well DUH! - *sister wives* who didnt see that coming

luvbug00 wrote: http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2010/09/...ony_bigamy.html

Utah courts may recognize a common law marriage if the following conditions are met:

* Both parties are of legal marriage age and are able to give consent
* Both parties are capable of being married
* The parties live(d) together as man and wife
* The parties assume(d) marital responsibilities and duties
* The parties "held themselves out" as husband and wife, and others perceive(d) them to be married.


now it states you have to ask for a common law marriage to be recognized. Only he knows if that happened or not.
either way the police have rumored to have been following him for some time. I'm sure there will be some religion vs law going on during this one. I just feel bad for the kids stuck in the middle.

stella6979 replied: I can't believe they actually turned this into a show. I've seen the previews and I'm just baffled as to why anyone would want to live like this. To each their own I guess, but the thought of it really makes me sick.

luvbug00 replied: LOL! i just watch like you would watch a train wreck, you wanna look away but morbid curiosity pulls you in.
regardless of lifestyle choice. it is in fact illegal. I'm glad they are following up and yet sad because there are 13 children stuck in this mess he created.

msoulz replied: Haven't and won't watch the show, but something occurs to me - Is it illegal to have children with many women? I am guessing they are not legally married, just calling themselves wives? Hard to prosecute that...

stella6979 replied:
Me neither!!!

Nina J replied: Why would they make a show about that? I can't understand why anyone would want to live that way.

msoulz replied:
Well, I can understand what the man is getting out of it ...

mom21kid2dogs replied:
Really? What? Who in the world would want to be accountable to more than one wife?

Personally, it took me most of our 27 year marriage to train mine this well (or he at least acts well trained~ ). I'm not sharing that kind of benefit with anyone!!!

luvbug00 replied:

Well the laws in ohio are confusing. But basically what i understand is this. If he has claimed them on taxes or in any way legally to be his wives then they are civil unions. This also being because he has been with all of them for over 16 years. resides with them and claims them as his wives.
So legally he is married to all three.
at least this is my understanding.
It's not illegal to have that many baby mama's as far as reproducing goes. ( he is royally doomed if they have to legally split and he has to pay child support)

my2monkeyboys replied: I think if they ever legalize gay marriage then they'll have to legalize plural marriage.
It's their religion and as long as it's not involving minors then there will really be no leg to stand on.
As for my opinion of it, well..... it's hard to say. On one hand, the Christian side of me that believes the New Testament over-rides the Old Testament says one man, one woman. On the other hand the US citizen side of me says they are free to live how they chose, as consenting adults. So..... where does that leave me? Who knows!?! LOL

luvbug00 replied: "I think if they ever legalize gay marriage then they'll have to legalize plural marriage. "

I find these to be completely different but that's another debate entirely. (it's already legal in a couple states and hopefully will be in all states soon *hopefully being my opinion*)


I'm not religious so i have no clue where religion goes with this. I've only looked at the legal rules and ramifications of their choice.

msoulz replied:
LOL, training is important!! But what man wouldn't want an extra wife or two in the event one has a headache??

mom21kid2dogs replied:
Not sure why the reference to Ohio law in the conversation (sorry~never saw the show) but actually Ohio law is extremely clear. NO statue exists in Ohio recognizing "civil union" and hasn't for at least 10 years. Chapter 3101 of the ORC is very clear about who can legally enter into a marriage.

3101.01 Persons who may be joined in marriage - minor to obtain consent.
(A) Male persons of the age of eighteen years, and female persons of the age of sixteen years, not nearer of kin than second cousins, and not having a husband or wife living, may be joined in marriage. A marriage may only be entered into by one man and one woman. A minor shall first obtain the consent of the minor’s parents, surviving parent, parent who is designated the residential parent and legal custodian of the minor by a court of competent jurisdiction, guardian, or any one of the following who has been awarded permanent custody of the minor by a court exercising juvenile jurisdiction:

(1) An adult person;

(2) The department of job and family services or any child welfare organization certified by the department;

(3) A public children services agency.

