabitation,
no use of synonyms for "marriage" [matrimony, wedlock, etc.] or for
"wedding" [marriage, nuptials etc.] in the cohabitation.)
"The showing of minimal numbers of prosecutions does not establish an
abandonment of the State's laws or an irrational revival of them here.
. . . . Mere failure to prosecute other offenders is no basis for a
finding of denial of equal protection." (See U.S. v. Salazar, 1983. P.
107) The courts follow the waves and tides of society. Right now it is
neither important , popular or cost efficient to prosecute bigamy/
polygyny cases now. The tide can turn at any time. If you believe in
the cycles of our culture as I do, you now how well the cultural tide
can turn. Consider the following:
1700- 1730, 1800 - 1830 and 1900- 1930 were times of majority rule and
the minorities be damned. If you were a woman or a minority, watch out
and step back. It was a time of heavy handed rule by the majority for
the majority. Many of the majority indulged themselves excessively and
at the expense of the minorities. It was a cultural Catholic and WASP
world, a time of ghettos for the minorities, who were thankful when
the majority left them alone or ignored them.
THE PENDULUM HAD SWUNG TO FAR CONSERVATIVE SIDE.
1730 -1750, 1830 -1850 and 1930 - 1950 were periods when the
government faced a series of crises that kept it from dealing with
major wrongs in society. The government was doing well if it could
just keep the lid on the pot of society. It was not a time of minority
rights because women, Jews, minority races and ethnic minorities
essentially had no government recognized rights other than those for
all in the Constitution, but their rights were ignored in "benign
neglect". The government was too busy coping with wars, collapsing
economies and a struggle to keep the country unified.
1750 - 1770, 1850-1870 and 1950-1970 were periods of great social
turmoil and dramatic cultural crises resulting in legislated reforms
and moves towards democratic goals.
THE PENDULUM HAD SWUNG TO THE LIBERAL SIDE.
1770 - 1790, 1870 - 1890 and 1970 - 1990 were periods of general
malaise and disillusionment with the reforms and democratic advances
of the '50's - '70's. The dreams died and many of the new and more
democratic laws suffered from "benign" neglect. An erosion of personal
liberties began, but things didn't become as bad as they were before
the reforms. The people turn inward, more preoccupied with themselves
and their issues than the culture's issues. They werere burnt out and
tired of cultural reforms and movements.
1790 - 1810, 1890 - 1910 and 1990 -2010, if the cycle continues to
hold true, the rights of minorities will almost be totally neglected
by an exhausted and self-centered population AND THE PENDULUM WILL
SWING TO THE HARD CONSERVATIVE SIDE. The individual will
have to survive the best he can in a cold and uncaring world---unless
China or Russia ignite World War III and the great war of Revelations
Six ushers in the Tribulation, with scenario #1, one third of the
world's population dying within a month of the outbreak of The War; or
scenario #2, one third of the midEast's population dying within one
month of such a war.
Whatever the scenario, we who believe in polygyny, and especially
those who practice it need to think defensively and think survival in
a world that grows colder, harder, more insensitive and more evil day
by passing day. If I were practicing polygyny, especially if I were
raising children in polygyny, I would take every precaution, every
defensive measure and exercise every discretion to protect my loved
ones and my home from the packs of wolves and hyenas that are out
there waiting for us to make an unnecessary mistake that would expose
and our loved ones to their fangs, to the great pain and loss of our
loved ones. We must be wiser than serpents and foxes, yet harmless as
doves and sheep, remembering how easy doves and sheep die. Thank God
that we are doves and sheep indwelled and shepherded by the Lord Jesus
Christ, the thankful possessors of eternal life and the hope of living
eternally with the God who is Unselfish and Compassionate
Cherishing, Truth, Light, Life and the Way.
1. FEDERAL LAW AND THE PRACTICE OF POLYGYNY
Federal Law (Federal Reporter, 2d Series, #760, pp. 1065-1071):"Utah
was justified, by compelling interest, in upholding and enforcing ban
on plural marriage to protect monogamous marriage relationships."
