| Show SOCIETY AND MORMON MARRIAGE IN commenting upon judge zanes latest construction of the edmunds law and his discourse comparing polygamy to murder robbery and other essential crimes we showed the folly and dishonesty of the reasoning which attempts to place something that is simply made an aa offense by law on a par wi with th aels acts that would be criminal in themselves even if they were not coni cani damned by law we showed that anything which violates the natural rights of mankind Is a fit subject for punitive legislation but that which does not infringe upon the rights to life liberty property sad and the pursuit of happi not to be classed lu in the same category and therefore that murder robbery and other crimes crimea per se could be rationally and cons constitutionally punished by law even if practise a under the plea pies of religion while plural marriage under religious restrictions and regulations could not be proceeded against by law on the same grounds or tor for the same reasons the I 1 integrity of the position cannot be successfully successfully assailed there is 18 a radical difference between plural marriage thus contracted when all tile parties are agreed and anything done by one individual that trespasses upon tile the inherent or acquired rights of at others that which produces lite cannot be rate rated d with that which destroys life A mutual agreement between all the parties to a transaction must not be ranked with any deed that deprives another of liberty or property it was the bu endeavor deavor of judge zane to class them all together and justify extreme legislation against plural marriage because gross and essential crimes may be lawfully punished even though the perpetrators may claim the sanction ioa of religion reli gion that called forth our remonstrance and refutation it has been since claimed in an anti mormon article that evades this question that polygamy is a crime against society sad and therefore may be legislated against and suppressed in support of the proposition the assertion is made that the practice of polygamy tends directly to the destruction strut st tion of a people or at least to the qualities that ennoble a people that its very condition is a degradation of woman that in polygamous nations the men are vindictive treacherous and cruel and that there comans womans wo mans virtue ignot is not believed at all every argument that we have seen in regard to tile the alleged effects of plural marriage find and its gearing bearing upon society refers to something altogether foreign to the system which Is called in question the turks and chinese are cited as 84 Ox examples aMples of the effects of polygamy and it is boldly concluded that mormon plural marriage will aul inevitably le ie d to the same results as Tui kisti sli and chinese polygamy the dishonesty of such subterfuges proclaims me weakness of the cause that descends to guem in the first place it is by no means established that the turks would be any higher in the scale ot of humanity or national greatness if they were all monogamists nor that tile the condition of the chinese is attributable to any system of marriage that exists among them it is popular to say so but it is only a bold assumption the most advanced progressive and powerful ot of turkish warriors and leaders in any department of moslem rule have been polygamists and it cannot be sho shown wn anac turkish monog amista are superior in any way to their contemporaries we might liht with wita as great consistency claim that the condition of turkey is due to the costume of its inhabitants innabi tants in contradistinction to european and american dress as to assert witti out a particle of proof that the ottoman porte is not as strong as tile western nations because polygamy prevails pie vails within its borders why is modern greece so insignificant among the worl worlds dle monarchies Is it because the people are mists there is no polygamy in russia yet with its immense territory abundant resources vast population and variety of climate it is not to be compared compart cl for power and advancement with much smaller and less populous dominions there are such differences as race distinctions and we utterly ae deny the common assertion that asiatic people are inferior to europeans because some of them practice polygamy am aither neither I 1 is the turk the effeminate and flabby being that some people imagine in their contests with tile the hordes of russia the turbaned turks have exhibited a force endurance and vigor that have frequently astonished the world the so called sick mau man is no puny invalid but causes not dot in any way connected with the question of marriage render reader turkey unequal to a contest with more powerful foes Is the decadence of spain attributable to polygamy catholicism has ruled there tor for centuries and monog ln f with I 1 all its unnatural enforce ments has prevailed without hindrance or change where is the glory ot at ancient egypt was monogamy the cause of the complete wreck ot of the dynasty of the pharaohs Phara we have as much right to claim that the miserable condition today to day of that once mighty and intellectual empire is due to monogamy as to say that turkey is not powerful among nations because of polygamy where is the might of imperial rome bome founder of the modern contracted and crime breeding restrictions of monogamous mono ganous legislation the of the world has gone down to the dust the victim of its own licentiousness feeble decrepit prostrate and emasculate As compared wah turkey it is like a spaniel to a mastiff a puny consumptive sump tive to te a vigorous athlete if its marriage system was the cause of its decadence so much the worse for monogamy this is the logic of our opponents turkey and China are polygamous and behind the times therefore their condition is due to polygamy by parity of reasoning turks wear massive head gear and wear cues there tore their inferiority is due to turbans