The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1903-12-05

|
was a very precocious child. Do
you know of any Mormon prevari-
cations, touching family matters,
more Hagrant than those I have
just mentioned? Yet the Lord era-
clously winked at them, and salts
ned divine justice by furnishing
those whom they injured.
1t is the habit of bigoted Anti
Mormons to regard the monoeamic
family as divine institution, rooted
in immutable moral law. Thev
perslstently close their eyes to the
tact that the family is a social
growth which, through the ages,
has assumed many forms. Among
the Israelites, from the "Flood" to
the "Captivity," polyganous fami-
lies were the rule among the better
classes, especially Gods chosen SER
wants. After the "Captivity," for
reasons very different from moral
considerations, polygany became
less prevalent, and monogamic fam
lies grew in favor with all classes.
The beginning of the Christian era
marks decided turn towards celib-
acy, which grew in strength, until,
in Paups time, sexual intercourse,
however restricted, was deprecated,
this making for the destruction of the
family. Paul taught that marriage
is not good and to "unbelievers"
not binding, and one OF the Christian
Fathers taught that, while marriage
populated the earth, celibacy popu-
lated heaven. The attempted en-
forcement of impossible virtue, led
to the most shameless and promiscu-
Gus sexual debauchery. Reaction
came with the Reformation, and 50
pronounced was it, that Luther con-
sidered political exigency as justif-
cation for bigamy.
Turning to n-Christian peoples,
we find sexual relations, with rare
exceptions, free, and unfettered by
even polyganous restrictions. With
them, in most ages, polygamy in its
broadest sense was all but universal.
Men and women, without distinc-
tion of sex, cohabited as much and
as many as they pleased. Plato
would have restricted this untram-
meled looseness, not by establishing
the monogamic family, but by de-
stroying the family, and vesting in
the state control and regulation of
sexual intercourse, to the end of i'm
proving the stock.
Outside of the story of crea-
ton, in which Gods purpose
in making but one man and
one woman may be construed as
either an expression of His idea
of the family, or the economical
origin of a species, there is nothing
in early history to warrant the as
sumption that monogamy is a d1-
vine ordinance, rooted in moral law.
It is true that Christ's teachings
seem to favor monogamy, but one
cannot but be impressed with the
much greater stress he places upon
divorce than upon marriage, indl-
eating that he had a much greater
horror of grass widows than plural
wives. But Notwithstanding Christ S
structure on divorce, marriage as a
religious sacrament was anuulled by
the English church in 1547. Subse-
quently the Puritans declared it a
civil contract and this was still later
confirmed by the New England Pur-
itans. Marriage is now regarded as
civil contract by all Protestant
churches. l am giving more atten-
ton to the Christian than the Pagan
view of marriage, because, 1 appre-
hend that you would not care to
take your sexual philosophy from
Pagan laws and customs. In dwell
ing at some length on the SUBJECT L
am not endeavoring to make out a
case for polygamous Institutions
but indicating some reasons why
polygamy should not be CLASSIFIED
as a crime, ranking with murder
robbery, rape and arson.