One Step Closer - Utah's Bigamy Amendment Goes Through House Committee

Yesterday, Utah's Bigamy Amendment - S.B. 102 - went before and passed through a House Committee on Monday.  This is the bill that will reduce Utah's anti-polygamy statute from a felony to a minor infraction.  You can listen to the hearing right here.

Even though I wasn't there, I had many good friends there, including my good friend and fellow burner, Gary Taylor, who once worked directly for the Safety Net.

I did get a chance, however, to listen in on the proceedings via the link provided above.  There was first an opening statement given by the bill's sponsor, Senator Deidre Henderson.  Then a variety of speakers were allowed to testify from both sides of the argument, both pro and con.

I don't really want to focus very much on the opposition.  There were a couple of representatives from law firms speaking against the bill.  There were a coupe of teenagers who didn't clarify why they were there, perhaps hoping to become the Greta Thunbergs of anti-polygamy.  There were mostly former victims of polygamy who now work with/ for the state's various anti-polygamy hate groups.  My opinion - biased as it may be - is that the opposition was mainly using emotionality and projection as their tool.  "These horrible things happened to me in polygamy, so it must remain illegal."  The general argument was that the bill will not reduce crimes committed within polygamy, but that it will give polygamists the green light to increase their rampant efforts to practice it without fear of recrimination.  Fear was also expressed that Utah would become a safe haven for people across the world who want to live polygamy.  Like Muslims.  It wasn't voiced directly in the hearing, but it has been stated in other forums.  Anti-polygamists are afraid of Muslims coming to Utah to live polygamy.  Can you think of anything more racist?

As far as those arguing in favor of the bill - I want to emphasize that none of those who argued in favor of the bill defended it from the standpoint of being pro-polygamy.  In fact, some of them were very against polygamy.  But they recognized that generations of Prohibition cannot and will not end the practice, only nestle it in a place to be taken advantage by perpetrators of evil.  In fact, some like Dr. Cristina Rosetti, a scholar who studies Mormon fundamentalism, pointed out that the bill keeps polygamy a felony in instances of other crimes like abuse, rape, or fraud.  (Her speech was erudite and very well-expressed, by the way.  She's a freaking rockstar.)  There were other speakers like Loretta Barlow, from the FLDS in Hildale, Utah, who spoke about the affect the 1953 Polygamy Raid had on her father, upon her and her other siblings.  Donia Jessop, the mayor of Hildale, along with Shirley Draper, the trustee of the UEP Trust, also spoke.  Alina Darger - one of those Dargers - also spoke on how she was afraid to speak about a very private incident for fear of bringing negative attention to her plural family.  Then Christine Marie Katas from Voices From Dignity spoke.  Some of you who follow my blog might remember when Christine and I clashed.  She has since become one of my favorite people on the planet.  She has done so much to help the disenfranchised and displaced in Short Creek whether offering emotional support or helping people find homes.  Christine is the perfect example of someone who came into this with preconceived notions about polygamists only to find that things are not always as they seem.

The next step is for this bill to be placed before the entire House of Representatives.  I will keep you informed!  This is an exciting time for me!

God Save Us From Stupid Articles

Okay, so I am on a newsgroup that provides me with articles on polygamy on a daily basis.  I usually glaze through them.  But occasionally, I will see a glaring example of how there are still false stereotypes about polygamists.  One article irked me.  Check it out here.

It is about the Darger family (whom I used to know back in the day).  They were recently featured on TLC's  "Sister Wives", and this is the passage that bugged me:

"The Dargers are definitely unique. For one, the wives are pretty glamorous for polygamists. They are very fit (they work out as a family,) and seem to care about things like hair, makeup and clothes; but that wasn’t always the case..."

And...

"They say they are of an independent polygamist faith, and from their clothing and hair in the old photos it looks at one time they may have been a part of a separatist Warren Jeffs’-type polygamist community. Vicky’s sister Valerie even speaks of leaving a “dysfunctional” polygamist marriage in order to save her children. The Brown family also likes to make a distinction between their family’s faith and the Warren Jeffs community, or any polygamists that abuse women, marry children, and or abuse the welfare system."


1)  The Dargers are "unique" because they are glamorous?  Granted, many polygamists are plain, but that doesn't apply to EVERY polygamist.  We are not all Amish.  If you think that polygamists are ignorant of fashion, check out my Music or Movie blogs.  That is not someone who is sheltered and isolated from the world.  I am not going to be wowed by your fandangled cell phones.  I have one.

The Darger family used to hold dances every month at the Murray City Park in Utah.  I used to attend them.  Yes, there were the waltzes and polkas that seem to figure in most polygamist dances, but they ended every single dance with Steppenwolf's "Born To Be Wild".

So, the Darger Family...  Glamorous?  Yes, but certainly not "unique"...

2)  They are "fit"?  Okay, so I personally have a weight issue.  Okay, I am just grossly fat.  (Check out the comments on my YouTube video for confirmation of this.)  But I think that I am more the exception than the rule.  Excuse me?  Is there a stereotype that polygamists are fat??  Where did that come from?  Most polygamist men seem to work in the construction industry and are pretty fit.  And "I" may be fat, but my wives certainly were not.

3)  They care about things like hair, makeup and clothes?  Are you kidding?  Polygamists don't care about hair?  Or makeup?  Or clothes?  Do polygamists run around naked?  And amongst the FLDS, some of them put a lot of money into their pioneer dresses.  And the bouffant hairdo that the women favor?  They put a lot of work into that look, even using sugar water to hold their hair in place.  They care very much about their appearance.  So dressing up is not something unique to monogamists.

4)  Their clothing and their hair indicated that they belonged to some separatist, Warren Jeffs-type polygamist community?  Now, I admit, in times past, most polygamists looked the same - long hair and long dresses for the women.  It didn't matter whether you were FLDS, in the AUB, or an Independent. They all kind of dressed the same.  But that hasn't been true for a long time.  And I have known the Dargers for a long time.  And they never belonged to any community, per se.  They were Independents.

5)  "Polygamists who abuse women, marry children, and abuse the welfare system?"  Clearly, this author has bought into the negative stereotypes.  Where do they find these kind of journalists?  Do monogamous men ever abuse women?  Do they ever marry children?  Do they abuse the welfare system?  Why is it okay to believe stereotypes about polygamists, but not about other groups?

This is one of the worst articles about polygamy that I have ever read.  I don't know how this stuff passes off as journalism.