Polygamists should be granted the right to a civil union with rights similar to marriage

Proposed Definitions (Wikipedia): Legal Rights: Rights that are bestowed onto a person by a given legal system. Natural Rights: Rights that are not contingent upon laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable. Premise 1: There is no natural right to have a polygamous civil union. Premise 2: The disadvantages would far out way the advantages if the government were to grant this right legally. Conclusion: Polygamists should not be granted the right to a civil union. P1 There is no recognized civil or human right that gives a citizen the freedom to enter into a partnership, similar to marriage, with how ever many spouses that they wish. The sources searched are found in: [1][2][3]. In fact, both the UN Human Rights Committee and the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women have condemned polygamy because of their conviction that it discriminates against women. [4] The first amendment of the U.S Constitution is limited and it cannot protect rights to polygamy based on religious duty. This was evident when it came before the U.S Supreme Court in Reynolds v. United States. In this case the Supreme Court, quoting a document written by Thomas Jefferson, ruled "that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order". [5] In layman"s terms, freedom of religion protects a citizen's opinion but not their actions. In actuality, polygamy violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S Constitution as well as the U.S obligation under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to "ensure equality of rights and responsibilities of spouses as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution." [4] A husband is able to take as many wives as he wishes while the wife is limited to one husband. P2 Whereas the right to a polygamous civil union is not a natural right, should it then be a legal right? The decision solely rests on the government to grant this right. To make this decision, we should measure the advantages against the disadvantages. I welcome my opponent to break out the advantages, but I could only list one: allowing religious groups to follow their charter and customs without interference from the government. However, the disadvantages are abundant. I"ll list them below (some disadvantages were established previously): D1) Overturn established laws. In order to do, the government would have to overturn the Morril Anti-Bigamy Act and the Edmunds Acts as well as countless court cases. [6] D2) Violates civil rights. A polygamous civil union would violate the Equal Protection Claus of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, as established in P1. D3) Dereliction of obligation to children. A study completed by Dr. Henrich, an expert witness in the case against polygamy in the British Columbia Supreme Court, found that children were at a higher risk of having diminished nutritional status, poor health and mortality. One study found that when compared to monogamous households, children under age 10 in polygynous households were 7 to 11 times more likely to die. [7] This is a consequence of having married men remain continually in the marriage market, choosing to invest their resources in acquiring additional wives rather than investing in their children. D4) Dereliction of obligation to wife. Only a fraction of the husband's time and emotional attention are available to each wife and associated children since his resources are spread across several adult-child pairs. In addition to this, when death or divorce comes each wife gets a smaller portion of the estate than the typical succession when a man has only one wife. D5) Increase in crime. A similar study by Dr. Henrich found that marriage reduced a man's likelihood of committing a crime by 35%. The same study found that crimes rates not only decreased when those men were married, but increased when their marital status changed again. The rise in crime is a consequence of polygamy creating a pool of unmarried low-status men. Low-status men would find it difficult to acquire a wife and would be "incentivized to take substantial risks so they [could] eventually participate in the mating and marriage market."[7] D6) Decrease in age of marriage, increase in age gap. On the flipside, polygamy would also create an increase demand for brides. This would undoubtedly lead to a decreased age of marriage for women and an increased age gap between husbands and wives (even in monogamous marriages). [7] In conclusion, it is rather obvious that the disadvantages in allowing polygamous civil unions far out-weigh the advantages. In fact, the government has already decided this partly in the Reynolds v. United States Supreme Court case. Therefore, this resolution should not pass. [1] (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) http://www.un.org... [2] (U.S Bill of Rights) http://www.archives.gov... [3] (Civil Rights acts of 1866, 1871, 1875, 1960, 1964, 1968, and 1991) http://www.ourdocuments.gov... [4] http://www.americanbar.org... [5] http://supreme.justia.com... [6] http://memory.loc.gov... [7] http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca...