Search

This paper examines several cases of bigamy in the early history of Israel as a junction of confronting legal, religious and ethno-cultural considerations. It will discuss these challenging test cases in which the Supreme Court deliberated over the question during the formative decade of the 1950s as a meeting point of social dimensions: both among Jews of Eastern origin, and also among – and in a comparative perspective – Arab-Muslims. To the Court, both of these groups presented reflections of the East, and this paper will suggest a new reading of the Court’s decisions. The bigamy dilemma has occupied the former rulers of the land: both the Ottoman Empire, and the British Mandate for Palestine. History dramatically changed during the early 1950s, as the new State of Israel brought together the Arab communities and an enormous public of new Jewish immigrants, mostly strangers to the Western legal-political tradition that the Zionistfounding fathersstruggled to establish during the first half of the twentieth century. Given this background, the law (and the Court) sometimes served as an institution and as a stage in which these new legal system and different traditions confronted each other. In compare to other meeting points between East and West and the world of law, the phenomenon of bigamy stands – as this paper argues – at a unique place of its own as the Israeli legal system was literally under construction. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act (2015) targets immigrants suspected of engaging in polygamy. While polygamy is already illegal in Canada and non-immigrant polygamous arrangements exist within Canadian borders, the framing of polygamy as a foreign practice portrays this familial arrangement as a threat to Canadian national values. Effects on women and children have traditionally provided a convincing argument for state regulation of polygamy; however, the combination of state under—and over—enforcement suggests that relying solely on a harm framework inadequately captures the complexities of state treatment. In this paper, I argue that the state's primary motivations for defending monogamy are not necessarily rooted in the avoidance of harm but in the preservation of a particular type of citizenship. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Polygamous families are our national outlaws. Despite the expansion of sexual rights and marriage equality in the U.S., polygamy remains a crime. Challenging that stigma is the Brown family, who star in the reality TV show "Sister Wives" and who practice polygamous marriage as a tenet of their religion. The Browns filed suit against multiple Utah state actors in federal district court, challenging Utah's polygamy statute as unconstitutional in violation of their Free Exercise of Religion, substantive Due Process, and Equal Protection rights. The district court agreed and decriminalized informal polygamy in Utah. On appeal, the Tenth Circuit reversed the district court on mootness grounds, displaying an inherent reluctance to address the merits of the arguments, re-affirming outdated misconceptions, and leaving prosecutors and polygamists in an uncertain legal position. This Article provides much needed clarity on the decriminalization of polygamy to inform future litigation. This Article approaches the decriminalization debate by re-framing the issue into its three key considerations-the harm, the law, and the policy-that must guide the polygamy debate moving forward. The aim is to provide a gloss over the Brown litigation in order to draw out the harms of polygamy, the constitutional arguments and statutory interpretation issues at stake, and the transformative legal and theoretical social policies that could ideally result from the polygamy debate at this moment in history. Using this framework, this Article's novel argument is that polygamy bans are unconstitutional under a combination of substantive Due Process and Free Speech grounds as they apply to the private aspects of polygamy and the public aspects of polygamy, respectively. The Article culminates with an idealized, mock opinion from a fictional Tenth Circuit panel in the Brown litigation that approaches the decriminalization of polygamy using a combination of substantive Due Process and Free Speech tenets, and not arguments based in Free Exercise of Religion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

