Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Utah Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Polygamy Case (ACLU Defends Polygamists)
Concerned Women for America ^ | Feb. 12, 2005

Posted on 02/16/2005 11:40:26 AM PST by Lindykim

Utah Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Polygamy Case     2/15/2005 By Anne F. Downey, Esq.

Arrested husband claims U.S. Supreme Court decision indicates right to polygamy. Did the 2003 Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned a Texas law against homosexual sodomy, open the door to polygamy? On February 3, 2005, the Utah Supreme Court heard arguments in a shocking case that raises this issue. The case began in 2002 with the arrest of Rodney Holm, a police officer living in Hildale, Utah, near the Arizona border. Hildale and neighboring Colorado City, Arizona, have a large population of polygamists. Many, like Holm, are members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS), an offshoot of the Mormon religion that openly supports polygamy. The main LDS church disavowed polygamy in 1890.

Police arrested Holm on charges of bigamy and sex with a minor to whom he was not legally married. The arrest followed his admission in a custody lawsuit that, at age 32, he impregnated 16-year-old Ruth Stubbs, his common-law "spiritual wife," who is the younger sister of Holm's first and only lawful wife, Suzie Stubbs Holm.

Besides the legal marriage to Suzie and the "spiritual marriage" to Ruth, Holm had another common-law "spiritual wife." He has 21 children by the three women.

The prosecution has also charged Suzie with abetting her husband's bigamy and illegal sex, apparently the first time in more than 100 years that Utah has prosecuted a woman on polygamy-related charges. The bigamy charge was later dropped when Ruth refused to testify against Suzie.

It is reported that the union of Ruth and Rodney was at the direction of the Fundamentalist Church leadership. PhoenixNewTimes.com cites Ruth's statements to government investigators and describes a meeting between Ruth and the Fundamentalists' powerful 88-year-old leader, Rulon Jeffs. Rodney Holm brought Ruth to see Jeffs and, when she indicated her desire to marry a neighbor boy she knew, Jeffs instead pointed to Holm and said, "I feel she belongs to you." Ruth told the investigators "Shocked, I was."

Ruth tried to postpone the "wedding," which was scheduled for the next day, but Suzie pressured her not to. Ruth was "sealed" to her 32-year-old groom in a ceremony performed by Jeffs in the presence of Suzie and Holm's other "spiritual wife." Two months after the wedding, Ruth was pregnant with her first child. A few years later, during her third pregnancy, she fled Holm and filed the custody case.

In a notarized affidavit filed in the custody case, Ruth said: "At the age of 16, I was pressured to marry Rodney H. Holm, under the rule of the [FLDS] church. Since that time, I have lived in a controlling and abusive environment common in the community. The 'sister-wives' were physically and emotionally abusive to both myself and my children. I have scars on my face from one beating. Children were beaten and locked in rooms. On several occasions, younger children would be smothered by one of the mothers until they choked or gasped for air. …I was required to work and leave my children with the other 18 in the care of the other two mothers." Critics of polygamy, including the nonprofit Tapestry Against Polygamy (TAP), founded by former polygamist wives, denounce the abuses that can occur within polygamous societies, including statutory rape and underage marriage. The organization's Web site states: "The Mormon fundamentalist tradition has been interwoven into Utah's culture for so long that today it is being protected by the ACLU, local NOW, and much of the state of Utah as a religious freedom without any regard for the polygamous women and children whose human rights are being violated."

In August 2003, a jury convicted Holm on all charges. The judge sentenced him to up to five years in the Utah State Prison on each of the three counts, to be served concurrently. But he allowed Holm to serve three years' probation and one year of incarceration in Purgatory Correctional Facility, with daily travel to his job—he has been reassigned to the public works department—under a work release program. In January 2004 the Utah Supreme Court denied Holm's request that he be released from jail pending the appeal. By mid-2004, Holm had completed his prison sentence.

Holm's appeal is based in part on the argument that the bigamy charge is unconstitutional in the wake of Lawrence v. Texas, which announced a constitutional right to engage in private homosexual sodomy. Holm's attorney argued that his client should be allowed to marry more than one wife.

