The War Room

DOSSIER # 21: POLYGAMY

A few people last week asked me about my opinion on the issue of polygamy and now seemed a good time to discuss.

In short, on a moral level I am opposed to SSM and I will continue to be for reasons that I have discussed in length before. I am also opposed to polygamy on a moral level. I am not a relativist.

As for the legal issues of polygamy, after SSM I do not believe there are any valid arguments one can make against it if one accept the arguments for SSM. SSM proponets argued in courts and in parliament that marriage was nothing but an agreement of property and tax rights between consenting adults. If this is the new legal definition, and for now it is, to be consistant one must allow polygamy. Why only two adults? Why not 4...10?

Anyone who is for SSM, in my mind must also be for polygamy.

If this does come to a court case however I do believe that whether or not it succeeds will depend on who mounts the challenge. If the challenge comes from the sects in Bountiful, BC., it will not pass. As Mark Steyn pointed out, then the media will show great pictures of evil, white males with snaggle teeth looking ominously down into the camera. If the challenge comes from within the Muslim community it will be seen as challenge under 'freedom of religion' and our activists courts will accept it as it will be seen as another way to destroy the Judeo-Christian history of Canada. If the challenge comes form a gay couple who want to include a lesbian friend in the mix; the law will be passed quick and swift with little to no debate.

And this is of course always the goal with the New Left; to destroy any remnants of Judeo-Christian culture in place of a neo-Marxist view of 'equality' and radical egalitarianism.

In the abstract and on a much larger timeline I believe it is very possible that marriage itself will ultimately fall by the wayside and eventually only be held by people with strong religious faith who will be seen as 'outsiders' and 'old-fashioned'. We are already seeing Hollywood celebrities such as Brad Pitt and Scarlett Johansson saying monogamy and marriage are wrong and in universities traditional marriage is seen as a form of 'patriarchal oppression'. If one really believes modern marriage is about nothing but property and tax laws, that presupposes the marriage will fail. It turns the instituition into a defacto prenuptial agreement of sorts. How romantic is that?

This is why it is so important for the left to have universal daycare. If family is no longer the institution through which children are reared and the elderly are protected than what institutions do we use?

The answer of course for the New Left is children to be raised by government and the elderly to be euthanized. Now of course I am not saying that every leftist wants to euthanize every elderly person...but they certainly want to create a culture that would lead to this way of thinking.

Hence, the family unit, once the unit for thousands of years through which society protected its young, and the elderly; the institution through which families bonded together in communites to create a social safety net that does not rely on government then gradually erodes to the point where it is no longer recognizable and therefore has no purpose.

But society must still protect its weak. To the New Left, this is done through government and 'education'. Now I obviously do not think marriage will die off entirely, but I do think it will become more and more 'unhip' to get married. People will see it as nothing more than just an old fashioned way to live. I can also see it getting to the point where it is seen as 'cruel' and 'abusive' to raise your children without government 'social workers' to tell you what to do. Ken Dryden has already said this. Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory recently said (on CFRB's Bill Caroll show) that he thought people should have to undergo mandatory government training to become parents. I have met John Tory and think he is a good man, but I do not know that I can vote for him now.

Would I need to have a license before I made love to my wife if we wanted to conceive?

What if she got pregnant before we were 'licensed' and we failed the government test?

If we fail do they 'terminate' the pregnancy?

How do we determine who passes or fails?

What are the standards?

Who determines what a 'good parent' is?

Will it be the same 'activists' with rainbow flags on their beret's who are teaching children how to put condoms on bananas in elementary schools?

Remember, this is the leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party saying this. I have allegiance to people and ideals but not to a party.

I fight for Stephen Harper because I know his world view is rooted in a Christian philosopy of right and wrong. That is where his conservatism comes from. I would find it very difficult to endorse a Conservative Party without him and a 'secular red tory' at the helm.

Much on the future of Canada will be determined on Monday nights federal election. We know this. If Stephen Haper wins (and while he is still in the lead, many of the polls are varying) at least a healthy minority I think Canada has a chance of getting back on track. If the Liberals receive even a weak minority and they team with the NDP, I think many of the threats to freedom of religion and the family are going to happen quick and fast.

National Daycare is a huge linchpin in the New Left's attempt to destroy the traditional family. I fear that much more than polygamy. Polygamy is not the problem...it is a symptom of it. The philosophy is the problem.

Polygamy is but one step in the road. After same-sex marriage, I think only a fool would bet against it.

posted by Nicol DuMoulin @ 7:44 AM