Stars of TLCs Sister Wives Under Investigation

[oh_gal]

Polygamy Laws

http://www.usmarriagelaws.com/search/united_states/polygamy/index.shtml

Now seriously, do you want to start enforcing ALL of these laws state by state?

Me? Personally? Well....yeah!
But then, I've always been a law-abiding citizen.

I always get a little nervous when people start deciding for themselves which laws to follow, and which to disregard. If you're going to do that, then why have laws at all?

 

[LaWanda]

My question is ... do these people shop the television stations? or does TLC/DHC/TRU TV/ETC come looking for them? I mean really. I have been married for 15 years, I have 20 yr old twins, an 11 yr old and a house full of pets. Can I have a TV Show? Oh, me and my hubby are an inter-racial couple. But we would be boring I guess.

 

[justbeachy]

Those children will have been raised to be tolerant, the rooms daddy would be rotating to are their moms. I am sure they would give as much thought to it as the children of two parents entering their room at night.

I also think it's far better for those children than it is for the children of divorced parents.

BBM. I just want to be sure I understand you. You think it is better for children to be part of a polygamous family than it is for them to be part of a divorced family? And not just better, but "far" better?

 

[tlcya]

I think generalizations suck big ole honkin raw eggs.

I think a child who is raised in a loving tolerant home is more likely to grow up sound and well-adjusted than one from a broken angry bitter divorced home.

I DO NOT agree that all children from polyamorous homes are better off than all divorced kids.

each kid is diferent. each home is diferent.

 

[legalmania]

So it's much better for the kids to see dad being hauled off in handcuffs. Then having the media hounding the mothers. It also has to be confusing for the children to see dad going from room to room. It is against Utah law to be married to more than one person at a time. I'll post it again.

http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE30/htm/30_01_000200.htm

 

[tlcya]

Thank you for the link to the statute. I am aware it is against the law in Utah. I am sure that these folks knew that as well when they decided to allow TLC to film there polyamorous lifestyle. Which begs the question why? When they knew there would be all this scrutiny and disapproval, perhaps even arrest?

While I would not opt to break a law, even if I thought it wrong, you must recall that not long ago in our nation's history, a black man who had relations with a white woman, by law, could be hung. Gays could not be seen associating with one another or hang out in gay bars lest they risk police raids, arrests and beatings.

My point is this - If I had lived in those times, would I have been the one pumping my fist egging the authorities on as they beat or hung folks for being "sexual deviants"? Or would I be the one quietly saying from the corner, hey, long as they are all consenting adults not my concern?

Pretty sure I would be saying then what I've said now. Not my concern.

 

[believe09]

So I am still curious as to the fraud charges and whether or not any of the women are collecting public funds to support the family, not to mention how they declared it.

And FWIW, it fascinates me that a family who is patently against a law and opts to break it may possibly have no hesitation collecting public funds on behalf of their families. I am not saying this family did it-I read a book Under the Banner of Heaven that had some information regarding it. Again, I am not saying this family is like that.

 

[legalmania]

Thank you for the link to the statute. I am aware it is against the law in Utah. I am sure that these folks knew that as well when they decided to allow TLC to film there polyamorous lifestyle. Which begs the question why? When they knew there would be all this scrutiny and disapproval, perhaps even arrest?

While I would not opt to break a law, even if I thought it wrong, you must recall that not long ago in our nation's history, a black man who had relations with a white woman, by law, could be hung. Gays could not be seen associating with one another or hang out in gay bars lest they risk police raids, arrests and beatings.

My point is this - If I had lived in those times, would I have been the one pumping my fist egging the authorities on as they beat or hung folks for being "sexual deviants"? Or would I be the one quietly saying from the corner, hey, long as they are all consenting adults not my concern?

Pretty sure I would be saying then what I've said now. Not my concern.

hey tlcox, please don't take this personally, I'm just stating my opinion as you are, but we are still living in those times. It's not as severer as it was but black men who are married or have a white girlfriend in certain states are harassed, as a matter of fact there was a judge ( I forgot what state) who wouldn't marry a couple because they were black and white and the gays are still being beat and killed and are still fighting for their civil rights. When it comes to a person being denied their rights then it is my concern. I feel that everyone should have rights, but when it comes to breaking the law we should draw a line.

 

[tlcya]

no offense taken legalmania. Our opinions on this differ. Variety being the spice of life - peace friend.

 

[oh_gal]

hey tlcox, please don't take this personally, I'm just stating my opinion as you are, but we are still living in those times. It's not as severer as it was but black men who are married or have a white girlfriend in certain states are harassed, as a matter of fact there was a judge ( I forgot what state) who wouldn't marry a couple because they were black and white and the gays are still being beat and killed and are still fighting for their civil rights. When it comes to a person being denied their rights then it is my concern. I feel that everyone should have rights, but when it comes to breaking the law we should draw a line.

(above bbm)

Hope it's ok to tag this onto your post:
A law is something you must do, or abide by.
A right is something you can do, if you wish.

My dd's social studies lesson for today was all about laws and rights, and although the above definition was written for kindergartners, I like easy explanations.