State criminal polygamy laws substantially burden the religious polygamy practiced by Fundamentalist Mormons and others, and can be subjected to strict scrutiny in those states where mini-RFRAs have been enacted. Such strict scrutiny may be influenced by the Supreme Court's most recent RFRA case, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., which continues the Court's development of an even "stricter" form of scrutiny under the RFRA than it has applied in free exercise cases. Defense of polygamy laws will initially require identification of a compelling state interest. The illegitimate, vague, and unsupported state interests previously provided in the Supreme Court case of Reynolds v. United States, as well as subsequent lower court and state cases, must be replaced by a more modern and empirical understanding of the harms of polygamy. This can be found in the recent Canadian case on the constitutionality of its criminal polygamy law, Reference re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Reference relied upon a statistical analysis of empirical data from 172 countries on the differential impact of monogamy versus polygamy; in addition to expert testimony from academics in the fields of evolutionary psychology, economic, political science, and nursing, from medical and psychological clinicians; and anecdotal evidence from husbands, wives, and children of polygamy. The goal was to specifically identify the harms of polygamy to women, children, men, and society at large. The Reference Court concluded that these harms outweighed burdens on religion and liberty. Avoiding these harms would be a compelling state interest, but there are questions as to whether the empirical evidence relied upon by Reference would be sufficient to satisfy the new RFRA requirement that the compelling state interest be specifically served by not exempting religious actors. In particular, it is not yet clear how the use of statistical evidence to satisfy this requirement would be evaluated. If this obstacle can be overcome, criminalization must still be the least restrictive alternative. I consider, and ultimately reject, the possibility that refusing to legally recognize polygamous marriages could be a less restrictive and sufficiently effective way to keep polygamy in check, even in light of Hobby Lobby's suggestion that a less effective alternative may serve as a least restrictive alternative, given the recent trajectory from decriminalization of sodomy to same-sex marriage. I conclude that, while the Reference harms go a long way toward shielding state criminal polygamy laws from RFRA attacks, the ultimate result would depend upon the resolution of a number of novel questions about RFRA scrutiny itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Up until Obergefell v. Hodges, pro-marriage ideology was used to justify homophobic laws and the entrenched sexism of traditional marriages. Now that marriage equality is the law of the land, there is room for a new conversation over the meaning of marriage. Specifically, this essay argues that the proponents of traditional marriage were correct in asserting that the institution of marriage has benefits-- intangible and tangible--that no other relationship currently provides to its members. Put another way, although those who defended traditional marriage were wrong with respect to their agenda, what if they in fact were absolutely right in that the marital relationship can provide something quite distinct and of great societal value? After analyzing this proposition, this essay proposes a rethinking of the privacy doctrine. What if the right to be let alone--the prior means by which the citizen is best protected by the State--is in fact more harmful than helpful? This essay explores specific situations where the new state interest in the dignity of marriage paves the way for state intervention as a welcomed and needed benefit of marriage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years polygamy has taken center stage on prime-time television and in the nation's courts. After the Supreme Court's reexamination of marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges, polygamy was thought to be the next major issue the Court hears regarding the structure and purpose of marriage and family. The Sister Wives case, Brown v. Buhman, may have a broader effect on U.S. policies and laws than merely in the realm of marriage and cohabitation. In fact, it may be a gateway to offering other benefits, such as immigration benefits, to polygamist families. The rationale of Brown challenges the longstanding bars against polygamous immigrants. While the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Brown on mootness grounds, subsequent appeals or challenges to anti-polygamy laws could be the beginning of a reexamination of policy and law that can better address the realities of immigration in the globalized age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court case The Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States. Topics discussed include the opposition of Republicans on Mormon Church's practice of polygamy before the Civil War, the Mormons' relocation to the State of Deseret which became the Utah Territory, and anti-polygamy legislation passed by the Republican Party.

Questions about polygamy are likely to dominate Western family law in the next generation. Two generations ago, contraception, abortion, and women's rights were the hot topics. This past generation, children's rights and same-sex rights have dominated public deliberation and litigation. On the frontier of Western family law are hard questions about extending the forms of valid marriage to include polygamy and extending the forums of marital governance to include religious and cultural legal systems that countenance polygamy. This Article analyzes the 1,850 year tradition of Western laws against polygamy and the growing constitutional and cultural pressures to reform these laws today. I show how the traditional Western cases against polygamy and same-sex unions used strikingly different arguments drawn from the Bible, nature, rights, harm, and symbolism. I conclude that, because these arguments are so different, Western nations can responsibly hold the line against polygamy, even if they choose to accept same-sex marriage and its accompanying norms of sexual liberty, domestic autonomy, equality, and nondiscrimination. I reject ideological arguments, pro and con, that anti-polygamy laws are a form of traditional Christian morality. I reject slippery slope arguments, from the right and the left, that acceptance of same-sex marriage must inevitably lead to acceptance of polygamous marriage. And I reject arguments from domestic and international sources that religious freedom norms command the accommodation, if not validation, of religious polygamy. The West may, and in my view should, politely say no to polygamy. An Appendix to the Article provides a detailed guide to different forms and terms of plural marriage discussed and prohibited in the West-real polygamy, constructive polygamy, successive polygamy, and clerical polygamy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editors discuss various reports within the journal on topics including civil marriage, polygyny, and a criminal ban on polygamy in the state of Utah.

Much of the legal debate surrounding the challenge to "traditional" heterosexual marriage has involved questions of liberty, discrimination, and equal treatment. Similar moves have now been made by advocates for polygamous marriage, indicating that polygamous families may be on track to follow in the rainbow contrails of same-sex marriage. This Article argues that such an evolution is indeed likely, but for different reasons than commonly held. Instead, it applies the emerging paradigm of vulnerability theory to a recent suite of polygamy and same-sex marriage rulings, with particular focus on the figure of the "vulnerable" child. At the same time, this Article will also consider the legal and social consequences of the mechanics of reproduction within both same-sex and polygamous families. It will ask what the lessons of same-sex parents using assisted reproductive technology (ART) might offer in thinking through the future of polygamy. Plural forms of parentage indicate that we are in a period of marriage evolution, wherein multiple adult caregivers may have a potential claim on the right to parent a given child. These contemporary struggles are already transforming the legal landscape in other countries. The vulnerability analysis will shed light on why it is only a matter of time before they also shift the two-parent mode of caretaking in the United States, given the overlapping vulnerabilities of dependent children, the state, and the institution of marriage itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Brown v. Buhman, the recent challenge to the Utah law criminalizing polygamy brought by the stars of the reality television show Sister Wives, a federal district court determined both that strict scrutiny was required and that strict scrutiny could not be satisfied. A significant factor in this result was the state's failure to mount a strong defense of the law, assuming that it could rely on long standing polygamy precedents such as the United States Supreme Court decision in Reynolds v. United States and more recent Tenth Circuit and Utah Supreme Court decisions to justify limiting scrutiny to rational basis and to provide legitimate reasons for the criminalization of polygamy. However, the State could have taken advantage of a then just released Canadian opinion, Reference re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada (Reference), to explain the real and expansive harms of polygamy. The Reference court undertook an exhaustive examination of the impact of polygamy on women, on children, on men, and on society, utilizing empirical evidence, expert reports, personal anecdotes, and a wide range of "Brandeis Brief" materials. This Article argues that the broad range of social and individual harms of polygamy identified in Reference provide a compelling state interest sufficient to withstand the strict scrutiny deemed necessary by Brown. The Article also argues that the Utah statute cannot properly be understood to be a "religious gerrymander" requiring strict scrutiny. The Brown court's determination that the Utah statute only targeted religiously motivated polygamy was based on its improper segregation of the statute's coverage of licensed bigamy and polygamy, which the court acknowledged covered both religiously and nonreligiously motivated marriages, from the statute's coverage of unlicensed ceremonial polygamous marriages and polygamous marital cohabitation, which the court saw as only religiously motivated. The Article goes on to show that the real target of the Utah statute are the multiple marital relationships present in all polygamy and not the religious motivation for polygamy undeniably present in much of the actual Mormon Fundamentalist polygamy practiced in Utah. The Article additionally argues that the heightened scrutiny called for by the Brown court under the Smith hybrid analysis is also not justified. Finally, the Article briefly considers how a statute that only criminalizes religiously motivated polygamy might be justified, based on the way in which polygamous religious communities funnel teenage girls into polygamous marriages by ensuring that they never have the chance to develop sufficient autonomy to truly choose for themselves, not unlike the way the Amish in Yoder sought to limit their children's education to prevent them from having either the desire or ability to live anything but an agrarian life. This Article suggests that confronting the autonomy-destroying impact of religiously motivated practices, such as polygamy, might force reconsideration of both Yoder and the limits of free exercise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Some Americans are changing the way they pair up, but others aren't satisfied with pairs. In the last few years, while voters, legislatures, and judiciaries have expanded marriage in favor of same-sex couples, some are hoping for expansion in a different dimension. These Americans, instead of concerning themselves with gender restrictions, want to remove numerical restrictions on marriage currently imposed by states. These people call themselves polyamorists, and they are seeking rights for their multiple-partner relationships. Of course, polygamy is nothing new for the human species. Some scientists believe that polygamy is actually the most natural human relationship, and history is littered with a variety of approaches to polygamous relations. Only in recent centuries has society's preference for monogamy developed, yet that preference has proven robust, as most Western governments vehemently support monogamy as the only marital option. This Comment explores polygyny and polyamory in the United States and walks through the traditional legal, political, and sociological arguments for and against polygamy. While most polygamy throughout the world stems from cultural or religious bases, this