Prosecutors distinguished Lawrence as involving two consenting adults, unlike Holm's prosecution. The appellate court ruled for the state.

On February 3, the Utah Supreme Court heard oral arguments. Holm's attorney argued that in light of the Lawrence decision, the court should find that his client has a constitutional right to practice polygamy. His brief states: "Popular departure from traditional marriage has made our domestic laws on cohabitation and fornication anachronistic."

According to the Deseret Morning News, Chief Justice Christine Durham cited Lawrence as indicating that a state cannot regulate private sexual relationships. Arguing for the state, Assistant Attorney General Laura Dupaix countered that there is no constitutional right to have sex with a minor. According to The Salt Lake Tribune, Ms. Dupaix, in responding to Holm's claim that he was being prosecuted for his beliefs, stated: "No one is telling Mr. Holm that he can't belong to a church that believes in polygamy."

Meanwhile, according to the Yale Daily News, Nadine Strossen, president of the ACLU, recently told a group of students at Yale that the ACLU is actively fighting to defend polygamous unions, saying: "We have defended the right for individuals to engage in polygamy."

Concerned Women for America (CWA) will remain at the forefront to defend marriage. Resources are available on our Web site. On February 4, CWA filed an amicus brief in the Washington Supreme Court urging the court to reverse a trial court decision permitting same-sex "marriage." Anne Downey is a Christian attorney who practices law with her husband in New York state. She is a member of the Christian Legal Society, an Alliance Defense Fund "ally," and is volunteering her services to CWA's Legal Studies Department.  

Concerned Women for America 1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (202) 488-7000 Fax: (202) 488-0806 E-mail: mail@cwfa.org    


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: aclu; cwa; lawrencevtexas; lawsuit; marriage; perverts; polygamy
The American Commie Lovers Union, haters of God, Christianity, and traditional moral values and defenders and promoters of NAMBLA perverts, Islamic terrorists, sodomy, buggery, fornication, and now polygamy.
1 posted on 02/16/2005 11:40:27 AM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah; Jay777; ItsOurTimeNow; DirtyHarryY2K; EdReform

ping


2 posted on 02/16/2005 11:42:19 AM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

we knew it would come to this


3 posted on 02/16/2005 11:43:45 AM PST by sure_fine (*not one to over kill the thought process*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

Next it will be for group marriage (multiple men and multiple women in the same "marriage", and then the right for 30 year old adults and 12 year old children to consensually have relations without parental permission...(and probably outside of marriage).


4 posted on 02/16/2005 11:44:34 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: sure_fine

Where is the constitutional amendment? Guess we don't need one, right? These are some messed up people.


6 posted on 02/16/2005 11:48:54 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All
Join the Fight at StoptheACLU discussion forum
Join the Fight at StoptheACLU discussion forum


Prayer for the Youth

"Join the Fight at StoptheACLU Blog">
Join the Fight at StoptheACLU Blog


7 posted on 02/16/2005 11:49:44 AM PST by Jay777 (Join The Resistance at www.stoptheaclu.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: Lindykim

What a big surprise. Next it will be bestiality. It will never end until the Lord returns and takes this scum to task.


9 posted on 02/16/2005 11:54:32 AM PST by Marysecretary (Thank you, Lord, for FOUR MORE YEARS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Lindykim

I've never quite figured out why any guy would WANT more than one wife! That means you'd have more than one MOTHER-IN-LAW!..........AAAAA-r-r-r-r-r-g-g-g-g-g-g-h-h-h-h--h!.....


11 posted on 02/16/2005 11:54:54 AM PST by Red Badger (I call her GODZILLARY because she went to NYC and made her nest there, too.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

snip...'we knew it would come to this"


Sure did! Anything that will help to destroy America's traditional family structure and institutions will be promoted and defended by the morally insane ACLU and its' sewer vemin cabal.


12 posted on 02/16/2005 11:54:55 AM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary

I know you are being sarcastic, but seriously don't put it past them. The only reason they wouldn't support beastiality is if animal rights people are donors!