 

[Linda7NJ]

BBM. I just want to be sure I understand you. You think it is better for children to be part of a polygamous family than it is for them to be part of a divorced family? And not just better, but "far" better?

You understand me. Absolutely, I think a caring intact family is always a better choice than a child experiencing a divorce. (Unless of course there is abuse) Let's say the divorce was the result of an adulterous affair.

 

[Linda7NJ]

So it's much better for the kids to see dad being hauled off in handcuffs. Then having the media hounding the mothers. It also has to be confusing for the children to see dad going from room to room. It is against Utah law to be married to more than one person at a time. I'll post it again.

http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE30/htm/30_01_000200.htm

I thought he was only legally married to one?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Thank you for the link to the statute. I am aware it is against the law in Utah. I am sure that these folks knew that as well when they decided to allow TLC to film there polyamorous lifestyle. Which begs the question why? When they knew there would be all this scrutiny and disapproval, perhaps even arrest?

While I would not opt to break a law, even if I thought it wrong, you must recall that not long ago in our nation's history, a black man who had relations with a white woman, by law, could be hung. Gays could not be seen associating with one another or hang out in gay bars lest they risk police raids, arrests and beatings.

My point is this - If I had lived in those times, would I have been the one pumping my fist egging the authorities on as they beat or hung folks for being "sexual deviants"? Or would I be the one quietly saying from the corner, hey, long as they are all consenting adults not my concern?

Pretty sure I would be saying then what I've said now. Not my concern.

Bravo!!!!!!!!!!!!!:woohoo:I'd be right next to you!

 

[Fairy1]

I thought he was only legally married to one?

As I understand it, the law is written in such a way that marrying or cohabitating with multiple partners is legally considered bigamy or polygamy. Though I also understand that in UT, such cases are rarely prosecuted.

These folks (and TLC) either made absolutely sure their case would not be prosecutable, or they were comfortable taking their chances. My guess is that the state is simply making a show of investigating because this particular family is on TV and they can't really ignore it without being criticized. I'm sure there are plenty of other families living this lifestyle who are and plan to remain under the radar.

 

[believe09]

I guess they cannot technically claim religious persecution because they are not really practicing polygamy, right? He is only married to one and the rest are cohabitating.

They are really just swinging...or he is anyway.

 

[craftybatchy]

Kody and Meri declared bankruptcy in 2005. There have been many questions regarding the finances of this family, names added to deeds, other names taken off, etc.

Kody was closely involved with Das Hundhaus Firearms and Accessories until 2004. He and Meri declared bankruptcy in 2005. Between 2005/06 Meris name was added to the deed of a home he owned with Jenelle but NOT Christine or Meri.

Kody is now CEO loser of Kody Brown Family Entertainment. It looks to me like he is not employed as an advertising salesman in the traditional sense but as the front man for his own PR firm of which his family is the only client.

Having a few wives would be a convenient way to shuffle property and debt, imo.


Also of note, no voting records have been found for Meri, Jenelle, or Christine in the state of Utah.

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

Kody and Meri declared bankruptcy in 2005. There have been many questions regarding the finances of this family, names added to deeds, other names taken off, etc.

Kody was closely involved with Das Hundhaus Firearms and Accessories until 2004. He and Meri declared bankruptcy in 2005. Between 2005/06 Meris name was added to the deed of a home he owned with Jenelle but NOT Christine or Meri.

Kody is now CEO loser of Kody Brown Family Entertainment. It looks to me like he is not employed as an advertising salesman in the traditional sense but as the front man for his own PR firm of which his family is the only client.

Having a few wives would be a convenient way to shuffle property and debt, imo.


Also of note, no voting records have been found for Meri, Jenelle, or Christine in the state of Utah.

Ok...so please tell me I am understanding this incorrectly. BUT are you saying that his 'job' is actually marketing his family? Is that right? Because Mr. Kody Brown made me ill before but NOW? I'm considering flying my butt to Utah and taking him DOWN. What a sad sad excuse for a man.

 

[Fairy1]

I guess they cannot technically claim religious persecution because they are not really practicing polygamy, right? He is only married to one and the rest are cohabitating.

They are really just swinging...or he is anyway.

Yes Ma'am - swinging like a monkey from tree to tree to tree to tree!

Trust me, they will claim religious persecution if they have to. That's how they roll.

 

[Fairy1]

Ok...so please tell me I am understanding this incorrectly. BUT are you saying that his 'job' is actually marketing his family? Is that right? Because Mr. Kody Brown made me ill before but NOW? I'm considering flying my butt to Utah and taking him DOWN. What a sad sad excuse for a man.

I didn't really need another reason to feel :sick: about this dude. BUT, the fact that his motive for "outing" himself, the wives and all those innocent kids on TV for $$$ is even more sickening. Though I don't suppose we should really be surprised.

Never fails to amaze me the lengths to which people will go to be on TV and to be "famous."

IMO, this "lifestyle" has NOTHING to do with religion or civil rights. Nothing.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I did not post on this thread at first, but now that I have seen and heard more about this I just have to say that I find it to be very twisted. What are they teaching their children? That it is okay for Daddy to have multiple partners even though it is against the law?

Guess I will not be watching the show!