( For the purposes of division (A) of this section, a minor shall not be required to obtain the consent of a parent who resides in a foreign country, has neglected or abandoned the minor for a period of one year or longer immediately preceding the minor’s application for a marriage license, has been adjudged incompetent, is an inmate of a state mental or correctional institution, has been permanently deprived of parental rights and responsibilities for the care of the minor and the right to have the minor live with the parent and to be the legal custodian of the minor by a court exercising juvenile jurisdiction, or has been deprived of parental rights and responsibilities for the care of the minor and the right to have the minor live with the parent and to be the legal custodian of the minor by the appointment of a guardian of the person of the minor by the probate court or by another court of competent jurisdiction.

©(1) Any marriage between persons of the same sex is against the strong public policy of this state. Any marriage between persons of the same sex shall have no legal force or effect in this state and, if attempted to be entered into in this state, is void ab initio and shall not be recognized by this state.

(2) Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex in any other jurisdiction shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state.

(3) The recognition or extension by the state of the specific statutory benefits of a legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is against the strong public policy of this state. Any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of this state, as defined in section 9.82 of the Revised Code, that extends the specific statutory benefits of legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is void ab initio. Nothing in division ©(3) of this section shall be construed to do either of the following:

(a) Prohibit the extension of specific benefits otherwise enjoyed by all persons, married or unmarried, to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes, including the extension of benefits conferred by any statute that is not expressly limited to married persons, which includes but is not limited to benefits available under Chapter 4117. of the Revised Code;

( Affect the validity of private agreements that are otherwise valid under the laws of this state.

(4) Any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state, country, or other jurisdiction outside this state that extends the specific benefits of legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state.

Effective Date: 05-07-2004

Pretty clear~ we're a one man/one woman state here

mom21kid2dogs replied:
Wow! It would have to be AWFULLY great to put up with that many women (and their kids) at once! (especially since most people can get it on the side without the tie of commitment) To each his own I guess!!!

youngmomofone replied: I'd like to have someone share the house hold chores but when it comes to my husband, he is mine and mine only!

luvbug00 replied: did I say ohio?? I'm such a dork. I ment utah. which is where they live.

moped replied: I have to agree, just like a train wreck, I can't look away! I love it and think it is going to be interesting how it all plays out! I don't agree, but I like to watch for sure! TLC is smart because htey know it will be controversial therefore they will get HUGE watchers and HUGE ratings! SMART!!!!!!

I do however think that the sister wives are a huge support for each other, so in a way it would be a comfort to have them there for each other

Kody himself is a wee bit creepy to me!

mom21kid2dogs replied:
LOL! There are enough freaks in Ohio to support the claim, Nadia!

luvbug00 replied: Jen he is such a creeper!
they all look about the same to me (except the brunette)..just younger and younger versions of the ones before. especially 2 and 3. i cant tell them apart.

luvbug00 replied: Cheryl your too funny! your right next door and we VA people are just we sent some over to you!

my2monkeyboys replied: I think they'd have to allow both legally because if they change the one man/one woman definition of marriage then where can they redraw the line without infringing on someone's rights?
The crazy thing is the actual definition of marriage is one man/one woman, so why can't they just call it something else and let adults marry whomever they want??
I don't know... but it's bound to be interesting to watch is all unfold!!!

I love that show Big Love, too - I just can't help it!

luvbug00 replied: je je your bating me for a debate! lol!
I'm gonna seriously bite my tongue on this and leave it as this:


"marriage is a social union or legal contract between people that creates kinship. It is an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually intimate and sexual, are acknowledged in a variety of ways, depending on the culture or subculture in which it is found. Such a union, often formalized via a wedding ceremony, may also be called matrimony."


they already call it a civil union anyway. It's sweet and i cant wait until they reach full legal equal rights with adoptions, unions and every other thing that every human deserves to accomplish happiness in their lives.

coasterqueen replied: Have any of you watched the HBO series Big Love? That man has nothing but a headache having so many wives. I don't know how any man would want that many wives and I don't know about Sister Wives as I've not seen in, but the Big Love series does a good job showing it from a religion standpoint and not being able to have sex with three different wives. The poor guy had to take viagra one season just to keep up with all his wives.

moped replied: Sounds like I need to tune into Big Love! I havne't seen it! Will check on tv

