In the Supreme Court of British Columbia

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

In the Supreme Court of British Columbia IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Reference re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada, 2011 BCSC 1588 Date: 20111123 Docket: S097767 Registry: Vancouver In the Matter of: The Constitutional Question Act, R.S.B.C. 1986, c 68 And In the Matter of: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms And in the Matter of: A Reference by The Lieutenant Governor In Council Set Out in Order In Council No. 533 dated October 22, 2009 concerning the Constitutionality of s. 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 Before: The Honourable Chief Justice Bauman Reasons for Judgment Counsel for the Attorney General of Craig E. Jones British Columbia: Leah R. Greathead Karen Horsman Sarah A. Bevan Eva L. Ross Freya Zaltz Counsel for the Attorney General of Canada: Deborah J. Strachan R. Keith Reimer R. Craig Cameron Robert J. Danay B.J. Wray Counsel for the Reference Amicus: George K. Macintosh, Q.C. Ludmila B. Herbst Tim A. Dickson Counsel for the Interested Persons: Beyond Borders: Ensuring Global Justice for David Matas Children: British Columbia Civil Liberties Association: Monique Pongracic-Speier British Columbia Teachers‟ Federation: Robyn P.M. Trask Canadian Association for Free Expression: Douglas H. Christie Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children and Brent B. Olthuis the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights: Cheryl L. Milne Stephanie McHugh Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Assoc.: John G. Ince As Agent Christian Legal Fellowship: Gerald D. Chipeur, Q.C. Oleh W. Ilnyckyj Jill W. Wilkie Phebe Chan Ruth Ross, as Agent James Marion Oler and the Fundamentalist Robert V. Wickett Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints: Matthew G. Siren Andrew W.T. Scarth REAL Women of Canada: Jonathan Baker Stop Polygamy in Canada: Brian M. Samuels Robert J.C. Deane Kieran A.G. Bridge Jennifer W. Chan West Coast Legal Education and Janet Winteringham, Q.C. Action Fund: Deanne Gaffar Kasari J. Govender Place and Dates of Trial: Vancouver, B.C. November 22-26, 30, 2010 December 1, 2, 7-9, 13, 15, 16, 2010 January 5-7, 10-13, 17-20, 25-28, February 7-9, March 28-31, April 1, 4, 11-13, 15, 2011 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, B.C. November 23, 2011 Table of Contents Paragraph Range I. INTRODUCTION [1] - [15] II. COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS [16] - [44] A. The Reference Questions [16] - [17] B. The Participants [18] - [25] C. The Evidence [26] - [32] D. Webcast of Final Submissions [33] - [44] III. EVIDENTIARY ISSUES [45] - [127] A. Factors Justifying a Liberal Approach to Admissibility in a Trial Reference [46] - [58] 1. The Importance of Evidence in Charter Litigation [47] - [51] 2. The Potential of a Trial Reference [52] - [58] B. Legislative Facts and Judicial Notice [59] - [70] 1. Legislative and Adjudicative Facts [60] - [62] 2. Judicial Notice [63] - [70] C. Expert Evidence [71] - [103] 1. Angela Campbell [77] - [103] a) Preconditions to Admissibility [80] - [88] b) Cost-Benefit Analysis [89] - [103] D. Lay Witnesses [104] - [105] E. The Brandeis Brief [106] - [127] 1. Canadian Use of Brandeis Brief Materials [109] - [121] 2. Use of Materials in the Brandeis Brief [122] - [127] IV. