Polygamy in America

The issue of child abuse with the instituion is something I've not considered. That in itself is enough to push this forward. Great piece. GL

Please click on my head and check out my latest rant..."shot for a toy".

Wow... GL.
Check out my pod when you get the chance: Def Talent Jam

Very informative piece. Very well presented. GL

A very informative piece of work. GL.

Check out my POD

This should be on TV. Very well done.

informative piece, GL from, me man
please check my pod "Graff Jam" if you are curious from urban art

Good exploration of the nuances and controversies of this issue, with very good interviews. I was caught a little off balance by the personal note in the final V.O. ("Like I said...") -- felt a little late in the game for that tack. But this is definitely worth the GL.

Very powerful!

This is a really good piece. The fact that I'm hearing about this here before in the mainsteam media is pretty significant.

This is a really good piece. The fact that I'm hearing about this here before in the mainsteam media is pretty significant.

Really well done...I can see this segment being aired on TV. GL

This is really well done.
this should be on TV.
Gl

Powerful subject that's very relevant today, interesting interviews and nicely stated. GL

This message needs to be heard.

You captured the seedy and distastful side of the issue. Any successful or functional side to this?

This is really great work. TV bound for sure. GL

Judge not brothers and sisters!

I have no problem with prosecuting abuse, but this video is a victim slanted statement on open sexuality. Thumbs down on this socailly backwards propaganda.

Once again an amazing piece of work scootmac...wow...

In reference to the post below, how is this socially backwards propaganda? That's the most absurd comment I have ever read on here. The fact is, Polygamy is illegal in the U.S., and there are some women and children being abused in it. At this very moment Polygamist leader Warren Jeffs' is standing trial for rape as an accomplice.

There are those who want to see marriage to more than one spouse decriminalized. It is indeed a civil rights question, all covered in the pod. If the pod seemed a one sided victim's story it's because practicing polygamists are breaking the law and most choose not to speak to the media. Having said that there was an interview with a pro polygamist activist in the pod who had some very interesting things to say. The pod did not attack open sexuality, in fact one of the former polygamist women defended gay rights. I felt that this piece was very fair to all, especially when the major polygamist groups declined to comment.

Very powerful pod indeed.

i liked this video its really interesting, gave it a gl

Very interesting and very well done.

Sometime in the next several months an announcer will interrupt regularly scheduled programming to introduce the President who, blinking rapidly, will announce a series of air strikes against Iran. That announcement will probably use religious rhetoric that makes a tragic situation even worse.
Iran, Iraq, a wreck. That's how you conjugate war in the Middle East, and Iran is the future tense.
What's worse, the government continues to employ heated theological language that plays well to its base but hurts our efforts to reduce terrorism.
There will be little or no loss of American life as a result of airstrikes against Iran ... right away. That will happen further down the road, when generations of Muslims that might have been our allies turn against us. (Remember: Hundreds of thousands of Iranians gathered in the streets of Teheran in solidarity with Americans after 9/11.)
As the Administration continues to escalate militarily the danger increases. The Pale Horse and its rider draw closer to Iran - and to us. And the continued use of inflammatory religious rhetoric only compounds the problem.
Take "Islamofascism." Fascism is a government function, and there is no evidence that any state participated in 9/11. In fact, the only Islamic government known to have sponsored terror attacks against Americans is Libya, yet the U.S. and Britain chose negotiation there. (Britain accepted a longstanding offer from Qadafi after the invasion of Iraq, so they could claim their war brought him to the bargaining table.)
Why does Bush celebrate diplomacy with Qadafi - the architect of Flight 700's tragedy - while refusing to speak with Iran or Syria as the Iraq Study Group recommended? Iran is ten years away from being a nuclear danger, and has signaled its interest in negotiation since at least 2003.
Why would we be afraid to talk now, especially when Iran can be helpful in resolving the catastrophe in Iraq? (And the fact is we've brought a pro-Iranian government into power there.) Instead, we're slamming the door on urgently-needed discussions by labeling our adversaries in theological terms.
What other countries might be described as "Islamofascist," besides Libya, Syria, and Iran? Only nations that are currently allies, nations such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Pakistan. Leaders like Musharraf in Pakistan are endangered and given less latitude to support our anti-terrorism efforts when we inflame their countrymen with religionist rhetoric.
And if we are to encourage democratic reform in the Arab world, we can't do it by using terms that imply we believe all Muslim nations are inherently fascist or evil.
Then there's "Divine Strake." Tests of this massive "bunker-busting" bomb remain on schedule in Nevada, despite protests from local residents.
Why is it called Divine Strake? A "strake" is a tool used to level sand. A reasonable interpretation of this name in the Islamic world would therefore be "a tool for flattening you into the sand ... in God's name." That will play like a declaration of holy war in the Islamic world.
The U.S. fundamentalist/conservative coalition benefits politically from framing the anti-terror effort as a battle against "Islamofascism." It allows them to claim we're in a new Cold War, with all the political opportunities that creates.
Maybe that's why Christian conservative Gary Bauer, in my debate with him on Sean Hannity's show, said that "The struggle against Islamofascism is the defining issue of our time."
Really? Other issues pale in importance? Ten times as many Americans have died from lack of health insurance as from terrorism in the 21st Century. Six times as many Americans have died from improperly tested pharmaceuticals.
Yes, fighting terrorism is vitally important - but it's not a fight against "Islamofascism." It's a fight against stateless criminals, and a fight to prevent them from taking over countries like Paki

Christian polygyny is not the same as Mormon polygyny.

Christian polygyny requires love and respect, wives are not treated as property or objects. No underage marriage, no trading daughters, no incestual marriage, no involuntarily assigned wives.

There should be no prohibition of consensual adult relationships.

The video is a good concept but needs further development, broader perspectives. Talk to a few women that actually like being in a plural marriage. I know a woman that conspired with her friend to convince her husband to take the friend as a second wife.

But to me personally, I disagree with the practice of Mormon polygamy. They do it for all the wrong reasons and a total lack of respect for their women.

wow...this is really a powerful piece from so many different perspectives. i will say, that it will most likely provoke a response of some sort or reaction from all the viewers. it makes you think...think about lots of stuff....i have many thoughts about this, but that dude comparing polygamy is probably one of the most ridiculous things i've heard all day..but, it's great you kept that footage in the piece...congratulations! really nice stuff~good voice overs.

great job on this piece!!...very informative and well put together!