Comment primarily focuses on freely entered-into polygamy. The traditional human rights arguments against cultural- and religious-based polygamy do not necessarily apply to coercion-free polyamory. While some claim the absence of coercion leaves the state without a compelling reason to ban polygamous marriage, this Comment disagrees and finds several compelling reasons for states to favor monogamy. Alarmingly, in the face of challenges by would-be polygamous couples, states are unable to articulate exactly what interest they have in normative monogamy. Attorneys defending states' polygamy laws usually rely on historical or administrative reasons, essentially claiming that monogamy should hold because that's what we have always done, and it would be too hard to change. These typical arguments sell monogamy short. This Comment proposes other, more dynamic reasons that states should continue to support normative monogamy, reasons that have thus far been ignored by the legal world. Normative monogamy plays a far greater role in the development of Western society than states have argued. In fact, social science research shows that normative monogamy makes members of society more productive by encouraging long-term investments instead of short-term, mating-focused expenditures of resources. This natural shift in priorities among the monogamous has led to radical advancement in societies that practice normative monogamy. Monogamy's contribution to society has been largely ignored by the legal world and unargued before courts deciding the merits of laws proscribing polygamy; yet normative monogamy's role in the advancement of society is the single most compelling interest that states have. This Comment advances that previously ignored interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article takes seriously the substantive due process and equal protection arguments that support plural marriage (being able to marry more than one person at the same time). While numerous scholars have written about same-sex marriage, few of them have had much to say about marriages among three or more individuals. As progressive, successful, and important as the Marriage Equality Movement has been, it focuses on same-sex marriage at the expense of other possible kinds of marriages that may be equally worthwhile. The vast majority of Americans still do not discuss plural marriage openly and fairly, as if the topic were taboo. One of the goals of this Article is to convince readers that marriage in the future could be a much more diverse institution that does a better job of meeting individual needs. After all, one size may not fit all. Unfortunately, too often, scholars reduce plural marriage to the exploitation of women and the abuse of children. This approach makes it too easy to dismiss the possibility that a plural marriage might work better than the alternatives for at least some individuals in some circumstances. Because the expansion of marriage to include same-sex couples is bound to cover a broader range of marital relationships, lawmakers, judges, and the rest of us eventually will have to decide which kinds of intimate relationships will be accorded legal status and which kinds will be left out. Today, a growing number of Americans reject the double standard when a state does not treat same-sex couples the same as opposite-sex couples when it comes to eligibility for marriage licenses. The strong dignity language of the recent Windsor decision indicates that future courts will be more skeptical of the rationale for limiting marriage to a man and a woman if it is predicated upon demeaning sexual minorities. Another double standard, which is the focal point of this Article, concerns why the state allows almost all couples to marry for just about any personal reason that they happen to have. At the same time, all states continue to refuse to recognize any plural union. Those who care about gays and lesbians being discriminated against cannot ignore whether those who would marry multiple partners, if they were allowed to do so, are also being treated unfairly. The former kind of discrimination may be more widespread and worse than the latter, but that does not mean the latter is constitutionally permissible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this Essay, we argue that civil marriage should not be opened up to multiple parties. Our focus is on civil, not religious, marriage, and we address polygamy in general, rather than any particular form of it. We highlight the important distinction between opening up civil marriage to multiple parties on one hand and recognizing valid foreign polygamous marriages on the other. We contemplate how a country can coherently recognize valid foreign polygamous marriages, while at the same time decline to open up civil marriage to multiple parties. We distinguish decriminalization of polygamy, which we advocate, from opening up civil marriage to multiple parties. We then explain why we believe the rights of children should be a non-issue in deciding whether civil marriage should be opened up to multiple parties. We consider the state's continuing interest in marriage in the context of changing social norms and legal developments and conclude that there is a compelling state interest in preserving and supporting civil marriage as a monogamous institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the same sex marriage in the U.S. with reference to the court case United States v. Windsor. Topics discussed include marriages under the U.S. Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), understanding marriage according to social construct, natural law and religious rites, history of the U.S. laws prohibiting polygamy, demands by homosexual couples for marriage licenses and recognition of same sex marriage under the Federal Marriage Amendment.

