REVIEW: A Cruel Arithmetic
POLYAMORY / New memoir looks back on BC's historic polygamy case
Jeremy Hainsworth / Vancouver / Friday, November 30, 2012
Share |

Dozens of lawyers introduced themselves to BC Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Bauman at the start of the polygamy reference case on Nov 22, 2010, but only BC government lawyer Craig Jones remained standing.

Jones would spend the next few hours outlining polygamy's "cruel arithmetic" — why the government believed the law criminalizing the practice of multiple spouses was justifiable and constitutional.

The case grew from the controversy surrounding the southeastern BC polygamous community of Bountiful, a hamlet divided between two factions of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS).

The community of about 1,000 residents had been investigated repeatedly during the previous two decades but avoided prosecution until its leaders were charged with polygamy in January 2009.

Winston Blackmore was accused of having at least 19 wives, and Jim Oler at least three.

Lawyer Craig Jones, who argued in favour of maintaining Canada's ban on polygamy, has now written a memoir of the historic court case.
(Irwin Law Inc/Tobyn Ross photo)
FLDS members practise polygamy in arranged marriages, a tradition tied to the early theology of the Mormon Church. The main branch of the church renounced polygamy in 1890, but several fundamentalist groups seceded in order to continue the practice.

Blackmore has long claimed religious persecution and protested what he sees as the denial of his constitutional right to religious freedom.

The criminal charges against him and Oler never proceeded due to controversy surrounding the number of special prosecutors needed to arrive at their approval. A judge agreed that the government had gone “prosecutor shopping” and threw the charges out. Undeterred, the government tried a new tack, requesting a constitutional reference, essentially putting the polygamy law itself on trial.

In the testimony that followed, in a trial setting unprecedented in Canadian history, Bauman heard about polygamy, polyamory, polyandry, polygyny and gay marriage, among a host of other issues.

Bauman's ruling a year later said Canada's Section 293 criminal ban against polygamy should be upheld because it impairs religious rights only minimally while potentially protecting women and children from abuse.

However, he defended polyamorous relationships, calling them consensual and not harmful, and said polyamorists should be allowed to have multiple relationships as long as they don't get married.

Now, Jones has written A Cruel Arithmetic: Inside the Case Against Polygamy, a memoir of the case that produced one of the world's most thorough investigations of polygamy.

"This book is about polygamy and a fundamental clash of rights; the right of a society to declare it to be criminal behaviour versus the rights of individuals to be free to arrange their most intimate personal affairs according to their conscience," Jones writes.

The cruel arithmetic (a phrase drawn from Vancouver Sun writer Daphne Bramham), according to Jones, is the excess of unmarried men and the overall gender imbalance that results as those unmarried men are expelled while more women are imported for marriage.

Bountiful, he writes, “was a small but important window on polygamy in practice, and it provided a demographic backdrop against which the individual evidence would emerge — of child brides, lost boys and human trafficking."

In the foreword, journalist Andrew Coyne asks if polygamy is not just another step forward.

“Not so long ago, same-sex marriage had seemed strange, even threatening; now it was the law. Was not multiple marriage simply another step along the road to greater tolerance?"

Jones answers him in the afterword 352 pages later. "We can and should say that, going forward, all polygamous marriages that come to the attention of authorities will be subject to prosecution," Jones writes.

"With respect to subsisting or historical polygamous marriage, prosecution would only occur if it appeared that there were elements of exploitation, abuse, or a gross imbalance of power," he continues. "This would permit the majority of existing polygamous marriages, and the families they supported, to continue, and run their course without government interference.

"I see little to be gained in tearing apart existing and functioning households,” he adds, “most of which include children of the wives involved, except where they are founded on exploitation or abuse."

On the topic of same-sex marriage, Jones concedes, "The modern embrace of gays and lesbians appears to have had nothing but positive effects."

He also quotes reference witness John Witte Jr, director of the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University in Georgia, as saying children and partners in same-sex marriages are flourishing, as are the communities that embrace them.”

"We've come to the conclusion in a number of different churches and in a number of different states and in a number of different cultural communities, that same-sex parties need to be treated the same way as other-sex parties when it comes to union.”

Jones also praises the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association's (CPAA) lawyer John Ince, calling him "adept" at presenting his clients' viewpoint in the reference case.

Jones summarizes the CPAA position as supporting "the idea that there could be some law to prohibit polygamy, but that it could not include the secular, egalitarian multipartner relationships that their membership idealized."

Ince argued before Bauman that the ban on the formalization of polyamorous relationships violated freedom of expression in as much as "the public celebration of a polyamorous relationship affirms the value and legitimacy of the union. It is also an expression of love and commitment."

Bauman disagreed. But he still differentiated between polygamy and polyamory in his ruling.

"For fundamentalist Mormons, polygamy is a fundamental spiritual principle through which they fulfill God’s plan,” Bauman said. "For polyamorists, the ability to live in a family with the people they love is essential."