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES [128] - [133] V. THE EVIDENCE [134] - [851] A. Terminology [135] - [145] B. The Historical Context [146] - [233] 1. The Emergence of Modern Monogamy [147] - [167] 2. Philosophical Dimensions of Western Monogamy [168] - [233] a) Classical Foundations [170] - [179] b) Biblical Foundations of Monogamy [180] - [187] c) Early Christian Teachings [188] - [193] d) The Medieval Views on Monogamy and Polygamy [194] - [202] e) Protestant Views of Monogamy and Polygamy [203] - [206] f) The Enlightenment [207] - [217] g) The Common Law Inheritance [218] - [227] h) Polygamy Linked to Harms [228] - [233] C. Polygamy Globally [234] - [336] 1. Islam [238] - [255] a) Polygyny in the Qur‟an [242] - [249] b) Muslim State Practice [250] - [255] 2. Mormonism [256] - [336] a) Brief History of the Mormon Church [258] - [305] i. Plural Marriage [264] - [277] ii. Criminalization of Polygamy [278] - [305] b) Mormon Fundamentalism [306] - [333] i. The FLDS [316] - [333] c) Polygamy in American Constitutional Law [334] - [336] D. Polygamy in Canada [337] - [467] 1. The History of Polygamy in Canada [337] - [380] a) First Nations Polygamy [341] - [346] b) Mormon Polygamy [347] - [356] c) Criminalization of Polygamy [357] - [359] d) First Nations and Mormon Polygamy After Criminalization [360] - [380] 2. Bountiful [381] - [422] a) Police Investigations Relating to Bountiful [393] - [422] 3. Muslim Community [423] - [429] 4. Polyamory [430] - [460] 5. Wicca [461] - [467] E. Changing Family Demographics in Canada [468] - [481] F. Alleged Harms of Polygamy [482] - [793] 1. Evolutionary Psychology [493] - [576] a) Dr. Henrich [498] - [539] i. Polygyny‟s Creation of a Pool of Unmarried Low-Status Men [507] - [517] ii. Polygyny‟s Effects on Male Parental Investment [518] - [522] iii. Polygyny, Age of marriage, the Age Gap and Gender Equality [523] - [533] iv. More Speculative Predictions [534] - [539] b) Dr. Shackelford [540] - [553] c) Will Polygamy Spread in Canada? [554] - [576] 2. Literature Review [577] - [608] 3. Statistical Analysis [609] - [640] 4. Polygamy in Contemporary North America [641] - [745] a) Polygamy in The United States [645] - [701] i. Fundamentalist Mormons [645] - [691] ii. Muslim Community [692] - [701] b) Polygamy in Canada [702] - [745] i. Bountiful [702] - [744] ii. Muslim Community [745] - [745] 5. Stereotyping Adherents of Minority Religious Groups [746] - [758] 6. Position of the Challengers [759] - [778] 7. Summary of Apprehended Harms [779] - [793] G. Canada‟s International Obligations [794] - [851] 1. Canada‟s Obligations under International Treaties [800] - [840] a) Statements by International Treaty Bodies [804] - [832] i. CEDAW [813] - [816] ii. ICCPR [817] - [820] iii. CRC [821] - [826] iv. ICESCR [827] - [832] b) Arguable Limitations on a State‟s Ability to Criminalize Polygamy [833] - [840] 2. Customary International Law [841] - [843] 3. Comparative Law [844] - [851] VI. PURPOSE AND INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 293 [852] - [1042] A. Purpose of Section 293 [854] - [904] 1. Legislative History of Section 293 [854] - [877] 2. Conclusion on Purpose of Section 293 [878] - [904] B. Interpretation of s. 293 [905] - [1042] 1. Positions of the Parties [905] - [968] 2. Conclusion on Interpretation of s. 293 [969] - [1042] VII. THE CHARTER [1043] - [1357] A. Freedom of Religion [1048] - [1098] 1. Positions of the Parties [1049] - [1082] a) Purpose [1052] - [1060] b) Effect [1061] - [1082] 2. Conclusion [1083] - [1098] B. Freedom of Expression [1099] - [1105] 1. Positions of the Parties [1099] - [1102] 