(U.S.C.A. Const. Amends 1,14)
In Reynolds v. U.S., 98 US (8 otto) 145, 25, L.ED. 244 (1878; p.
1068), "the Supreme Court affirmed a criminal conviction of a Mormon
for practicing polygamy, and rejected the argument that Congress'
prohibition of polygamy violated the defendant's right to the free
exercise of religion." In the 1972 Yoder case, "The Supreme Court has
recognized the continued validity of [the] REYNOLDS [case]."
In YODER (p.1069), the court cited REYNOLDS in support of the
proposition that it "is true that activities of individual's, even
when religiously based, are often subject to regulation by the states
in the exercise of this undoubted power to promote the .. . . .
general welfare, or the Federal Government in the exercise of its
delegated powers." The Reynolds case against polygyny/bigamy was
reaffirmed in 1983 (Bob Jones Univ. v. U.S.).
>>The Court has already made up its mind that, in the USA, you may not
practice polygyny as a right in the free exercise of your religion.
"Since Yoder [1972], the Court has said that statutes "making bigamy a
crime surely cut into an individual's freedom to associate, but few
today seriously claim such statutes violate the First Amendment or any
Constitutional provision." YODER p. 1069
In 1978, the Steward and J. & Powell decisions concurred in the
judgment that the "state may legitimately say that no one who has a
living husband or wife can marry. . . . the state has the undeniable
interest in insuring that its rules of domestic relations reflect
widely held values of its people. . . . . " YODER p. 1069 Majority
rule, or majority sentiment or majority values RULE and we all know
how the majority feels (especially the majority of women) about bigamy
and polygyny. Give this rule of law, it is futile to attempt to get
the Supreme Court, or any state, to change its provision. Bigamists
and polygynists are the minority, and neither a recognized nor a
protected minority. We must live our lives wisely in an hostile
environment, and not expect or ask for society's help or recognition.
"After Reynolds, though before Yoder, the Supreme Court upheld Mann
Act convictions for transporting at least one plural wife across
state lines either to cohabit with her or to aid another person in
such a project, despite a challenge based on the Free Exercise
Clause." (See Cleveland vs. U.S., 3294514, in 1946). p. 1070
In State v. Barlow (107 Utah 292-1944), "The Utah Supreme Court
rejected the defendant's free exercise challenge and affirmed their
convictions for cohabitating with more than one person of the opposite
sex." The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the defendant's appeal of the
Utah Supreme Court decision. p. 1070
"We find no authority for extending the Constitutional right to
privacy so far that it would protect polygamous marriages. We decline
to do so." 1985, see Roe v. Wade. p. 1070
>>>In such a state or where ever there exits a law against cohabiting
with more than one person of the opposite sex, wisdom would decree
that each wife would have to have her own studio/cottage/cabin
following the African polygyny model where the husband would make
the rounds visiting his wives dwelling in a fair and equitable manner
to fulfill his "duty of marriage" with each. With today's economy and
prices two female mates (of their own man) might go together and live
in a one bedroom or studio apartment. All could still come together in
one place for meals, fellowship, prayer and fun without violating the
laws against cohabiting with more than one woman. Again, I believe all
the taboo words must be religiously and conscientiously avoided (wife,
husband, marriage, wedding, spouse etc.) in such a hostile environment.
The "Constitutional right of privacy prevents the state from
criminalizing the non-prostitutional heterosexual activities of two
unmarried consenting adults when such activities occur in privacy of
home." Duling, 603 F. Supp. 960 (E.D. Va 1985). p. 1071
It behooves American polygynists that are legally married to be
legally UNMARRIED AND CONSENTING with any other covenanted sexual
partners they may have, exercising their polygyny in the privacy of
their home, sexually, verbally and editorially.
2. CALIFORNIA LAW AND THE PRACTICE OF POLYGYNY
California Law: (#284) "Every person who knowingly and willfully
marries the husband or wife of another . . . . is punishable by fine
not less than $5000 or by imprisonment in state prison." (7/1/'97)
Again we see the need for all parties to a polygynous relationship
should be legally single, not legally married. It is simply a
precaution against this kind of prosecution/persecution. State prison
is Hell and is daily filled with life threatening experiences, even on
the less violent classification levels, and should be avoided at all
costs.
"Bigamy is punishable by a fine not exceeding $10,000 or by
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state
prison." (#283 Calif. Penal Code; 9/27/'83; operative 1/1/'84) One
should not be so selfish and cavalier as to jeopardize their
family unity, their emotional, intimate and sexual union, for the
"cause" of polygyny. It is not worth the hardship of loss and
separation to you and your loved ones to be put in jail for practicing
your belief in polygyny that violates the specific laws of society. It
is a wiser course to practice one's faith, including polygyny,
"striving to live peacably with all men", seeking to give offense to
no one, by practicing it as instructed in Romans 14, i.e. privately ,
discretely and with great discernment so as not to unnecessarily
stumble or offend our weaker brethren who are still bound by the laws
and traditions of men.
To pracitce polygyny in California today, you must not:
>> 1. Be legally married to more than one "wife" at the same time (CA
Criminal Law #820)
>> 2. Be married in an officially recognized ceremony to more than one
"wife" at one time (CA Criminal Law 822; Fam Law #66))
>> 3. Be married in a state or publicly recognized common-law marriage
to more than one wife at the same time (CL 822; Fam Law
#65 & #66). Public here means the general public, not polygynous
families who join you in a covenanting event.
>> 4. Be married by state license to more than one mate at the same
time (CL822)
>> 5. Be solemnized in marriage to more than one wife at the same time
by an official recognized by the state (CL822). If the
polygynous "marriage" is "solemnized" by ceremony, rite or ritual, the
words "wife", "husband" and "marriage" should be avoided carefully (a
good thesaurus will help. See the
appendix. See Fam Law#65).
>> 6. Be authenticated in marriage to more than one wife at the same
time (in polygyny) in any way acceptable to the state
(CL822)
>> 7. File the marriage certificate of registry with the state, for
your polygynous marriage. (CL822)
>> 8. Conclude in an official civil manner or legally your "marriage"
in polygyny. (CL824)
>> 9. Publicly cohabit as husband and wife, publicly and mutually,
assuming marital rights, duties and obligations, including
sexual relations with more than one wife at the same time.(CL825)
[Public here is the general public, not one's polygynous associates.
Even though they may not cohabit as husband and wife, they may cohabit
as man and woman, man and his own woman, exclusive lovers, exclusive
love/life partners, exclusively devoted lovers, a man and his covenant
woman/lover/partner/pal, or viceversa for all the above (e.g. a woman
and her own man).]
>> 10. Have the reputation in a community of being married, nor deport
yourselves in the neighborhood as husband and wife (Fam Law 61 & 62).
Specifically you must not allow/permit/encourage common, general,
uniform, and undivided repute among witnesses/
neigbors that you are married to more than one mate at the same time.
(Fam Law#65, Re Estate of Gill; Hite v. Hite; Re Estate of
Baldwin). The reputation of being a man with more than one woman/lover
would be legal.
>> 11. Have any one other than the actual parties of the polygynous
uniting present at the "uniting" ceremony (Fam Law 62), since every
witness of the "uniting" is a possible "witness" of the polygynous
uniting in a bigamy trial. See # 5 above. If they are willing to take
the chance, there would be relative safety in having other
polygynously "united" couples present. I don't see any problem with
witnesses at a "covenant event", "union ceremony", or "bonding
ceremony" (not wedding ceremony, see ch. 3). It would be foolish and
risky to invite or inform the monogynous and/or the opponents of
polygyny to any such uniting event. It only takes one witness to files
criminal charges.