13 posted on 02/16/2005 11:55:47 AM PST by Jay777 (Join The Resistance at www.stoptheaclu.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum

snip....'next time it will be group marriage...."


By that time, traditional marriage will be dead, unless we put a stop to the madness before then.


14 posted on 02/16/2005 11:56:34 AM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary

Amen to that!


15 posted on 02/16/2005 11:57:34 AM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

It would be hard to treat more than one equally to the others. I guess if you got in an argument with one, you could just go to bed with a different one that night! But, think of the jealosy it would breed in the house, and what if they were all mad at you? sounds like a nightmare! When I was in Saudi I asked some of the TCN's if their Islamic law allowed them to have more than one wife, and most answered, "Why would you want more than one?"


16 posted on 02/16/2005 11:58:24 AM PST by Jay777 (Join The Resistance at www.stoptheaclu.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

The danger here is that the court will rule against him, but on the basis of her age. That will weaken the wall against polygamy among adults.

Just my non-lawyer opinion.

17 posted on 02/16/2005 11:59:38 AM PST by vollmond (Head back to base for debriefing and cocktails.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

That's why I am here working away!


18 posted on 02/16/2005 11:59:51 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum

Me too! If we don't fight for what's right, who will?


19 posted on 02/16/2005 12:06:12 PM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

This case is not an issue of polygamy. It is a case of rape.


20 posted on 02/16/2005 12:09:58 PM PST by eccentric (a.k.a. baldwidow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jay777

Yeah, every wife I've ever had has been mad at me at one time or another, so, "hell" in my estimation would be to have them all in the same house at the same time and all mad at me. No Thanks.


21 posted on 02/16/2005 12:13:38 PM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

You are wrong, If you marry the wifes sister you only have the one mother in law, then if she is a widow you can marry her and not have any.


22 posted on 02/16/2005 12:13:57 PM PST by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jay777

I don't think Christianity absolutely forbids more than one wife. Paul wrote to Timothy, "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; ", but that was his opinion.......and he, Paul, was single.......


23 posted on 02/16/2005 12:14:36 PM PST by Red Badger (I call her GODZILLARY because she went to NYC and made her nest there, too.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

Strange bedfellows alert! What do Islamofascists, Mormons and San Fran Free-Lovers have in common?

Polygamy! It's the new homosexuality. Stay tuned for bestiality and incest! News at 11!


24 posted on 02/16/2005 12:15:00 PM PST by Uncle Miltie (Democrat Obstructionists will be Daschled!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002

The old testament Judaic laws forbade the marrying of a woman and her mother.......


25 posted on 02/16/2005 12:16:44 PM PST by Red Badger (I call her GODZILLARY because she went to NYC and made her nest there, too.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

OK Utah flamers. Here is my point of view. My question is only this. When the ACLU makes polygamy legal will all you good and obedient Mormons begin to practice again?


26 posted on 02/16/2005 12:17:30 PM PST by Utah Binger (Recovering)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum

Polygamy is swell for us guys,but the gals are clammering for polyandry. What's happening in this crazy mixed-up land is all sex related. Which means that too many people are out in the cold.


27 posted on 02/16/2005 12:19:45 PM PST by zoosha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzales
The polygamists filed right after the SCOTUS decison on Lawrence I was surprised you didn't know about it
28 posted on 02/16/2005 12:20:52 PM PST by cake_crumb (Leftist Credo: "One Wing to Rule Them all and to the Dark Side Bind Them")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum

Polygamy is swell for us guys,but the gals are clammering for polyandry. What's happening in this crazy mixed-up land is all sex related. Which means that too many people are out in the cold.


29 posted on 02/16/2005 12:21:33 PM PST by zoosha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim
have you seen these goals? .. its all part of the plan

Communist ACLU Goals

30 posted on 02/16/2005 12:24:47 PM PST by sure_fine (*not one to over kill the thought process*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim
Utah is also refusing to let me marry my pet sheep, "Cuddles." And my NAMBLA neighbor Barney is being denied the right to marry that 8 year-old boy he bought in Venezuela. Furthermore, my Muslim pal Osama is being refused marrige licenses for wives 2 to 4.

