Polygamy In The United States

Does polygamy violate basic rights?

The practice of "polygamy" is founded in the Later Day Saint movement, also known as Mormonism, which was founded by Joseph Smith, Jr. in the mid-1800s. Smith translated and published the Book of Mormon and organized The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in 1830.

It was believed that Joseph Smith promoted and practiced polygamy, but due to the lack of public records, the exact number of Smith's wives continues to be debated. Smith denied the allegations that he either promoted polygamy or had more than one wife up until his assassination in 1844 during his campaign for President of the United States.

The Mormons settled in Utah when it was only a territory and it was this group who actually applied to Congress for statehood. Congress would never allow a territory to become a state as long as polygamy was practiced.

Congress passed several laws making polygamy a crime, including the Edmund-Tucker Act of 1887. This Act prohibited the practice of polygamy and punished it with a fine of from $500 to $800 and imprisonment of up to five years. As a result of this new law, polygamists were hunted down and imprisoned, church properties were confiscated and even the right of Utah women to vote was revoked.

In many test cases, the U. S. Supreme Court declared these laws to be Constitutional. To avoid arrest, many polygamists took to the "underground" and formed their own groups in other areas of the country.

Parental Consent For Underage Children Abortions

With teenage abortions - there are no "do overs".

It seems strange to me that we would see "underage children" and "abortion" in the same sentence.
The abortion procedure in itself is the voluntary murder of an "underage child".

The Age of Consent

So, who actually are these underage children? States differ in what they consider the "age of consent", for example - In Florida, the age of consent is 18, In Missouri it's age 17, and in Delaware it's age 16. These "ages of consent" mean that the laws of the state uphold a persons right to have sex with whomever they please as long as they have reached the age of consent.

For a person to have sex with a person under the age of consent would mean that person has violated a state law, either sexual assault, statutory rape, sexual misconduct with a child, or some other law by another name. In a situation where criminal charges were filed, the parents would most certainly be involved.

Parental Consent Is Required

Most children under the age of 16 are:
(1) living at home
(2) in school
(3) unemployed

These children are totally dependent on their parents for food, clothing, shelter and just about any other aspect of living. These kids require parental consent to even go on a field trip with their class at school. These kids require parental consent to even get their ears pierced. Parental consent is required for a child under age 16 to have medical treatment or any type of surgical procedure. Since the abortion procedure is normally a "surgical procedure", why should it be treated any differently?

Right To Bear Arms Under The Constitution

Should our right to bear arms have limits?

According to the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, “fundamental rights” may include, but are not limited to, the right to vote, the right to run for public office, the right to marry or divorce, and the right to fairness in our criminal justice system.

Webster’s New World Law Dictionary defines a fundamental right as “A basic or foundational right, derived from natural law; a right deemed by the Supreme Court to receive the highest level of Constitutional protection against government interference”.

Our Constitution was originally written without any "Amendments", but we were not satisfied that these original words were clear enough to convey the actual intended purpose, so some changes were necessary and the "Amendments" were added. Since these "Amendments" can't really stand on their own, they must be a further explanation or clarification of some other part of the Constitution, right?

So what are these "Amendments" amending?

Let's take a look at the original Constitution:

Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution reads, in part:

"To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

Is The Constitution A Living Document Which Should Change Over Time?

How far can we stretch the U. S. Constitution?

In a recent interview with U. S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on the CBS news program 60 Minutes, correspondent Lesley Stahl raised several questions regrading the U. S. Constitution, since our U. S. Supreme Court is charged with interpreting our Constitution and normally making a final decision on any Constitutional issues.

Justice Scalia practices a philosophy of what he calls "originalism", meaning that he chooses to interpret our Constitution based on the meanings and intentions of the people who ratified it over 200 years ago. He went further to say, "Society doesn't change through a Constitution."

Even though our Constitution is certainly an enduring document that we must all defend each and every day, our Constitution is not a "living" document that requires amending each time a rogue judge wants to create "rights" not actually in our Constitution or when we want the Constitution to say what we would like for it to say?

The words in our Constitution should be interpreted with the same meanings of the people who ratified it?

Should Parents Who Leave Children Unattended In Cars Be Charged?

Children should not be left in cars for convenience.

Many loving, well-meaning parents and other caregivers in all levels of our society leave children unattended in vehicles every day for a number of reasons.  Usually it is for the sake of convenience.

It just seems to be a lot of trouble to undo seat belts or car seats and get the kids out of the car just to go into the store for a few minutes.  If these parents thought about and totally understood the dangers involved in leaving a child unattended in a vehicle, there would probably not be any deaths of these children.

According to an article at WebMD:

"Every summer, heartbreaking and preventable deaths happen when children are left alone in hot cars. More than 600 U.S. children have died that way since 1990, according to the nonprofit safety group Kids and Cars. "

The majority of parents wouldn't even dream of leaving a child alone in a vehicle, but for some reason there are some parents who just don't seem to understand the dangers.

Evaluating U. S. Abortion Laws

Abortion laws must change to protect human life.

Just the mention of the word "abortion" can very quickly result in very heated debates and discussions with no real winners and yet the losers are always innocent babies.

We seem to have become a nation in which we no longer desire to pattern our lives and behaviors around our existing laws, but always want to change the laws to justify a pattern of how we want to live and behave.

We invent terms in an effort to make our cause seem believable or just. A good example of this inventive spirit are the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice", both of which are highly detested by this writer. These four simple words have actually divided a nation and there seems to be no end to that division. So, just who are these people?

 

The "Pro-Choice" Abortion Philosophy

This group feels very strongly that a "woman" should have the "right", under the law, to kill the baby inside her if she believes the baby is causing damage to her health, interfering with her career, is the wrong sex, is causing a strain on her relationship, is an unwanted child, or any other reason of convenience. This group also feels that the woman has the "right" to keep her baby if that is her "choice". So, basically, this group will vote either way.

 

The "Pro-Life" Abortion Philosophy

This group feels very strongly that since "life" is the basic right given to all of us by our Constitution and since a baby, even while inside the womb, is a human being at the very beginning of "life", killing that baby is wrong and should not be legal under our laws. Many people in this group also feel that a woman's medical care, while pregnant, should totally be controlled by her doctor and not by attorneys and the courts, since many times medical complications will arise requiring tough decisions by the mother, the father, and the doctor.

Domestic Violence And The Right To Bear Arms

Should domestic violence impact our right to bear arms?

The thought of any man or woman intentionally inflicting violence or abuse in any domestic relationsip is appalling.

Oftentimes, domestic violence begins in a less physical manner with emotional and psychological attacks on the victim, but in many cases of domestic violence the violent behavior will escalate to making threats with guns or other weapons. In many cases these threats are actually carried out.

If we were to make a decision based solely on our logic and our feelings, most of us would probably say that anyone who engages in violent behavior in a marital or live-in relationship, should not have access to a lethal weapon. That would make very good sense.

Whether or not a person "accused" of domestic violence should lose the right to bear arms brings up two very complex and very different issues.