Polygamy and Canada

So, as some of you may know, in a few months the British Columbia Supreme Court, in Canada, will decide whether polygamy (ie. no specific type of polygamy) will be legal or not. After this, there is basically 99.9% chance it'll be appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court of Canada.

I know there has been quite a few polygamy threads but this one is more specific. Do you believe Canada should legalise polygamy?

Yes.

Yeah, it'd be nice.

Only if it's equally available, as in polyandry as well as polygyny. And only if we make the requisite preparations for the changes (to the health system for STD prevention and to the tax codes for what polygamy means to spousal benefits) that it would require.

Otherwise no, if we're not ready to do it properly it can wait.

What you mean by legalize? That the police aren't going to come around to smash heads, or are clumps going to get that ever so elusive legal recognition that they have been clamoring for? There is a difference.

edited 17th Apr '11 2:33:03 AM by joeyjojo

Civil marriages are nothing but contracts ruling certain aspects of inheritance law and the like anyway.

I see no reason why such contracts should be only allowed between only two people.

Now, if you were asking whether such a contract would be something I would recognize as a marriage, in the full sense of the word, the answer is obviously no; but that's not something that a State can be reasonably expected to give rules about.

edited 17th Apr '11 2:40:39 AM by Carciofus

What's Canada's current take on "matrimonial property" in the event of a marriage, or even de facto relationship, breaking up?

I ask this because here in NZ they brought in a change to our "Matrimonial Property Act" that removed the "marriage" stipulation and extended the Act to cover anyone living together as sexual partners. The inclusive way it was worded can be used to apply to any co-habiting romantic/sexual relationship - regardless of the sexes involved or how many partners the person has.

This basically means that if a person is living with a couple of sexual partners and one of them leaves, the one who leaves is afforded the same rights under the Act as a legally married spouse would have. It effectively gave legal standing to gay couples and polygamous groups at the same time it granted legal status to de facto relationships.

Does Canada's current legislation likewise "effectively recognise" polygamous/polyamorous relationships in any way?

If it does, then less would need to be sorted out in the event of the law being passed to allow polygamy.

Didn't the New Zealand lawmakers consider that some people lived in de facto relationships just to SPECIFICALLY AND DELIBERATELY avoid the duties and responsibilities of marriage?

Ain't forcing them on unwilling de facto couples sort of a dick move?

Doesn't the Canadian welfare system take care of unemployed families?

If so, legalize this and I expect to see unemployed dudes with four housewives appear really fast.

There may have been a bit of that in it - as it may have been the case for a minority of people in de facto relationships - but I think a lot of de facto couples really didn't give a damn about it as they were not thinking in terms of "when they split up" and there were probably some others who were glad to hear that they had the same legal standing of married couples if things did "turn pear-shaped".

The buzz most heard was how it effectively legitimised same-sex couples. And a woman I know in the poly community - who's also a marriage celebrant and so keeps up on the laws - mentioned that it could open a can of worms so far as poly groups were concerned as it does not specifically exclude them. She reckonned it'd require a test case to resolve it.

Under NZ law "bigamy" - being legally married to two people - is against the law but "adultery" - merely screwing more than one person - is not even a misdemeanor and is not grounds for divorce. The former would entail deliberately defrauding the NZ govt, represented by the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages. The latter is unofficial and a case of "what goes on behind closed doors..."

Poly relationships of whatever description are neither fish nor fowl as they are not official marriages but also they are not the "traditional" boning the secretary without the wife's knowledge form of "adultery".

That puts them in a legal grey area.

As bigamy laws were primarily put in place to give protection to the defrauded spouses in the event of someone secretly marrying more than one person, it would not be a big problem to define criminal bigamy as "marrying a subsequent spouse under fraudulent circumstances" and legalise bigamy/polygamy (all flavours) for consenting families - sworn affidavits from any and all current spouse[s]/"spice" agreeing to the union would no doubt be required.

While a lot of poly groups probably would not want to go through the official "marriage"/Civil Union thing - being quite happy to be de facto groups - the decriminalising of polygamy would probably prompt a lot of people who are secretly poly (for fear of legal repercussions/problems) to come out of their extremely crowded closets.

My understanding is that Christians who practise Scriptural Polygamy (polygyny) and therefore require legal marriages already have their own convoluted (and rather expensive) way of "circumventing" the law (they get legally divorced then marry the next partner - they do not recognise the divorces as "legitimate", only the marriages). Legalising polygamy would remove their need to go through expensive, time-consuming secular divorces prior to marrying subsequent partners.

It looks like it might end up being a B.C. provincial law. I personally don't care, especially considering how far away BC is.

so hang here.... If three people are living under one roof as a triple is that a crime under Canadian law?

edited 17th Apr '11 8:19:52 PM by joeyjojo

I'm not sure about BC, but I know that in Utah it's technically against the law.

Yes but that was pretty clearly intended to be used to crack down on abusive mormon compounds and the like rather then consenting adults.

There is not much argument in say arresting a 'married' group of polygamous consenting adults. But there is reasonable justification in limiting legally reconditioned civil unions to between two individuals. If only to minimise welfare fraud as rott was saying.

edited 18th Apr '11 3:20:49 PM by joeyjojo

From Wikipedia:

Here's a news article on it: [1]

edited 17th Apr '11 8:37:32 PM by Zersk

You can look at the actual criminal code rather than Wikipedia.

Basically it's like this. If you're in a polygamous marriage (of any type) it is illegal but no police force in Canada is going to waste resources cracking down on this. The current court case stems from Bountiful BC issue (the mormons that moved up here from the States).

• It's not just a provincial law. You have to note that this falls under Federal Criminal Code, so it means after a few months whatever decision this judge makes, it'll go up to federal Supreme Court with a simple appeal from one side or another
• I'm pretty sure there's a black hole forming because those backing polygamy are Civil Libertarians and Church of Latter Day Saints, while those against polygamy are Christian groups, Feminists and Children's rights groups

As for whether Canada is prepared

• There are no divorce laws set up for any style of polygamy
• There is no indication that this has anything to do with defining polygamy as marriage, just that it will be legalised

Also, as for the talk about how NZ does it, well Canada also has common-law couples. Basically, if you indicate that you are sexually involved, then you automatically enter into a common-law couple after 5 years, or you can register your relationship after 3 years. This doesn't really work with polygamy as far as I know but I think it can be used for it.

Gay marriage is already legal here in Canada and fully recognised as marriage, so common-law is not used for that purpose (it might have been in the past).

Considering there's like 50 different forms of polygamous marriage, this will certainly make family law in Canada a total nightmare if we legalise and prepare the legal framework for it all.

Small nitpick, but the Church of LDS doesn't officially support polygamy. There's a spin-off branch that does.

Saskatchewan has legalized polygamy and polygamous common law marriages after a certain time living together, I think its 2 years.

Abolish marriage, let's really get the government out of our bedrooms.

edited 18th Apr '11 4:24:37 PM by LoveHappiness

Hmm . . . I wonder how child custody will be handled in polygamous divorce cases. There'll probably be a preference for leaving a child with an intact pair if a third member splits off.

There is actually a fairly strong movement to do just that[1], even from Christians groups [2][3]

edited 18th Apr '11 6:38:57 PM by joeyjojo

Well there's multiple well established models of polygamy that handle these type of cases very well. However, I'm guessing we want to completely reinvent the wheel.