Oh, when will the oppression end?"

31 posted on 02/16/2005 12:37:39 PM PST by FormerACLUmember (Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utah Binger
When the ACLU makes polygamy legal will all you good and obedient Mormons begin to practice again?

Obedient to whom? The ACLU?
32 posted on 02/16/2005 12:40:33 PM PST by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

I am not so sure the Mormons care a lot about Old Testament Judaic laws. Maybe they do I dont know, I was being fecetious at any rate.


33 posted on 02/16/2005 12:43:41 PM PST by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Jay777
When I was in Saudi I asked some of the TCN's if their Islamic law allowed them to have more than one wife, and most answered, "Why would you want more than one?"

Four wives equals four sets of in-laws, four times the PMS, four times the credit-card bill, four times the nagging.

I can sort of understand why strapping a bomb vest on and charging a group of Marines might seem attractive in such a situation.

34 posted on 02/16/2005 12:44:25 PM PST by Modernman ("Normally, I don't listen to women, or doctors." - Captain Hero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Utah Binger

No kidding. people need to lay off.


35 posted on 02/16/2005 12:49:12 PM PST by notigar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002

I guess the family tree wopuld look like a telephone pole!


36 posted on 02/16/2005 1:06:45 PM PST by midnightson (Mama-the ultimate prognosticator- said there'd be days like this.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

I hope they rule in favor of polygamy. The ruling will hurt one core liberal group, the feminists. Polygamy favors the men more than the women, because men tends to earn more than a typical woman, can afford to have more than one wife. I once did a tax calculation, if a man has four or more wives, plus each provide two children, the tax deductions become interesting. If one wife takes one day off to watch the kids, day care costs go away, and if all the wives work. The income is awesome and the MacMansions will be utilized more proficiently (vs one couple with two kids in a 3500 plus SF house). Remember our tax code is written for a typical familly of four, not a familly of five plus adults and eight plus kids. Polygamy empowers the man more than the woman. Liberals will get a kick in the head if it becomes legal using liberal initiated pretext. Historically, mankind has practiced and condone polygamy alot longer than sodomy. If sodomy is legal, hard to stop polygamy.


37 posted on 02/16/2005 1:14:43 PM PST by Fee (Great powers never let minor allies dictate who, where and when they must fight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

The 'plan' is pretty much completed. Of course, we still have our guns, and the commies didn't reckon on there ever being something called the 'internet'.
So all is not lost.


38 posted on 02/16/2005 1:58:55 PM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember

Well if people with little to no impulse control can redefine and redescribe reality so they can be known as 'people of orientation', then it seems logical that you can do the same with your pet sheep.
Why not, every other wacko is doing it.


39 posted on 02/16/2005 2:08:20 PM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator

To: Lindykim

INTREP - Sociology - Family - Survive


41 posted on 02/16/2005 6:09:29 PM PST by LiteKeeper (Secularization of America is happening)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

The fact is that evil men want monogamy. They want one wife and a pool of available single women that they can prostitute and fornicate with with no responsibility. Monogamy is very anti woman. This is partly why woman and children are so degraded and humiliated in cultures that push monogamy to the extreme such as the west does.

In a monogamous culture women are forced to marry jerks because all he good ones are already taken. this leads to many problems.

We are not supposed to unequally yoked (married) to unbelievers as Christians. There are twice as many Christian women as men. Who do they marry in your monogamous system, or are they just SOL? They marry the jerks that is who. This is why the divorce rate is a high with Christians as with world.

God Himself took two wives. Ezekiel 23:37. These two sisters (Judah and Samaria) committed adultery against God himself. Adultery being sex with someone other than your husband. So God obviously had two wives here.

You would make God a liar and an adulterer. You would murmur against God's annointed : Moses, Abraham, Jacob, Joshua, King David, Solomon , Samuel etc.


42 posted on 03/19/2005 1:18:30 AM PST by nostod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson