JB
Within your question is the answer to why there are so few convictions for this issue.
Polygamy is when a man marries more than one woman. They all live together or at minimum know of each others existence (as a spouse to the man) and hold themselves out as husband and wife. Polygamy is a class 3 felony as of today.
Bigamy is basically the man marrying more than one women and they don't know of one anothers existence. Think of the business man with a wife in each of the one or two cities he frequently travels to for business. Bigamy is a misdemeanor.
In polygamy, the first marriage is typically one recognized by the state with appropriate paperwork. The additional marriages are conducted with a private ceremony (non-legal), if there is a ceremony at all. The result with the other wives would be cohabitation (which can move into common law marriage depending on the jurisdiction) or a common law marriage (if criteria is met).
The key is when does cohabitation move into a common law marriage, because it is the multiple marriages that result in the felony charge. Since this would take a great deal of work on law enforcement's part and would be a total fiasco if a family were torn apart with a erroneous claim of a common law marriage, the only time that law enforcement goes after a claim of polygamy would be if someone within the relationship reported it to the authorities. There just is little interest on enforcing this law unless there is reason...or...rather evidence that it has had a negative effect. In some states, the birth of a child can immediately catapult the relationship to a common law marriage. In others, it is a non-specified period of time where both parties acted as would a married couple.
So the way to avoid a polygamy charge is to only legally marry one woman and simply cohabitate with the others preferably in a state that has high standards to meet for the creation of a common law marriage.
The other technique to stay legal when practicing polygamy is what you have seen as referred to as serial monogamy.
I say staying legal and that is key as well. Knowingly circumventing laws, while not specifically illegal at that point can be brought into question. It can then be deemed that that activity was illegal. Again, this would take a effort on the governments part to go after and as we can see by the numbers reported in this thread...there just isnt that much interest within the government and judicial communities.
The key to making a polygamy charge extremely hard to make stick is simply not actually marrying more than one person. The police have far more important things to do than checking up on cohabitation claims. The other is making sure that there are no unhappy participants that can go to the police or that you do not flaunt it too openly. Tomas Green was convicted of 4 counts of bigamy and failure to pay child support... The main reason he was convicted...he got on TV and started talking about his lifestyle. The one thing that he said is still very true in general...
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 863 86.3%
Robert9876 I guess the short of it is; it is against the law to marry more then one person and if a group that does allow this to occur also tries to hide from the law by suppression of its members then it is an organized criminal unit.
International Level: Senior Politician / Political Participation: 188 18.8%
Name: Flipper
Country:
Comments: How can this even be a debate? If it is against the law then it is illegal. If society think the law is not justified then they need to change it like everyone else. What makes this one organized crime is because it takes at least 3 people to make it happen.
For those of you who think polygamy is a crime now you get a chance to see the 'criminals' in action: Polygamy Tours.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 3231 100%
That's ridiculous. Who is going to pay to see that? (some weird probably). You know, as long as they don't bother anyone they should just leave them ALONE and catch the real criminals out there who are stealing and killing people.
International Level: Specialist / Political Participation: 43 4.3%
These tours to the two little towns is your typical greedy opportunity for profit people.
But back at this threat. The point was made that if the law states it is illegal then why are we debating this. To my knowledge the whole idea of this site is to debate and learn from each other, see different points of view etc. We all KNOW that it is illegal. To me the question is organized crime. And what I believe what comes to most peoples minds is like a mafia / ganster group / And I have a real problem with that label. There are some communities that are largely polygamous and nobody is the "boss" And if there is a boss it tends to be the boss of a religious organization. The real issue is if a mature, no-violent, free choice plural relationship is chosen by several people and want to live together without committing fraud, paying taxes. What is wrong with that. It is my God given right to live my life according to my dictated while not violating any other human being's rights.
International Level: Politics 101 / Political Participation: 0 0%
Robert9876 there is a sort of fraud that was brought up in a documentary about this living arrangement. The second and third wives can claim welfare support because they don't 'legally' have a husband. Isn't that fraud? Plus if you know you cannot afford it why turn to the government to ask for help?
International Level: New Activist / Political Participation: 23 2.3%
Hi Clara,
Sorry for my late reply, just saw your post. I do not know which report you refer to regarding fraud. I can only say this: A lot of people quote somebody or some report and never checked the "facts" I have read some stats where they have checked the number of welfare cases in a particular county and really found no abnormal "welfare" issues even though these communities were accused of welfare fraud. I am not saying they do not exist but as we all know, welfare fraud exist everywhere in our society, including worker's compensation, and unemployment fraud.
But let me "shoot" from the hip here a little, and not really analyzed in my own mind yet. Just to put things on the table: First, If a fraud issue or a criminal issue or whatever happens, let the courts deal with it. Second, All my friends support their families, yes it is tough at times but they do. At this time they travel all over the states to work. They do not sit at home and file an unemployment claim on the computer. If you cannot afford it why turn to the government: I agree in the normal economic day-to-day sense. And I hope that you apply that to monogamy as well. If you cannot afford getting married to one person you should stay single. Agreed? If you cannot afford a child you should be neutered/condoms/abortions/vasectomy and be childless. Only the well off should have children. It would help society and tax payers if we would not have to support education, grands etc for those that cannot afford to pay for the schooling of their children. As an accountant I would say: Take the total cost per school and divide that by the number of students and bill each family each month for each student that attends that school. No pay, no attending. No children (such as retired couples) no school tax assessment. Do the same with higher education, public swimming pools, public transportation libraries etc. Agreed? As the baby boomers retire we have no funds/ mass of people to support them. Unless we have a lot of foreigners come into this country. Maybe these plural marriage kids might fill that gap? If nothing else, they speak English. What is the net cost or revenue to the country from these kids? Let's assume they are "supported" for awhile as they grow up. Then they start to get into the work force and pay taxes into the coffers of the IRS. They tend to work in construction jobs, well paid and pay taxes like everybody else.
FRAUD: Fraud is not necessarily criminal or an offense. Yes it might be immoral or illegal. It is an intentional misrepresentation of a material existing fact. Relating this to another person, knowing full well it is false resulting in damage or injury.
So, a second wife that has been denied the legal claim of a husband is under the law of the country : Single. (I am not a lawyer) So if the country can legally deny her certain rights (especially when the man dies) then should she not use that same set of laws and apply that to herself as a single mother? And get the benefits from a government that imposes upon her the status of single? What is good for the goose is good for the gander, no? So, is it a fraud? She declares, she is not married, (I have no idea what the questions are) What about families, whose unemployment benefits ran out years ago and probably get welfare assistance. What actually is the difference in terms of single mothers with children? Should they all be cut off? I really do not have all the answers to these complex questions either Clara. What really is the difference between a plural marriage family having three wives and all unemployed versus a monogamous family unemployed and two single mothers unemployed? And you know that we have a lot of single young mothers unemployed on welfare. Costing the tax payers a lot more because they all require separate ling arrangements while in a plural marriage they might be in the same house.
International Level: Politics 101 / Political Participation: 0 0%