Comments on: First They Came for the Polygamists… http://lawiscool.com/2008/08/06/first-the-came-for-the-polygamists/?nucrss=1 The law school blog and podcast from Canada Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:07:47 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Rob http://lawiscool.com/2008/08/06/first-the-came-for-the-polygamists/comment-page-1/#comment-4304 Rob Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:52:31 +0000 http://lawiscool.com/?p=570#comment-4304 This Landes character must be another Steyn fan, especially looking at his extremely racist website. Why do they have such difficulty actually identifying the issues? Or do they do this deliberately to take people off track? This Landes character must be another Steyn fan, especially looking at his extremely racist website.

Why do they have such difficulty actually identifying the issues? Or do they do this deliberately to take people off track?

]]> By: Jan Baker http://lawiscool.com/2008/08/06/first-the-came-for-the-polygamists/comment-page-1/#comment-4299 Jan Baker Wed, 10 Dec 2008 13:49:15 +0000 http://lawiscool.com/?p=570#comment-4299 It is interesting that you have identified contradictions around the practice of divorce and as actually supporting the state of polygamy. You make it an argument in favor of polygamy, but I make it an argument against divorce. Divorce is not benigh. Divorce is not green. Divorce is a primary factor in our national neurosis (teach school for a year--you'll see). Divorce messed up Carrie Bradshaw's dream. Divorce kills love. Let us fight it with all our hearts. I myself do not do business with those who initiated divorce, and always tell them so. I especially avoid doctors who flout their trophy wives. God proscribed divorce as strongly as murder, because marriage is a metaphor for man's relation to God; some relationships are so important that they cannot be discarded, and our relation with God is one of them. We should not divorce our spouses without tempting God to divorce mankind, and this can never be. Yes, recognize that divorce is no different from any other form of marriage that paganizes the relationship, and fight it with all your heart. It is interesting that you have identified contradictions around the practice of divorce and as actually supporting the state of polygamy. You make it an argument in favor of polygamy, but I make it an argument against divorce. Divorce is not benigh. Divorce is not green. Divorce is a primary factor in our national neurosis (teach school for a year–you’ll see). Divorce messed up Carrie Bradshaw’s dream. Divorce kills love. Let us fight it with all our hearts. I myself do not do business with those who initiated divorce, and always tell them so. I especially avoid doctors who flout their trophy wives. God proscribed divorce as strongly as murder, because marriage is a metaphor for man’s relation to God; some relationships are so important that they cannot be discarded, and our relation with God is one of them. We should not divorce our spouses without tempting God to divorce mankind, and this can never be.

Yes, recognize that divorce is no different from any other form of marriage that paganizes the relationship, and fight it with all your heart.

]]> By: rlandes http://lawiscool.com/2008/08/06/first-the-came-for-the-polygamists/comment-page-1/#comment-4296 rlandes Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:43:10 +0000 http://lawiscool.com/?p=570#comment-4296 the idea that because the church does not allow divorce and a catholic who gets a civil divorce and remarries is somehow bigamist by canadian law calls into question the legal training of the author of this post. how can one compare that with people who have multiple wives, and who expect the social security system to support them. and the record of bigamists' treatment of their wives is pretty appalling. one cd actually argue that this post is sexist in its defense of some of the ugliest aspects of oppressive patriarchal society. <hr> Law is Cool: The author of the substantive material of this post is a <a href="http://osgoode.yorku.ca/osgmedia.nsf/research/drummond_susan_g" rel="nofollow">well renowned law professor</a>. We're not sure what your credentials in family law are yet, but you seem to run a pretty politically <a href="http://www.theaugeanstables.com" rel="nofollow">controversial site</a> in the U.S. on a completely different subject matter, and have obvious Millennial sectarian biases that would likely affect your evaluation of Mormonism. And we're not sure what record you're citing, because there are many different types, for example, in Bountiful, B.C. We're sure your definition of a "free and democratic society" differs substantially from the people in Bountiful. the idea that because the church does not allow divorce and a catholic who gets a civil divorce and remarries is somehow bigamist by canadian law calls into question the legal training of the author of this post. how can one compare that with people who have multiple wives, and who expect the social security system to support them. and the record of bigamists’ treatment of their wives is pretty appalling. one cd actually argue that this post is sexist in its defense of some of the ugliest aspects of oppressive patriarchal society.

Law is Cool:
The author of the substantive material of this post is a well renowned law professor. We’re not sure what your credentials in family law are yet, but you seem to run a pretty politically controversial site in the U.S. on a completely different subject matter, and have obvious Millennial sectarian biases that would likely affect your evaluation of Mormonism.

And we’re not sure what record you’re citing, because there are many different types, for example, in Bountiful, B.C. We’re sure your definition of a “free and democratic society” differs substantially from the people in Bountiful.

]]> By: Laurie/Halo Secretarial http://lawiscool.com/2008/08/06/first-the-came-for-the-polygamists/comment-page-1/#comment-2533 Laurie/Halo Secretarial Fri, 08 Aug 2008 03:59:19 +0000 http://lawiscool.com/?p=570#comment-2533 Thanks for such an interesting post, it's so true, but sadly too logical for some of the people who believe they have "right" on their side. Take care! Thanks for such an interesting post, it’s so true, but sadly too logical for some of the people who believe they have “right” on their side. Take care!

]]>