A man and his women who practice polygyny in Calif. must realize that
the admissions of polygyny by one of his mates is hard evidence for
the state in a felony bigamy case. The "testimony by a party to one of
the marriages in issue" (People v. Van Wie/O'Neal/Rauch) is hard
evidence. The danger of this can be reduced by a prenuptial witnessed
contract in which they bind themselves to be responsible for the
payment of all attorney fees of all parties involved if one of them
should ever admit practicing polygyny in such a way that their
admission or testimony results in litigation, criminal or civil; and
agreeing to the sale of all their present and future possessions to
pay for such attorney fees and all costs incurred by the one being
prosecuted/litigated for polygyny as the result of such an admission.
The testimony of any witness to a polygynous uniting is such evidence
(People v. Stokes/ DuFault). The testimony of witnesses of the
polygynous mates' cohabitation and their reputation of "being married"
is such hard evidence (People v. Beevers/DuFault). This can be avoided
by making no public claim that you all are husband and wives, by
publicly introducing and presenting you and your mates as exclusive
lovers, covenanted lovers or a man and his own women etc. and making
sure to use a covenant like the one at the end of this article.
Traditional wedding rings on the wedding ring finger should not be
used on the wedding ring finger since they are a public statement of
marriage. A wooden ring or a braided ring on the wedding finger could
be sufficient for the polygynous. But all life is full risks and there
is always the possiblity of a Judas in the crowd in every gathering.
One who opposes polygyny should never be invited or made aware of a
polygynous uniting. For those who feel led to enter into polygyny in
California, they must do so at their own risk and they must do it very
prudently, counting the cost before entering into it.
To be polygynous in California, your "marriages" must be without
benefit of the civil law, its protection and its requirements. It is
best if none of the members of a polygynous marriage is legally/
officially married to the husband of the family (Fam Law58). There is
no law against two or more single people living together and having
sex together, so a polygynous family can take on this
appearance/manifestation. The second or etc. covenanted woman in a
polygynous marriage can neither have nor seek protection or
recognition of marital rights or obligations by the state. The state
and the public must not know the true nature of the polygynous
relationship.
Rights and responsibilities may be drawn up and agreed to in a
private, but a witnessed contract (see examples below) could be used,
carefully avoiding the use of words like "husband" or "wife" or
"marriage". Such a contract must not have any language that represents
or presents the parties involved as husband and wife or wives.
Property rights, money distribution, bill payment, financial
responsibilities, child rearing duties, sexual relations,
inheritances, house keeping duties etc. can all be covered by a
witnessed (by God or by humans) contract/covenant between the parites
involved. I believe that every "wife" in polygyny should be given the
"power of attorney" in all matters of her own man in the event of his
incapacity or hospitalization, and every man in polygyny should be
given the "power of attorney" in all matters of each of his ow women.
Of course all parties involved should have carefully drawn up wills or
living trusts covering the disposition of their property and children
in the event of their death or incapacity.
There can be no state recognized ceremony or documents or
documentation. There can be no state recognized common law marriage of
the parties involved in the polygynous relationship. As stated in
Hebrews 11:13-16, our citizenship is in the heavenlies in the
spiritual realm and we await the City of God. So instead of being
licensed by the state, Christian polygynists must get the permission
to marry from their King, the Lord Jesus Christ. Instead of being
solemnized by an official of the state, the polygynous marriage must
be solemnized by the presence of God, His angels and His children. His
Word that He hates covenant breaking (Malachi 2) and that He hates the
break up of marriages----that Word gives all the necessary solemnity
to a sincere exchange of marital covenants between the polygynous man
and his own woman. The fact that He knows our hearts, the thoughts and
intents of our hearts, makes Him the only One Who can really
authenticate such a polygynous relationship. Nothing needs to filed
with God since He was there as witness and every word said and every
thought imagined are a matter of record with Him.
