This show is designed to "educate viewers" about the life of a polygamist family...educate viewers? I suppose this is the same as feeling the need to educate viewers on the secret life of toddlers who wear tiaras...can you say, "Jon Benet???" I have to admit, I have watched this show...and while I am not personally against anyone who feels they want to enter their young daughters into beauty contests, I feel this show is most likely watched by sexual predators who enjoy the "freebie" they get when seeing a 6 year old strut her stuff, loaded with make-up, and dancing in a sexually explicit manner.
In affirming the criminal conviction of a Mormon for practicing polygamy, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the argument that a Utah law prohibiting polygamy violated either the Establishment or Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment to the federal Constitution. Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. (8 Otto) 145, 25 L. Ed. 244 (1878). Some may say this is such an old case--but this topic was also discussed in the case of State v. Holm, 137 P.3d 726 (2006) and Holm v. Utah, 549 U.S. 1252, 127 S.Ct. 1371, 167 L.Ed.2d 159, 75 USLW 3220, 75 USLW 3454, 75 USLW 3456 (U.S.Utah Feb 26, 2007) (NO. 06-535) Cert. Denied. In fact, in this Utah case, the Supreme Court of Utah, Durrant, J., held that:
(1) “marry” in the bigamy statute making a married person guilty of bigamy when the person purports to marry another person includes both legally recognized marriages and those that are not state-sanctioned;
(2) irrevocable ordinance of state constitution prohibiting polygamous or plural marriages does more than prohibit state from giving formal legal recognition to polygamous marriages;
(3) defendant had no fundamental due process liberty interest to engage in polygamy by purporting to marry his wife's sixteen-year-old sister;
(4) bigamy conviction did not violate First Amendment right to freedom of association;
(5) bigamy statute was not unconstitutionally vague as applied;
(6) expert testimony relating to the history of polygamy in Utah and the social health of polygamous communities could be excluded; and
(7) prohibition against sexual contact with minor did not violate equal protection by distinguishing between married and unmarried persons.
The fact is, polygamy/bigamy is not legal in the United States--regardless if some consider it an essential part of a religious following. This is not an issue directed at the Mormon faith--my issue is with TLC and it's need to focus television programming on a lifestyle that is simply illegal. Why promote this? One word...ratings. Once again, where is our society going if we continue to promote ideals that are not only against the law but often kept private for those families who participate in this type of lifestyle.
What legal ramifications will the families identified in this new reality show face? That will be the next show...how reality TV got me arrested...but I suppose there are ratings in that also for some!
The sad thing about this is that The Learning Channel is part of the Discovery Family, which has many informative and great shows...just finished watching Shark Week! Sadly, there are a few shows designed not to educate, but to entertain the odd side of life. These shows don't belong on such a channel--that's my personal opinion, and now I'll put my soapbox away.
1 comment:
Being a fan of some rather "ludicrous" TV shows myself (WWE wrestling), I believe that I can still state, with reasonable assurance, my agreement with your opinion regarding these two shows. TLC has managed to chisel out a rather unique market niche of viewers with their selections of "educational" shows. Pedophile viewing numbers had to skyrocket last year and thus TLC faced a quandary;what unique viewer market to "educate" this year. A diverse yet interrelated knowledge base is vital in developing a well rounded education, so polygamy was such an obvious choice. It's critical to understand the inner workings and factors associated with having multiple wives; additional alibis while one is "creeping" the local play ground. Arguments referencing the age of a case is (to a degree)a moot point since the common and case law basis of our legal system is based on precedence. Perhaps even more discerning is the fact that TLC would even consider these types of shows as "learning" opportunities. Next year TLC may air "Meth: How to manufacture and not blow yourself up"; another critical component in the well rounded educational arena of life.
However I did find your reference and citing of case law to be interesting and educational. Any chance TLC may hire you for next year?
It is sad that as we as a society deviate from the norm, we still scratch our heads and can't seem to "learn" why we have such an increase in crime and a collapse of the the moral and ethical values that we claim to so desperately want.
Post a Comment