The article focuses on the constitutional challenges regarding the bans on polygamy in religious freedom jurisprudence in the U.S. Topics discussed include the two U.S. Supreme Court cases such as Reynolds v. United States on the polygamy bans to a rational basis analysis and Lawrence v. Texas related to the LGBT equality, morality of preservation regarding the polygamy and same-sex marriage and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 related to freedom of religious expression.

The article looks at the empirical research regarding the resolution of marriage dispute in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa with the objections to polygamy under customary law. It mentions that the wife asked the compensation for the child maintenance and the role of local government to provide access to justice. It also mentions that the relevance of the conventional definitions of mediation, arbitration, and adjudication in the context of disputes.

The author reflects on practices and meaning of inheritance law and history of the regulation of polygamous marriage in Canada. It states that the inheritance could be material and ethical, personal and political, memory and identity, that rules of inheritance differ between societies, and have changed over time.

Academics frequently serve as expert witnesses in legal cases, yet their role as transmitters of social scientific knowledge remains under-examined. The present study analyzes the deployment of social science within British Columbia's polygamy reference trial where research is used to support the assertion that polygamy is inherently harmful to society. Within the trial record and the written decision, the protection of monogamy as an institution is performed in part through the marginalization of qualitative methodology and the concurrent privileging of quantitative studies that purportedly demonstrate widespread social harms associated with the practice of polygyny. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews the background to the High Court's decision in the ACT same sex marriage case and traces the origin of the court's surprisingly broad definition of what marriage is for the purposes of the marriage power in s 51(xxi) of the Australian Constitution. It reached this definition largely as a result of suggestions put from the Bench in oral argument, without the benefit of detailed written submissions on the subject by either the Commonwealth or the Australian Capital Territory, and in the absence of a contradictor. Intrinsic to the court's reasoning was the proposition that unless 'marriage' in s 51(xxi) included same-sex marriage then the Commonwealth would not be able to legislate so as to prevent the states or territories from establishing same-sex marriage. In finding the Commonwealth's power with respect to marriage does extend to same-sex and other forms of marriage, the court adopted a remarkably one-sided view of the existing case law on the scope of Commonwealth heads of power. It also did not take into consideration the wealth of case law directed specifically to the scope of the marriage power. The importance of the new definition is that now marriage policy in Australia does not depend in any significant way on issues of Constitutional law. While much has thereby been settled, much is now also unsettled. Marriage is, to a great extent, whatever the Federal Parliament says it is, so long as the union is a consensual one between persons (however young) and recognised by law as intended to endure. Specifically, the court has determined that the Constitution places no barrier in the way of polygamous relationships. What view of marriage the parliament chooses to adopt is a matter for political debate. Four options for a coherent policy on marriage and family are identified in the light of the High Court's judgment on the scope of the marriage power. These are (1) to continue with the current policy of treating all kinds of unions as if they were marriages, irrespective of consent and whether or not they are intended to endure, (2) to differentiate clearly between ceremonial marriage and informal relationships, (3) to return to the idea that marriage is based on nothing more than witnessed consent without the need for a celebrant, and (4) to base family policy on the twin axes of marriage and parenthood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the enforcement of polygamy laws in America, focusing on U.S. case law, child abuse claims, and the apparent problems associated with selective criminalization. Statutory rape and polygamy-related television programs such as "Big Love" are addressed, along with U.S. Supreme Court cases such as Lawrence v. Texas and United States v. Windsor which deal with changing social norms and the definition of a family in America. Morality and the Mormon religion are examined.

Regional jurisdiction (states, provinces, counties, etc.) is a crucial part of the governance of a country, and thus one would assume that great care is given to developing an optimal set of jurisdictional boundaries. However, the geometric simplicity of the boundaries of the western United States seems to defy the logic of the region’s human and physical geography, suggesting that other forces have played a role in the production of political space in the West at pivotal times in its history. In particular, the 36th Congress (1859-61) changed the map of the West considerably just before the beginning of the Civil War, when the politics of slavery were at their height. Congressional bills, debates, and votes show that slavery did have a strong influence on the creation of new states and territories, but western geography was also very important. In particular, bills were generally introduced to the 36th Congress at the request of settlers, with boundaries that were motivated by geographic or regional factors. Conversely, votes on those bills tended to fall along the sharp party and sectional divisions that were driving the country apart. This paper analyzes the process of boundary making by governments through a consideration of the complex combination of geopolitical and regional forces that result in a final decision. The study period of the 36th Congress included the creation of three new territories and a new state, as well as myriad intriguing but unsuccessful proposals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the how the legal recognition of same-sex marriage has allowed for the continuation of the criminalization of polygamy in Canada. Topics include the 'slippery slope' argument used by opponents of same-sex marriage, equality rights litigation in Canada, and the Canadian Civil Marriage Act.