2. Conclusion [1103] - [1105] C. Freedom of Association [1106] - [1127] 1. Positions of the Parties [1106] - [1123] 2. Conclusion [1124] - [1127] D. Liberty and Security of the Person [1128] - [1226] 1. Positions of the Parties [1128] - [1176] a) Interests at Stake [1130] - [1138] i. Liberty [1130] - [1134] ii. Security of the Person [1135] - [1138] b) Principles of Fundamental Justice [1139] - [1176] i. Overbreadth [1142] - [1148] ii. Arbitrariness [1149] - [1156] iii. Gross Disproportionality [1157] - [1165] iv. Consent [1166] - [1173] v. Vagueness [1174] - [1176] 2. Conclusion [1177] - [1226] E. Equality [1227] - [1270] 1. Positions of the Parties [1227] - [1258] a) On the ground of religion [1230] - [1235] b) On the ground of marital status [1236] - [1258] 2. Conclusion [1259] - [1270] F. Section 1 [1271] - [1357] 1. Positions of the Parties [1276] - [1328] a) Pressing and Substantial Objective [1278] - [1283] b) Proportionality [1284] - [1328] i. Rational Connection [1284] - [1298] ii. Minimum Impairment [1299] - [1305] iii. Proportionality of Effects [1306] - [1328] 2. Conclusion [1329] - [1357] a) Section 2(a) [1330] - [1352] b) Section 7 [1353] - [1357] VIII. DISPOSITION [1358] - [1367] 1. Is Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada consistent with the [1359] - [1362] Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? If not, in what particular or particulars and to what extent? 2. What are the necessary elements of the offence in s. 293 of the Criminal [1363] - [1367] Code of Canada? Without limiting this question, does s. 293 require that the polygamy or conjugal union in question involved a minor or occurred in a context of dependence, exploitation, abuse of authority, a gross imbalance of power, or undue influence? Page Range APPENDIX “A” [336 - 357] I. INTRODUCTION [1] By s. 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, (initially in 1890 and periodically since then in successive revisions to the Code), Parliament has prohibited the practice of polygamy. British Columbia asks this Court to declare whether this prohibition is consistent with the freedoms guaranteed to all Canadians by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part 1 of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act, 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11 [Charter]. [2] Mr. Justice Binnie, in extra-judicial comments (Kirk Makin, “An Insider‟s Glimpse at a Court in Transition”, The Globe and Mail, 24 September 2011), has suggested that the direction of any constitutional inquiry depends much upon how the good advocate, the good judge, the good appellate panel (and so on) characterizes the essential issue before the Court. Here, the Attorney General for British Columbia has said in opening that the case against polygamy is all about harm. Absent harm, that party accepted that s. 293 would not survive scrutiny under the Charter. [3] The challengers, led by the Amicus Curiae, counter (primarily) that this case is about a wholly unacceptable intrusion by the State into the most basic of rights guaranteed by the Charter - the freedom to practice one‟s religion, and to associate in family units with those whom one chooses. [4] Which characterization shoulders the burden of persuasion here? As Binnie J. said, the answer largely dictates the direction of the analysis. [5] I have concluded that this case is essentially about harm; more specifically, Parliament‟s reasoned apprehension of harm arising out of the practice of polygamy.
Recommended publications
  • Bountiful Voices Angela Campbell
    Osgoode Hall Law Journal Article 1 Volume 47, Number 2 (Summer 2009) Bountiful Voices Angela Campbell Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Part of the Law and Gender Commons Article Citation Information Campbell, Angela. "Bountiful Voices." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 47.2 (2009) : 183-234. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol47/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Bountiful Voices Abstract Common portrayals of Canada's only openly polygamous community cast it as a space frozen in time, both socially and intellectually. "Bountiful," British Columbia is a sixty-five-year-old community comprised of followers of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS). Many residents espouse plural marriage as a central tenet of their faith, believing that the practice leads not only to a good terrestrial life but, also, to facilitated entry into the "celestial kingdom." Visual and written accounts of Bountiful routinely present the women of this community as submissive, silenced, and isolated. Their traditional dress, and the number of children often captured following or clinging to them, suggest conservatism, and possibly also social regression and exploitation. This imagery bolsters current legal approaches to plural marriage in Canada. In particular, the notion that gender inequality and oppression are inherent to polygamy serves to support the criminal prohibition of plural marriage. This article presents a counter-narrative to this common portrayal of the FLDS wife.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Supreme Court of British Columbia
    BC su Poligamia IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Reference re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada, 2011 BCSC 1588 Date: 20111123 Docket: S097767 Registry: Vancouver In the Matter of: The Constitutional Question Act, R.S.B.C. 1986, c 68 And In the Matter of: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms And in the Matter of: A Reference by The Lieutenant Governor In Council Set Out in Order In Council No. 533 dated October 22, 2009 concerning the Constitutionality of s. 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 Before: The Honourable Chief Justice Bauman Reasons for Judgment Counsel for the Attorney General of British Columbia: Counsel for the Attorney General of Canada: Counsel for the Reference Amicus: Counsel for the Interested Persons: Beyond Borders: Ensuring Global Justice for Children: British Columbia Civil Liberties Association: British Columbia Teachers’ Federation: Canadian Association for Free Expression: Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children and the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights: Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Assoc.: Christian Legal Fellowship: James Marion Oler and the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints: REAL Women of Canada: Stop Polygamy in Canada: West Coast Legal Education and Action Fund: Place and Dates of Trial: Place and Date of Judgment: Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION II. COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS A. The Reference Questions B. The Participants C. The Evidence D. Webcast of Final Submissions III. EVIDENTIARY ISSUES A. Factors Justifying a Liberal Approach to Admissibility in a Trial Reference 1. The Importance of Evidence in Charter Litigation 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Plygs by Ed Kociela ISBN 13: 9781535456791
    Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} plygs by Ed Kociela ISBN 13: 9781535456791. This is the much-anticipated sequel to Ed Kociela's successful debut, "plygs," a fact-based novel about the people of a small, fundamentalist Mormon community and the self-proclaimed prophet who forced them to obey his twisted, demented teachings from engaging in welfare fraud to the horrors of child sexual abuse. This book completes the story of religion gone awry in the dusty barrenness of two small towns located along the state line between Utah and Arizona. It is the resolution of a story about a family torn apart by the demands of a demented prophet who controls every aspect of their lives by demanding they follow his word or face eternal damnation. Like the first book, ‘plygs2’ is also about love, lust, and greed and the heartbreaking loss of innocence that test the characters’ courage and will. “The first book was a primer on the lifestyle and beliefs of a group of fundamentalist Mormons," Kociela says. "This one pulls back the layers and exposes the vulnerabilities of a family forced to choose between its religious beliefs and belief in each other.” The book also deals with the fate of the fundamentalist prophet, wanted by authorities in three states for vicious sex crimes against children he took as brides. Kociela said he hopes the book will shed even more light on this very complex subject. “Some people shrug it off and say that consenting adults should be allowed to live whichever lifestyle they choose,” he said. “While I believe that is true, there is a subtext that often goes unrecognized in these fundamentalist groups.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Harm in the Criminalization of Plural Unions
    Emory Law Journal Volume 64 Issue 6 Paper Symposium — Polygamous Unions? Charting the Contours of Marriage Law's Frontier 2015 The Loadstone Rock: The Role of Harm in the Criminalization of Plural Unions Jonathan Turley Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj Recommended Citation Jonathan Turley, The Loadstone Rock: The Role of Harm in the Criminalization of Plural Unions, 64 Emory L. J. 1905 (2015). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj/vol64/iss6/7 This Articles & Essays is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Emory Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Emory Law Journal by an authorized editor of Emory Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TURLEY GALLEYSPROOFS2 5/27/2015 2:10 PM THE LOADSTONE ROCK: THE ROLE OF HARM IN THE CRIMINALIZATION OF PLURAL UNIONS ∗ Jonathan Turley ABSTRACT In this Article, Professor Turley explores the concept of social harm in the context of two recent cases in the United States and Canada over the criminalization of polygamy. The cases not only resulted in sharply divergent conclusions in striking down and upholding such laws respectively, but they offered strikingly different views of the concept of harm in the regulation of private consensual relations. Professor Turley draws comparisons with the debate over morality laws between figures like Lord Patrick Devlin and H.L.A. Hart in the last century. Professor Turley argues that the legal moralism of figures like Devlin have returned in a different form as a type of “compulsive liberalism” that seeks limitations on speech and consensual conduct to combat sexism and other social ills.