A&A'smommy replied: I truly believe that men who "believe" in "plural" marriage are only actually in it for sex. You can't tell me otherwise.
As a Godly woman I'm not going to watch the show, mostly because I don't want to support them. God's intent for marriage was for one woman and one man, the only reason that God ever aloud men to marry multiple women (and it never says anything FOR it in the old testament, just talks about the different men who did marry several women) was for reproduction. Some commentators also believe that he aloud it to happen because there have always been (as far as we know) more women than men and if that were the case back in bibical times then those women who were without husbands usually ended up in prostitution or slavery so it was so he could provide and take care of her.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
Amen.
I have not seen the show, but the last preview I saw was about one of the wives having a jealousy issue. WELL DUH!!!! Your husband has two other wives! She doesn't think she'll have jealousy issues!?!?

Stupid...

luvbug00 replied: Thanks Jessica for your biblical input. like i said i'm not at all religious and so that aspect is clueless to me.
as for the jealousy, i'd put down money the first wife meri will have it and leave at some point. There is only so much stress and she has been dealing with it the longest.

I love their daughter who is against it. I like how she made the new wife feel kinda like an idiot the last show.

coasterqueen replied:
It is stupid and I hait to admit I have evened watched Big Love, but the whole religion issue is intriguing. You know, that they actually consider it a religion. I am always trying to understand all the different religions and why they come about, which is why I had to watch it.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
What kind of religion do they consider themselves? I truly hope they don't claim to be any kind of "Christianity" because this is far from it...

coasterqueen replied:
Mormon religion believes in plural marriage -- some sectors of it, I guess.

My grandmother, at one point in her life, was of the mormon faith. I went to church with her a few times and never saw any signs of plural marriage and my grandmother was not a part of one, so maybe the mormon plural marriage religion faith is more just in Utah? I dunno, honestly.

I know that many do not believe that the plural marriage for some is not done for religious purposes, but honestly my understanding in the mormon faith it IS for religious reasons. I don't know about the other show, but Big Love honestly does a good job of showing the whole plural relationship thingy from a religious standpoint. It's a bit far out there, and I don't condone it, but for some ODD reason these people who grow up on these "compounds" believing in their faith and the plural marriage life is REAL for them. To many it might be a cult, but to them it's not and maybe to them good old "standard" christianity is odd. KWIM? I mean, I know Jehovah Witnesses wouldn't classify a lot of relgions very christian, yet many find JW religion odd.

I know I'm not making sense. Being on the outside in a sense I see why religious people say what they say -- they think their belief system is the only way. I've had this argument with my MIL a MILLION times and gave up. Not knowing hardly anything about the mormon religion I can't comment on why they think their way is 'the' way. I tend to try to think of a lot of people are brought up in religion -- never getting to explore what else is out there and never getting to decide what they believe to be the right 'way' and so they only know their religion as 'the' religion to believe. Mormons are no different, really, doesn't make them freaks.

Ugh, I'm not explaining myself right and my sinuses are killing. I will explain more later, if I can.

Kirstenmumof3 replied: I was actually just wondering when the police would become involved. I will admit that I did watch it and found it very disturbing.

msoulz replied:

You are making perfect sense Karen. This is why people strap bombs to themselves and blow up others. They are taught that is "the" way.

jcc64 replied:

I don't see the connection. I've heard this often in the gay marriage debate, "Well, the next thing you know, they'll be legalizing marriage between people and animals." I can't for the life of my understand how this argument goes from point A to point B. Why it's anyone else's business who someone marries will forever elude me. If people are against gay marriage, and it's against their religion, I accept that fact completely. Why they then feel entitled or even compelled to subject other consenting adults to their own personal beliefs is beyond me. There are many things about various religions that I don't understand or agree with, but I respect everyone's right to believe as they wish. I believe gay people are entitled to the same tolerance.
I'm sure I'll get tons of comments to the contrary, and I'm not trying to change anyone's mind here. Just throwing my two cents in...
BTW, I want to offer a blanket apology for my scarcity lately to all my good friends here at PC. I am completely swamped at my new job--my own family or friends irl rarely see me anymore. In addition, Corey has been advanced to a higher team level in gymnastics, which means AFTER work, we are at the gym 4 hrs EVERY day. So, please bear with me. I do pop in and lurk, but I just haven't had a lot of "me" time lately. I'm sure it will get better as I acclimate, but in the meantime, peace and love to you all.