The tax law treats married and unmarried taxpayers differently in several respects. Married persons, for example, can file and pay their taxes as a unified taxpayer, with rates that are different than those that apply to unmarried taxpayers. This different treatment of married persons has elicited criticism over the years. Some of the more salient criticisms include that married persons do not necessarily function as an economic unit, that joint filing discourages women from working, and that the various exclusions from the joint filing regime—including gay couples—is unfair. This Article looks at joint filing through the lens of polygamy. Polygamy stretches joint filing beyond what it can handle: while the current tax rates could accommodate same-sex couples without any substantive changes, applying the current married-filing-jointly tax brackets to polygamous taxpayers would have absurd—and often unjust—results. Polygamous marriage is not only quantitatively different than dyadic marriage—it is qualitatively different. These quantitative and qualitative differences render traditional joint filing an untenable fit. Ultimately, I conclude that changing from a joint filing system to a mandatory individual filing system that recognizes marriage for certain purposes would be the fairest and most administrable way to treat marriage. Because most commentators think, however, that eliminating joint filing will not happen in the foreseeable future, I also provide a second-best solution that would fit within the confines of the current joint filing regime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Law & Society/Revue Canadienne Droit et Societe (University of Toronto Press) is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article analyzes legislative proposals presented in bills related to polygamy, gender, death penalty and human trafficking in Pakistan. It argues that the Prevention and Control of Human Trafficking Ordinance 2002 is more comprehensive legislation in comparison with the bill clearly defining the act of human trafficking and provides severe punishments. Also, struggle for rights of women should continue but gender should not be a factor to determine in all situations.

U.S. citizens are overwhelmingly opposed to the legalization of polygamous marriage, but specific reasons for this opposition remain unclear. In this study we examined young adults' (n = 814) attitudes toward polygamous marriage as a function of myriad variables. Particular attention was given to the presumed association between attitudes toward same-sex marriage and polygamous marriage. Results indicated that, overall, young adults' attitudes toward polygamous marriage were neutral. Also, attitudes toward same-sex marriage significantly correlated with attitudes toward polygamous marriage. However, not all pro–same-sex marriage participants were pro-polygamous marriage. Moreover, opposition to same-sex marriage, (female) gender, higher levels of authoritarianism, and endorsement of traditional family values conjointly and individually predicted opposition to polygamous marriage. Implications of the findings are discussed, particularly in the context of U.S. discourse over the legalization of same-sex marriage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increasingly, challengers to antipolygamy legislation have framed polyamory as a sexual orientation, arguing that some people are immutably predisposed toward forming multiple relationships. Drawing on a qualitative study of 40 bisexual women in Toronto, Canada, this article argues that polyamory and monogamy are better viewed as strategies of sexual expression rather than as immutable orientations. Such an approach accommodates identity shifts between monogamy and polyamory that enable women to manage and negotiate their visibility as bisexuals. Viewing monogamy and polyamory as strategic identities can help health care practitioners more accurately assess their clients’ needs and health risks. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article focuses on the challenges to anti-polygamy laws, which refers to the practice of having more than one spouse at a time. It analyzes several provisions of the modern polygamy laws under litigation of British Columbia, Arizona and western part of the U.S. It explores the Supreme Court of British Columbia case regarding the polygamy claims and studies the impact of polygamy upon the children, women, and society.

The article provides a comparison of polygamy and its regulation in the U.S. and India as of June 2012, focusing on the Protestant Church's push to end the Mormon Church's polygamous practices in the U.S., as well as information on India's seemingly disparate treatment of polygamy among its Muslim and Hindu communities. According to the article, polygamy may be increasing in popularity in urban areas in the U.S.