and pigtails pintails pig tails quod erat demon stratum but if all that is alleged on this question were true if the turk is weak cruel infidel as to womans comans virtue and everything so different to a christian ana all because of polygamy it doss does not follow that the pluvial marriage of the mormons cormons Mor mons will produce similar effects turkish polygamy and mormon marriage are unlike the p people eople are dissimilar the conditions are diverse and what is predicated about one system cannot be assumed about the other in the mormon system only men who are esteemed worthy are permitted to enter into the obligations of plural marriage itis it is a religious obligation with eternal covenants and conditions dit ions the woman is no more mada enada subordinate joithe man than in monogamous marriage she is accorded a voice and vote in church and state she cn can hold property in her own right whether married or single first wife or plural wife she is not degraded except in the estimation of those whose opinion she does not value a wilted straw she has implicit faith in her husbands virtue aud he in hers her she is free and independent in her sphere and acknowledges no bondage but that of love nor restriction but that of righteousness and duty no such effects as those pretended to be the result of asiatic polygamy have followed the practice of mormon marriage As a rule the men and tile the women engaged in it will compare favorably with their co religionists who have not so advanced their children are at least as capable and intelligent as the off offspring pair of their monogamous brethren and sisters family to family the comparison will reflect no discredit on the plural households in anything anything that is worthy of commendation individual cases of wrongdoing wrong doing and lack of progress and culture may be found but are there no such cases among monog amista take all the settlements in utah and make comparisons and who will dare to say that plural families are in any degree behind monogamous families in the qualities that tend to make up well ordered society the claim that plural marriage is a crime against society is one of those utterly groundless assertions in our assailants continually indulge to prove it the injury it does to society must be pointed pointe dout out when society is sated asked to show it society is like a well known wild young fellow of early times in utah who claimed to have been shot in the leg by an indian and to carry the scar of the wound when challenged to disclose it he uncovered his left leg then said it must be the right when no scar was found on that exclaimed oh pshaw its on my brother bills leg society may protect itself against the commerce of the sexes without to marriage arriage because it is in danger dancer of having p palmed aimed off of upon it for the public support and is thus injured in that sense without the obligations responsibilities and requirements of marriage women would often be cut cast off also to become a burden to society and a prey to the licentious if a man and woman agree to consort together without marriage society may take meas measures aresto to prevent the association whether it claims to be done as religion or not because it is injurious to society and is in itself immoral marriage is ordained of god and is recognized and set up by the state plural marria marriage e cannot be compared to promiscuity city or to un marital associations of the sexes there is nothing in common between them the former forbids and tends to prevent the latter plural marriage does not preclude single un marriage arriage it does not compel any one to engage in its arrangements A man with two wives does not encroach upon the man who has only one neither does he injure the me man who has none for if the latter could have gained the hand of the woman who became a plural wife there was nothing but her choice to prevent no law should compel a woman to marry a man she does wish to wed and it is only arbitrary and contracted prejudice that prevents a plural marriage when all the parties are agreed there are so many men who will not incur the responsibilities of marriage that those who have the manhood to do so ought not to be prevented from marrying more wives than one providing all parties are willing society would be benefited rather than injured bv the arrangement ran gement and morality would be promoted not impaired for then all women could be married if they chose and there would be little or no feminine element left unprotected for lawless lust to prey upon we have touched a little on this question beyond tile the purely I 1 mormon I 1 standpoint which does not contemplate a general promulgation or practice of plural marriage it only provides tor for those of its own faith and only such of them as are considered nt lit tor for its extended responsibilities wo worthy r to engage in the sacred and holy re relationships 1 jensh aps which comprehend ana and require so much self control patience forbearance and exercise ot of all the christian christia virtues that system injures no abne it does not intrude upon pure morality it forbids oth both in male and female it promotes confidence between hus husbands and wives and cultivates virtue it is no crime against so society bety it is and has been commanded of god in certain instances and therefore cannot be immoral in legislating against it an establishment of religion is interfered with bythe by the civil power and in hounding and punishing those who have embraced it from cincere gin sincere cere religious motives a great and cruel injustice Is perpetrated that no expediency will palliate and no exi exigency ancy requires it it is persecution pure and simple and when viewed in the I 1 light lit of calm judgment the experience 0 of tf the past and the facts of the present is abhorrent to every just mind and a reproach to all eli engaged in the unhallowed crusade ae ainest a peaceable body of religious worship pers |