To conclude your polygynous uniting with cohabitation requires great
discretion on the part of those involved. They may not present
themselves as "husband" and "wives" to society in general and their
neighbors in particular (Boyd v. Boyd, 1962, CrimLaw825). A polygynous
husband must not address his own polygynous woman as wife in public,
in introductions or even in writing to those not intimately involved
in the polygynous relationship. Romans 14:16-23, especially verse 22,
makes it real clear that the practice of such controversial things
requires secrecy and discretion on the part of those who have the
liberty to practice it. To the world they may be only man and
mistress, or boy friend and girl friends shacking up. If the women
have their own separate residence, then when their own man comes to
visit etc. he would be presented/introduced as their own man, or their
own devoted and covenanted lover. Only in the circles of their
polygynous confidants and supporters may they be recognized as
"husband" and "wife", even though those words are not used.
In California "It is no defense to a charge of bigamy that the
doctrines and practice of polygamy are a part of the religion of the
accused" (Reynolds v. U.S.; Davis v. Beason). Polygyny in California
may not take the form of Common Law marriage, nor may it involve the
public presentation of the parties involved as husband and wife/
wives. To practice polygyny in California, you may not publicly
address your own polygynous mate(s) as wife and she (they) should not
publicly address you as husband.
But what is in the word "wife"? Isn't it the relationship, the
covenants that make the marriage, and not the words "husband and
wife"? If a wife in polygyny knows that her husband is an honorable
man before the Lord, a man of integrity, a man who honors his word and
his commitments, then she will feel just as much his wife when he
introduces her as, or calls her "my Beloved", "my Darling", "my
Lover", "my Lady", "my darling Helpmeet", "Blessed Companion", "the
Queen of my heart", etc. instead of "my wife".
If a husband in polygyny knows that his mate in polygyny is an
honorable woman before the Lord, a woman of integrity, a woman who
honors her word and her commitments, then he will feel just as much
her husband when she introduces him as, or calls him "My own Man", "My
Mate", "Beloved", "my Companion", my Partner" etc. instead of "my
husband". There are many names for a wife and a husband other than
"wife" and "husband". Love and creativity can join forces to develop
names that are uniquely yours in your marriage that speak to you of
the intimate and confidential nature of your polygynous relationship.
It is the covenant before God that makes the relationship, not the
names or titles.
One must be extremely careful when polygynously courting. If the
relationship goes bad, the offended party has hard evidence of your
intention to get that party to engage in "the crime of polygyny". All
of the legally sensitive words mentioned above should be avoided when
describing one's marital status or intentions in all correspondence,
email and phone communications. You should not make hard evidence that
you intend to engage in "the crime of polygyny", that you have engaged
in it, or that you are engaged in it. Romans 14:19-23 should be
observed in this matter at all times with all parties, carefully,
privately and discretely guarding your personal liberty to be polygynous.
END OF PART ONE OF TWO PARTS.
THE SONG OF SOLOMON
```[ The Shulamite to her friends]
**(1:2.) He should kiss me with the kisses of his mouth!
```[The Shulamite to Solomon, in the
hearing of her friends]
**For your [sexual] loving is better than wine. (3.) Your ointments
smell sweetly;
Your name is an ointment poured forth:
Therefore do the [marriage-age] virgins love you. (4.) Lead, drawing
me along!
```[Her friends , the Daughters of
Jerusalem ]
**--We will run after you!
```[The Shulamite to her friends ]
**The king has brought me into his chambers---
```[Her friends, the Daughters of
Jerusalem to Solomon; or Solomon's
concubines/wives to him]
**-We will be glad and rejoice in you,
We will remember your [sexual] loving more than wine.
```[ The Shulamite to the king ]
**They love you uprightly.
```[The King about his Black Shulamite]
6:8 There [are] sixty queens, and eighty concubines, and virgins
without number. 9 But My dove, My undefiled is one [alone]. She [is]
the [only] one of her mother. She [is] the choice of her who bore her.
The daughters saw [her] and blessed her; the [other] queens and the
concubines [of the king] saw her, and they praised her.