The United States has banned polygamous immigrants since the late nineteenth century. Enacted amid isolationist fears that an influx of polygamists would cause moral deterioration, the polygamy bar remains a resolute, if often overlooked, feature of modern immigration law. The current immigration scheme continues this tradition, rendering immigrants who intend to practice polygamy in the United States categorically ineligible for legal-permanent-resident status. As a result, the immigration bar allows polygamous men to immigrate with a wife of their choosing and the children from each of their marriages. Their other wives, however, are deemed inadmissible to the United States. This Note explores the immigration bar's disproportionate effect on the foreign wives of polygamous immigrants. In addition to precluding the other wives of polygamous immigrants from legal permanent- resident status, the current immigration bar also renders such women ineligible for humanitarian ingress. After offering a comparative analysis of how Canada and the United Kingdom reconcile their respective policies against polygamy with the burgeoning question of women's rights, this Note proposes that Congress likewise treat foreign women in polygamous unions with a degree of equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on jurisprudence relating to ecclesiastical law in Spain during 2011. The author discusses judgment on appeals by the Tribunal Supremo (TS), or Supreme Court of Spain, pertaining to the requirement of mandatory citizenship education for school-age children in Spain. The TS ruled on June 13th, 2011 by judicial order number 2011 5259 that polygamy is not admissible by public order in Spain. Judgment number 2011 1630 on April 14th, 2011 by the Judicial Supreme Court of Andalucía, Seville, Spain ruled that marriage under canon law that was not registered in civil court would not cause exclusion to widow's pensions.

The article recounts the birth of the Reynolds litigation and the natural law arguments that the Mormons' lawyers have offered before the Supreme Court in the U.S. It shows how the court has used the rhetoric of imperialism in rejecting the arguments by tapping into international narratives of racial hierarchy and the progress of civilization. It reconstructs the afterlife of the imperial analogies in Reynolds by showing how they formed a bridge between the decline of anti-polygamy crusade.

The article explores the theories that explain the continued prevalence of polygamy within the Palestinian Bedouin society in Naqab, Israel. It examines the factors that prevent Bedouin women from resisting polygamy. It investigates the legal dimension of polygamy under international law, personal law as governed by Shari'a and Israeli criminal law. It also discusses how the operation of colonial and patriarchal powers results to the invisibility of Bedouin women by the externalization of polygamy from the legal system.

This article examines the application of the putative spouse doctrine in South Africa in the light of a recent judgement in which it was held that the second ‘wife’ to a bigamous civil ‘marriage’ in community of property was not entitled to any share of the estate at the death of her ‘husband’ despite the fact that she was ostensibly of the bona fide belief that she had been his only wife and that her marriage had been valid. On the basis of a comparative survey involving American and French law, the article concludes that the legal position created in South Africa by the precedent in question is untenable and in need of being developed in order to cater for future similar situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the impact of polygynous Muslim marriages on the spread of HIV/AIDS in South Africa. It focuses on the institution of polygyny in Islam, the South African response to polygyny, the impact of polygyny on the incidences of AIDS, and the contribution of both an informed approach to HIV and an enlightened approach to the application of Islamic values on the control of the disease's spread. It discusses the nature of polygamy in Islam under the Muslim Personal Law (MPL), which allows a man four marriages at one time but exercises strict monogamy on women, and the South African law reforms for the recognition of MPL. Statistics related to the Muslim and HIV/AIDS-affected population are also presented.

An essay is presented which explores the participation of white southern Americans in the movement opposing Mormonism in the U.S. during the 1870s and 1880s. Particular focus is given to efforts opposing polygamy, the relationships between southern Americans and northern Republicans during the post-U.S. Civil War era, and the activities of Mormon missionaries in the southern U.S. Political and religious methods of promoting anti-Mormon sentiments are also discussed.

The article focuses on the legal recognition of plural marriage without violating the principles of the marital property system in the U.S. The author believes that states permitting plural marriage should consider innovation in the legislative choices governing the issue to advance marriage freedom. She also emphasizes that people in plural marriages could use prenuptial and marital property agreements and rules such as intestacy statutes could have vital significance in these situations.

The article analyzes women's rights and the practice of polygamy in Ghana. The various justifications given for the practice and the colonial attitude towards the practice are examined. The article focuses on how polygamy impacts the attainment of substantive equality for Ghanaian women. As the total abolition of polygamy would be a challenging and problematic objective at this stage, due to the entrenched nature of the practice, it is instead recommended that law be used to protect women in polygamous marriages from domestic violence and ensure their property rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]