Project Polygamy – Phase Two Complete

Phase One was getting same sex marriage allowed.

They said it would never come to pass, but Phase Two is here and a child is now allowed to have “two mothers and a father” as indicated in articles at both the CTV and the Globe and Mail.

An Ontario boy can legally have two mothers and a father, the province’s highest court ruled Tuesday.

The same-sex partner of the child’s biological mother went to court seeking to also be declared a mother of the boy.

The first stage took on the definition of parents. This second phase leverages a same sex marriage into changing the NUMBER of parents a child can have.

I can guarantee you Phase Three will have a same sex couple living with the father listed as a common law couple of co-habitating for over a year.

Canada is on the verge of becoming a nation that allows polygamy. Below is a map indicating (in green) which nations allow polygamy. Click the image to view a larger version.

H/T to 905Tory and HallsOfMacadamia

Share

13 thoughts on “Project Polygamy – Phase Two Complete

  • Pingback: Jack’s Newswatch

  • January 3, 2007 at 9:30 am
    Permalink

    Canada is on the verge of becoming a nation that allows polygamy.

    Canada already does allow polygamy. It is technically against the law, but has never been prosecuted to the best of my knowledge. If anyone can refute that statement, I would be most interested in acquiring the reference.

  • January 3, 2007 at 11:05 am
    Permalink

    I think Joanne is technically correct. E.g. B.C.’s Bountiful colony is well-known and it’s broadcast split was caused by an arguably theological discussion within, not through interference from the RCMP.

    The showdown when it comes will focus on freedom of religion.

  • January 3, 2007 at 11:33 am
    Permalink

    I wrote to Vic Toews about this several months ago. I got a reply saying they would get back to me.

    Nothing since.

  • January 3, 2007 at 1:18 pm
    Permalink

    This kind of thing sadly doesn’t surprise me.

  • January 3, 2007 at 4:56 pm
    Permalink

    Let’s also not confuse the Criminal Code definitions of “bigamy” (multiple marriages) with “polygamy” (multiple relationships).

    As far as I’ve ever been able to read (and I’m happy to learn different), having an affair constitutes polygamy under the CCC. Even if no sexual relations are involved.

    And I don’t know the last time either offense was prosecuted in Canada, successfully or no.

  • January 3, 2007 at 5:04 pm
    Permalink

    Paul, that’s an excellent point. Bigamy implies some kind of deceit, where one marriage has been hidden from a spouse.

    There’s no way polygamy would ever be prosecuted in Canada. They may as well take that one off the books.

  • January 3, 2007 at 6:24 pm
    Permalink

    The more I see of this case, the more upset I get.

    It’s too bad that this court (including the Appellate judges) have never heard of a child’s parents getting remarried after a divorce, that they think there’s some sort of “gap” in the law.

    After all, the exact same situation occurs every time a parent (with shared custody) remarries: either the new spouse has no custodial rights, or the new couple adopts the child and the former spouse gives up custodial rights.

    Why should this court not allow a heterosexual couple to have equal rights? Why should they not force the child to split their time among four, six, ten, countless custodial parents as couples divorce, remarry, and divorce again? Will the courts ever again put the child’s interests first?

  • Pingback: CaNN :: We started it.

  • January 3, 2007 at 10:49 pm
    Permalink

    Paul, Joanne, from my understanding of both the words and the Criminal Code of Canada, the definition of bigamy (i.e. two marriages) is where a person marries a second time while still in a lawful relationship.

    Polygamy (many marriages) typically occurs when the multiple spouses know about each other (and usually cohabitate).

    I think the arrests of polygamists can occur once it is determined that the welfare of the women and children in the relationship are being infringed upon by the freedom of religion. I think the fear in prosecuting comes from the lack of concrete evidence to this effect. Should a court determine that multiple relationships are not a hindrance to the children or the multiple spouses, then it could set a precedent that legalizes it.

    I think Paul is right in his last comment though. The legal system has a set manner for dealing with people who marry and divorce and remarry etc. and who and how the children are managed. There has always only been two legal parents of a child and step parents tend to get the short end of the stick. But it is a stick that has been used for eons and, in my mind, it should not change.

  • January 3, 2007 at 11:04 pm
    Permalink

    Weird how so many of these same countries in green happen to have Muslim populations…

    Nothing against Islam per se, but this is worth noting.

  • January 4, 2007 at 10:21 am
    Permalink

    Weird how so many of these same countries in green happen to have Muslim populations

    Not that there’s anything wrong with it…

  • February 18, 2010 at 8:13 pm
    Permalink

    Thank you for the useful thoughts… Yet a typical nice way of looking at things, truly precisely why we return to the site every so often..

Comments are closed.