    [Show full text]
  • A Question of Strangeness
    A Question of Strangeness by Jennifer Olijnyk A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws College of Law University of Toronto © Copyright by Jennifer Olijnyk 2010 A Question of Strangeness Jennifer Olijnyk Master of Laws College of Law University of Toronto 2010 Abstract This paper examines leading Canadian decisions in the areas of obscenity and indecency law and freedom of religion to demonstrate that the strangeness of a practice will be a major factor in determining the harm associated with it. Since “strangeness” in sexual deviance cases turn on the perceived objectification and subjugation of women and minority religion cases turn on communal behaviours, these strands intersect in the debate over polygamy. The impact that these skewed perceptions will have on findings of harm in the polygamy context is examined, as are how the benefits of the legislation may be overstated. Finally, the effects of “othering” are addressed for the practice of polyamory, a relationship structure that lacks harm but may nevertheless be equally prohibited. ii Table of Contents Table of Contents .................................................................................................................. iii I. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 II. Harm and Strangeness ....................................................................................................... 5 1. Perceptions of Harm ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Opinion Polygamy and the Rights of Women 2010
    Conseil du statut de la Opinion Polygamy and the rights of women 2010 1 Conseil du statut de la Opinion Polygamy and the rights of women 2010 La traduction de l’avis du Conseil La polygamie au regard du droit des femmes (novembre 2010) a été réalisée pour le compte de la Cour suprême de la Colombie-Britannique dans le cadre d’une cause jugée en 2011 pour déterminer si l’interdiction de la polygamie par le gouvernement de cette province est cohérente avec les libertés garanties par la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés. The Conseil du statut de la femme is a study and advisory council which was established in 1973. It gives its opinions on all of the topics related to respect of equality, rights and status of women in Quebec. The Conseil is made up of a female Chair and 10 female members from women’s associations, universities, socio-economic groups as well as from trade unions. This opinion was adopted at the 229th members meeting of the Conseil du statut de la femme on September 17, 2010. The members of the Conseil are (2010) Christine Pelchat, Chair, Nathalie Chapados, Véronique De Sève, Francyne Ducharme, Roxane Duhamel, Marjolaine Étienne, Carole Gingras, Élaine Hémond, Rakia Laroui, Ludmilla Prismy and Catherine des Rivières-Pigeon. We would like to particularly thank, Louise Langevin, professeur at the Faculty of Law at Laval University for her precious commentaries. Research, Writing and Translation Validation Research and Writing Coordination Yolande Geadah, M.A. Marie-Andrée Allard, Christiane Pelchat Collaboration Publishing Coordination (French) Caroline Beauchamp, LL.B.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Matter of the United Effort Plan Trust V. Jessop : Brief of Appellee Utah Supreme Court
    Brigham Young University Law School BYU Law Digital Commons Utah Supreme Court Briefs 2009 In the Matter of the United Effort Plan Trust v. Jessop : Brief of Appellee Utah Supreme Court Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/byu_sc2 Part of the Law Commons Original Brief Submitted to the Utah Supreme Court; digitized by the Howard W. Hunter Law Library, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah; machine-generated OCR, may contain errors. James C. Bradshaw; Rodney R. Parker; Richard A. Van Wagoner; Kenneth A. Okazaki; Stephen C. Clark; Attorneys for Appellants. Spencer E. Austin; Mark W. Dykes; Jeffrey L. Shields; Mark L. Callister; Zachary Shields; Michael D. Stanger; Callister Nebeker & McCullough; Attorneys for Appellee. Recommended Citation Brief of Appellee, United Effort Plan Trust v. Jessop, No. 20090691.00 (Utah Supreme Court, 2009). https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/byu_sc2/2958 This Brief of Appellee is brought to you for free and open access by BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Utah Supreme Court Briefs by an authorized administrator of BYU Law Digital Commons. Policies regarding these Utah briefs are available at http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/utah_court_briefs/policies.html. Please contact the Repository Manager at [email protected] with questions or feedback. IN THE UTAH SUPREME COURT BRIEF OF APPELLEE BRUCE R. IN THE MATTER OF THE UNITED WISAN, AS THE COURT-APPOINTED EFFORT PLAN TRUST SPECIAL FIDUCIARY OF THE UNITED EFFORT PLAN TRUST Supreme Court Case No. 20090691-SC Third District Court Case No. 053900848 APPEAL FROM THE JULY 17, 2009 ORDER OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH HONORABLE JUDGE DENISE P.
    [Show full text]
  • Harm, Human Rights, and the Criminalization of Fundamentalist Mormon Polygamy*
    Chapter4 8 Mormonism: Harm, Human Rights, and the Criminalization of Fundamentalist Mormon Polygamy* Stephen A. Kent With the Utah conviction (eventually overturned) of fundamentalist Mormon1 leader Warren Jeffs on two counts of rape as an accom- plice,2 and quashed indictments in British Columbia against two fundamentalist leaders (James Oler and Winston Blackmore) for allegedly practicing polygamy,3 heated legal and social debates are occurring over what societies’ responses should be to polygamy4 in general and its fundamentalist Mormon version in particular. Child welfare is the most sensitive concern around polygamy issues, and this concern was at the center of the decision by offi cials in Texas’s Department of Family and Protective Services to coordinate with law enforcement in raiding the fundamentalist Mormons’ Yearning for Zion Ranch near Eldorado on April 3, 2008.5 A raft of other controversial issues exist, however, around the practice, related to sexual, physical, medical, educational, and emotional abuse as well as fi nancial malfeasance. Moreover, polygamy is a felony in both the United States and Canada, practiced (according to various accounts) by anywhere between 21,000 to 100,000 fundamentalist Mormon polygamists in the two countries (with additional practitioners in Mexico).6 M. A. Hamilton et al. (eds.), Fundamentalism, Politics, and the Law © Marci A. Hamilton and Mark J. Rozell 2011 162 Stephen A. Kent I agree with the position that polygamy should remain a criminal, prosecutable offense in both countries, partly because of the wide- spread impact that the practice frequently has upon the human rights of children and the health and welfare of many people who live under its control.
    [Show full text]
  • Latter-Day Screens
    Latter- day Screens This page intentionally left blank Latter- day Screens GENDER, SEXUALITY, AND MEDIATED MORMONISM Brenda R. Weber duke university press durham and london 2019 © 2019 DUKE UNIVERSITY PRESS. All rights reserved Printed in the United States of Amer i ca on acid- free paper ∞ Designed by Courtney Leigh Baker Typeset in Minion Pro and Helvetica Neue by Westchester Publishing Services Library of Congress Control Number: 2019943713 isbn 9781478004264 (hardcover : alk. paper) isbn 9781478004868 (pbk. : alk. paper) isbn 9781478005292 (ebook) Cover art: Big Love (hbo, 2006–11). Publication of this open monograph was the result of Indiana University’s participation in TOME (Toward an Open Monograph Ecosystem), a col- laboration of the Association of American Universities, the Association of University Presses, and the Association of Research Libraries. TOME aims to expand the reach of long-form humanities and social science scholarship including digital scholarship. Additionally, the program looks to ensure the sustainability of university press monograph publishing by supporting the highest quality scholarship and promoting a new ecology of scholarly publishing in which authors’ institutions bear the publication costs. Funding from Indiana University made it possible to open this publication to the world. This work was partially funded by the Office of the Vice Provost of Research and the IU Libraries. For Michael and Stacey, my North Stars This page intentionally left blank CONTENTS Acknowl edgments ix Past as Prologue. Latter- day Screens and History 1 Introduction. “Well, We Are a Curiosity, Ain’t We?”: Mediated Mormonism ​13 1. Mormonism as Meme and Analytic: Spiritual Neoliberalism, Image Management, and Transmediated Salvation ​49 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Identity and Discrimination in the Public Realm: the Case of Polygamy in Western Canada
    Religious Identity and Discrimination in the Public Realm: The Case of Polygamy in Western Canada Avigail Eisenberg (Universidad de Victoria, Canadá) Polygamy has been criminally prohibited in Canada since 1890,1 but many people, including some communities, openly engage in the practice either as a matter of lifestyle choice,2 because the practice is culturally familiar and accepted,3 or because it is religious mandated, as it is in the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (FLDS), who are also known as ‘fundamentalist Mormons’. Rarely have polygamists in North America been charged with the offence and those who have been convicted tend to receive light penalties. However, starting in 2002, this situation changed. At that time, the FLDS community in North America gained national and international attention due to a conflict within the community between rival leaders, one of whom, Warren Jeffs, was convicted in Utah as an accomplice for his role in arranging a marriage between a 14 year old girl and her 19 year old cousin.4 In the context of the conflict, Jeffs tried to excommunicate his rival in Canada, Winston Blackmore, which led to a split in the 1 Today, section 293 of Canada’s Criminal Code contains similar wording to the 1890 statute. Section 293 states: (1) Everyone who (a) practises or enters into or in any manner agrees or consents to practise or enter into (i) any form of polygamy, or (ii) any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the same time, whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding form of marriage, or (b) celebrates, assists or is a party to a rite, ceremony, contract or consent that purports to sanction a relationship mentioned in subparagraph (a)(i) or (ii), is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Biopolitics of Normative Monogamy: a Critical Discourse Analysis of the Polygamy Debate and Bountiful, British Columbia
    THE BIOPOLITICS OF NORMATIVE MONOGAMY: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF THE POLYGAMY DEBATE AND BOUNTIFUL, BRITISH COLUMBIA by ADAM BURKE CARMICHAEL A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Political Science) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) August 2010 © Adam Burke Carmichael, 2010 Abstract The issue of polygamy has become a political problem in the last twenty years in Canada, and in British Columbia specifically, because of legal ambiguity regarding the constitutionality of Canada's anti-polygamy law. This problem has been approached by academics primarily through a legal negotiation of women's rights versus religious minority rights. Popular polygamy discourse, however, is largely informed by a debate within the print media over core Canadian values regarding sexuality. This thesis examines the unequal power dynamics that serve as the preconditions for this debate and that are reinforced through the discourse. These dynamics form a complex web between various groups such as GLBTQ communities, social conservatives, secular feminists and those practising polygamy. I rely on a genealogical discourse analysis that traces the development of polygamy discourse in the mid-to-late nineteenth century, and the continuity of this discourse in the contemporary debate in Canada. Drawing on a critical analysis of Canadian print media, I argue that the contemporary polygamy debate reinforces a biopolitics of normalization in which a hetero-normative, monogamous and economically productive family unit is privileged at the expense of marginalized sexual-family structures that are characterized as a threat to the national population.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Economy of Nationalization
    THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NATIONALIZATION: SOCIAL CREDIT AND THE TAKEOVER OF THE BRITISH COLUMBIA ELECTRIC COMPANY By H. WILLIAM TIELEMAN B.A., The University of British Columbia, 1981 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Political Science) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA FefetuaTy^M 84"" © H. William Tieleman, 1984 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Political Science The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date Jan. 161 1Q84 DE-6 (3/81) ii. ABSTRACT The nationalization of the British Columbia Electric Company by the provincial Social Credit government provides a demonstrative example of a provincial state's relative autonomy being exercised in a dynamic situation. The study examines the state's variable degree of autonomy from the ruling class in society and how it is determined by specific economic, political and social circumstances. It is argued that Social Credit, with the support of its own class base — the petit bourgeoisie, nascent regional bourgeoisie, unorganized working class and others — and the backing of the resource capital fraction of the ruling class, nationalized the economic vehicle of the investment capital fraction, the BCE, in order to further economic development in the province.
    [Show full text]