Sam & Abby's Mom replied: I find the show interesting. To me, as long as they are all consenting adults, I have no issue with it.

my2monkeyboys replied:
I think the connection is that if the law is changed for one group that doesn't follow the one man/one woman pattern, then how can they not allow it for another group that doesn't follow the pattern? Now I don't think anyone would go for the marriage to animals thing (at least I HOPE not! LOL), and as I said earlier, the religious part of me is against any marriage other than one man/one woman, but the 'American/ freedom to all' side of me says they have the right.
But there absolutely is a connection, I'm not sure how some one could not see it... both 'options' are marriages between consenting adults.

We're glad you dropped in for a bit - hope to see you around more often!!

jcc64 replied:

Thanks! I'm glad I did, too!

MommyToAshley replied:
It's because one side defines marriage as a legal contract or institution while the other side sees it in the biblical sense, as a sacred union. When two sides can't even agree on the definition of marriage, it only gets messier from there. That just brings up the argument of "separation of church and state" but that is pretty difficult since our constitutional laws were founded on biblical law.

MommyToAshley replied:
It's so good to see you around here. Glad to hear your job is going so well, and WOW, sounds like Corey is doing something really special with her gymnastics. I loved that video you shared with us not too long ago... I would love to see her in person. You must be so proud!

Miss you!!

coasterqueen replied:
You know, I see this and I, too, see marriage as more of a sacred union, but I have to ask this, not just of you but anybody, everybody.....How can anyone see marriage as a sacred union and then get divorced? The way people are getting divorced today like they are it almost seems to me that people DO see marriage as a legal contract and NOT as a sacred union. It's really sad IMO. I know that people get married due to abuse, etc, but the ridiculous number of divorces these days just blows my mind. It saddens me. Sorry, I know this has strayed from the original topic.

MommyToAshley replied:
I was thinking about this last night. I had actually written something, and then erased it because I thought it was best to stay clear of the topic, but then I thought I should address your question of tolerance.

I think a good place to start would be to ask gay couples why they want to get married. Is it because they want to be recognized in the eyes of God? Or is it because they want to be accepted by society as a lifelong committed couple? Or, is it because they want the legal contract and rights that married couples have?

If it is the first option, in the eyes of God, then that is contradictory since the Bible specificly states that marriage is lifelong relationship between one man as husband and one woman as wife.

But, if it is is for the other two reasons, then that make sense to me. Under the law, everyone should be able to share their possesions, have the visitors they want in their hospital rooms, and conduct themselves in their own home in a manner that is not harmful to others. From a legal standpoint, I would have no issuse. It's when you get into faith and the moral side of things that it gets messy. I have some friends and even family that are gay, some are in a committed relationship an others have open marriages, and they know that I don't agree with their lifestyle, but they also know that I still love them as a person and I love them enough to tell them the truth. Practicing the Christian faith and what is expected of it is being very intolerant of sin, even our own, by embracing the sinner but not embracing the sin. To me, that is tolerance.

And, you speak of tolerance... is it tolerant to expect Christians to redefine His Word, the very definition of marriage, to suit political correctness?

holley79 replied: We were just discussing this here at work so then we all googled polygamist and it is based on the religion faith. I don't believe in it but to each is there own. This practice has been around for hundreds of years here in the US.

Polygamy

When you google polygamist you will see some people who have 100 wives. To us it's crazy, maybe to them it's normal. Who knows, right?

jcc64 replied:

I'm not asking Christians to redefine anything, Dee Dee. I believe what I said, not clearly I guess, is that everyone should be entitled to run their own lives as they see fit, Christians included. For me, the problems occur when people try to impose their own beliefs onto the lives of others. If Christians don't believe in gay marriage, then they shouldn't enter into one.