Bauman said the consensual and sex-positive nature of relationships are important tenets of polyamory. He also found that many polyamorists live mainstream lives fully integrated with their communities.

Ince welcomed Bauman's decision as a relief to polyamorists whose lives and relationships were validated and found not to be illegal.

In the end, Bauman would hear and consider what he called "the most comprehensive judicial record on the subject ever produced," Jones says.

Jones's book, when read in tandem with Bramham's history of the FLDS in Canada, The Secret Lives of Saints, and Bauman's comprehensive ruling, provides an excellent overview of the context and law on polygamy in Canada.



Share |


Reader Comments


 
IS THE BC GOVERNMENT A CRIMINAL GOVERNMENT?
Successive BC governments have known about the abuses at Bountiful for decades, but preferred to turn a blind eye, pretending that polygamy MIGHT be protected under the Charter's guarantee of religious freedom. They never bothered to put it to the test, but in any case, were well aware that the Charter does not give ANY religion carte blanche to sexually abuse girl children, throw boy children out of the community in order to lessen the competition for "wives" -- the so-called "polygamy math" -- deny equal education to girls, or take boy children out of school and put them to work at less than the legal wage. On June 30, 2009, RCMP Constable Shelley Livingstone testified in BC Supreme Court that the police now have DNA and birth certificate proof that ex-Bishop Winston Blackmore has impregnated NINE underage girls. No charges have been laid. In 2011 police said they had proof that some parents in Bountiful have trafficked their underage daughters to polygamous cults in the USA in order to fill the elders' demands for more and more "wives." No charges have been laid. On 23 November 2011 Chief Justice Robert Bauman brought down his decision stating that S. 293 CC, proscribing polygamy, is constitutional in that polygamy is inherently harmful because it contravenes women's equality rights, impoverishes their children and harms them psychologically, and sets men against men in their desperate search to collect more than one wife. (Nature has not even provided two women for every one man.)YET STILL OUR BC GOVERNMENT HAS NOT LAID ANY CHARGES. WHEN A GOVERNMENT IS WELL AWARE THAT LAWS ARE BEING BROKEN, THAT UNDERAGE GIRLS ARE BEING RAPED IN FORCED "MARRIAGES," AS WELL AS BEING TRAFFICKED TO THE USA, THAT BOYS ARE FORCED TO LEAVE SCHOOL EARLY TO WORK FOR LESS THAN THE MINIMUM WAGE, OR ARE SHOVED OUT OF BOUNTIFUL ALTOGETHER IN ORDER TO CATER RO "POLYGAMY MATH," IS NOT THAT GOVERNMENT AS
Jancis M. Andrews, Sechelt BC
11/30/12 9:30 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
A CRUEL ARITHMETIC (CONTD.)
Apparently I ran out of space before I could finish my question above. It should read: IS NOT THAT GOVERNMENT AS CRIMINAL AS THE CRIMINALS THEMSELVES?
Jancis M. Andrews, Sechelt BC
11/30/12 9:42 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Full Marriage Equality
An ADULT (notice: ADULT), regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, should be free to marry ANY consenting adults.
Keith, Los Angeles California
12/01/12 2:39 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
YES!
Same as marriage equality, these poygamous people do NOT AFFECT my life or my marriage, so i couldn't care less.
marc, van bc
12/01/12 3:47 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
NO
Define consent. These women and children cannot consent to these abhorrent relationships due to the gross imbalance of power inherent to a society that practices polygamy (and I would argue any form of group marriage). If polyamorous people want to fuck around they can have as much fun as they want but they cannot get married since such a system allows for the abuse of the most vulnerable in society. And as for this attitude that, ''it doesn't affect me or my marriage'' think again. Any social or legal change affects everyone in society in some way. Also even if there was no ''affect'' on you personally that doesn't mean that anything goes. As socety we have the right to dictate moral behaviour for other people within it and duty to protect the most vulnerable. Think of it this way, all those gay men dying of AIDS in the 80's-90's how many other people just went, ''doesn't affect me, why should I care?''
Mike, Edmonton AB
12/01/12 4:15 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Justice!?
Demanding that people practising polyamory must not affirm their commitment to each other in a public ceremony, and have to resort to shaky protection by civil contracts, is simply unjust. I would like to know why, of two men living with the same woman under one roof for years, one may have full protection under the law as her husband, but the other is regarded as "only" her lover, while in reality they are her equal partners? If the real problem was abuse of women and children in some religious communities, this should have been the only basis for prosecution. The only "cruel arithmetic" at play here is: how many votes can be gained and lost by discriminating in law against any particular choice of partners, belief, or relationship orientation.
Matthew, North Vancouver BC
12/01/12 6:01 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Another good plyg read
Another good read on Mormon polygamy is the hilarious yet insightful “It’s Not About the Sex My A**” by Joanne Hanks (easy to find if you google the title or author name)
Al Pratt, Salt Lake City Utah
12/03/12 12:54 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.