The American Spectator

Reader Mail

p> ONE MAN, MANY HEADACHES br> Re: William Tucker's Polygamy and Me : /p>

I can go out and legally impregnate as many women as possible, but if I covenant with them to love them and provide for the needs of their children, then suddenly I become a criminal. Does that make sense? I guess I could just abandon them, like the "monogamists" do, or maybe the great patriots of my country could honor the Constitution of the United States and give me my God given right to freely practice my religion. I'm not asking for anyone to sanction polygamous marriages. I'm just looking for the freedom to live my deeply held religious beliefs without fear of persecution from my government. Can I do that in this great country, or will I suffer the same governmental persecution as the Mormons of the 19th century?

p>"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." (Amendment I, The Constitution of the United States of America, may it rest in peace) br> -- Brent Hartman /p>

I can agree with most all of William Tucker's conclusions about marriage except where he says that marriage is a "human construct." The primary reason that marriage as an institution is in turmoil is that people have forgotten that marriage is really a Divine Construct. Anytime we choose to live our lives in a manner contrary to God's original plan, we do so at personal and societal peril. God's plan for marriage is one man and one woman united for life.

Libertarians, as he points out, have no problem with changing rules for marriage, but the only logical outcome of such thinking is social chaos. That's why I will never consider myself a libertarian. If they could confine their thinking to economics, they would have a chance at getting my support.

p>If we lose the foundation of monogamous marriage, we surely will be unable to support any kind of functional society. br> --

topics:
Economics, Religion, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Iraq, Oil