coasterqueen replied:
To me this is a tricky thing, because IMO people are imposing their beliefs onto the lives of others every day, whether they mean to or not. I mean, there is a girl in the 2nd grade that has two mothers. She's adopted. The mothers are very elderly, IMO to be having such a young child....IMO. Kylie has asked why the girl has two mothers and no father AND why one of the mothers looks majorly like a grandmother. I know the one is at least in her late 50's and I'd guess the other one is in her 60's. So I've had to explain to Kylie the beliefs of those people. So isn't the way people live their lives imposing on others in that sense. I mean, we are a small very tight knit community and so we've had to deal with this issue very closely. Doesn't bother me. Shocked me a little, but you would be able to understand that if you knew our community. Maybe I'm not seeing the whole "imposing your beliefs on others" thing in the right way, so please help correct me if I'm not. I just think it's hard not to impose a gay lifestyle on others, in particular Christians, maybe, if you are in the community and being a part of it, right? No?

jcc64 replied:

So, what would you have them do, disappear or dissolve their family so you won't have to explain to your kids that people make different choices in life all the time, some that are "wrong" in your family's moral code, but not in theirs?
When Corey was in preschool, she befriended a little boy who has two lesbian mothers. They eventually moved in across the street from us. Corey was 3 at the time, so I had to keep my explanation simple, and I just said to her that there are all different kinds of families--some kids have a mom and dad, some have only a mom, some only a dad, and in this case, this kid has two moms. I waited for her to ask another question, she didn't, and I left it at that. As she's gotten older, and asked more questions, I've answered them honestly and according to our own belief system. It's been enough for her, and I don't believe having to come to terms with the fact that other people do things differently than we do has damaged her in any way, quite the contrary, actually. Imo, it's one of the most valuable lessons I can teach my kid.

MommyToAshley replied:
But, the request to change the law is redefining marriage, because as it is now, marriage is between one man and one woman.

I happen to agree with you, people should be allowed to live their lives as they see fit and I am not here to pass judgement on them or anyone else. I already said I don't have a problem with gay couples having some of the same rights under the law ... as I said above, people "should be able to share their possesions, have the visitors they want in their hospital rooms, and conduct themselves in their own home in a manner that is not harmful to others." But, I don't think we should be expected to change the definition of something that is considered a sacred union, not just a legal contract, by myself or other Christians.

I have had the same kind of conversations with Ashley as you have with Corey.

jcc64 replied: I'm only speaking about marriage as a legal construct. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the gay community is not asking to be recognized by the church, only by the gov't, so that they can be entitled to the same rights and protections as the rest of us.

PrairieMom replied:
I agree with this. My explanation for any of these things, be it race, religion or sexual orientation , we have even used it to explain divorced couples, is basically, " its not better, not worse, just different, and different is ok. WE do things this way..."

Calimama replied: Eh, I'm not sure what's illegal about it? Unless he's actually married to them. I took it as legally, he's only married to 1 of them. Not my thing, but do what you want..

coasterqueen replied:
I wouldn't expect them to do that. Like I said I don't have a problem with others doing what they want. That's their choice. I guess my issue was with the choice of words of "imposing on others" or whatever was said. I never had an issue at all and had absolutely NO problem explaining to my child why a girl on her baseball team had two mothers. She knows our beliefs and what we feel is right, yet she can also accept that others may not feel the way we do. That's a lesson we've taught our child when it comes to ALL kinds of things -- not just gay couples.

luvbug00 replied: just watched the season finale last night..wow.
I came to two opinions.
first: christine (wife 3) seems really smart, funny, I think she can do soooo much better then kody.
second: Kody is the most hypocritical, self serving ****** that prays on woman with no self esteem.
He makes me sick!
Even jon thought he was a total jerk. That says alot for me. lol!
i dont buy the " we are sisters" crud at all...

youngmomofone replied:
I just watched it and I agree. I think that since he saw how bad it was affecting the other "wives" especially his first wife that he would call off the wedding. Seeing that he didn't, he is a butt-head. He only cares about himself. And then doesn't want any of his wives to have another man in their lives .

luvbug00 replied: It's like the old saying gone wrong, do what i say and not what i do..he should let them get their kicks too. If he truely believes you can love someone and have intimacy with others then he should have NO problem with it. I say Meri should leave him and find herself three husbands!

youngmomofone replied: I honestly think if any one of them leaves it will be her.

And I hate how when it comes to him getting another woman, he doesn't care about the feelings of the others. Like when he chose that new girl's dress. He thought it was no big deal, but it was hurtful. I would have left the interview too, because it seems like he is breaking all the rules for the new girl. IF they have another season, I can see heated arguments going on and jealous which is justified, and other fits.