Wednesday, January 7, 2009

And, the specter returns.

You know, you'd think after the debacle in Texas, people might have learned. *sigh*,5143,705275844,00.html - read it and weep. They at LEAST took only the men they were interested in, though, and left the women and children in intact family units. I'm grateful that Canada could do at least THAT much. Little enough it was.

I cringe at some of the quotes. Let me elucidate:

"Two leaders of polygamous groups with ties to Utah have been arrested in Canada, charged with practicing polygamy." -- Well, yes, what else would they be charged with? Doh. I'm sorry, that line should never have made it into a reputable newspaper.

"The law is quite clear. It prohibits polygamous practices from taking place," Oppal said. "This section of the criminal code was enacted prohibiting this type of conduct in order to prevent the exploitation of women."" -- And has anyone checked to see if the women are being exploited? No offense, but they can talk, walk, and use cell phones. This is not Utah in the early 20th century. If the men are being abusive, then charge them with that abuse. If they are NOT being abusive, then what right have you to interrupt their families and their lives?

And the top "I'm an idiot" commentary quoted: ""Polygamy is not a 'religious belief.' It is a crime," said the group's Nancy Mereska. "It denigrates the rights of women and children denying them their inalienable rights to equality and the right to choose."" -- Good freaking grief. Obviously this Mereska person is clueless. First, who died and made her the labeller of religious beliefs? Second, how does living in a poly family (of any type: polygynous, polygamous, polyandrous, whatever) stop you from being equal or from making choices? I live in a poly relationship with five other adults and two toddlers, and you know what? We all make important decisions every day. We share burdens and responsibilities. I would not go back to being "one woman, one man" even if forced. I could not live that way. So what this woman is saying is that her right to be offended by and deny my beliefs is more important than my right to choose. Except that's what she claims to be defending. Uh, yeah, right.

"Shields said several RCMP officers stayed behind after the arrests to meet with community members. "To assure them that we weren't interested in causing damage to the community, we weren't attempting to have children apprehended," he said." -- So what he's saying, in his round about way, is that it's okay for the women to be poly, but not for the men. Can you say double entendre, people?

I'm disappointed. I cut my ties with Canada years ago, and I've never been upset that I did. It's moments like these when I become embarassed that I was EVER Canadian.
Post a Comment