I do, I do, I do, I . . .

‘Bountiful wives nets criminal charges!’, ‘Hen pecked cult leaders seeks confinement!.’, and ‘Monogamy challenged in Bountiful become Butch’s bride!' No matter the heading the bottom line is two members of a religious sect known as the United Order Effort residing in the small community of Bountiful, B.C. have been charged with one count each of Polygamy. Jim Oler and Winston Blackmore, leaders of the movement were charged under Section 293(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. An indictable offense that can land the two vigorous men in prison for up to five years.

A slew of stamina jokes can be tossed around regarding these fellows, since Blackmore is purported to have 20 wives while for all of Oler ‘s efforts he was only able to procure a measly two. But the true story here will be if the prosecutors in BC will be able to convict. Charter of Rights ‘freedom of religion’ arguments aside, how can Canadian laws and our track record of our degrading moral code stand up to the public scrutiny of a trail? Because in the end, it will be the Polygamy laws that are put to the test.

The Criminal Code of Canada is a hypocritical document when it deals with offenses relating to Public Morals and Sexual Offenses. Lets just break this down and see where it takes us.

The charges of Polygamy are one that prohibits someone from being married to more than one person at a time. Subsection 293 (1)(a)(ii) states, practices or enters into or in any manner agrees or consents to practice or enter into 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. In other words, a certificate of marriage by the BC government is not needed to recognize the union as a marriage. Of course, polygamy is unlawful; therefore a government cannot ‘certify’ the union!

In order to call the union a marriage, the government has to recognize this group as a legitimate religious order giving the leaders “clergy” status in order to conduct a ceremony of marriage. The ‘church’ records would then be the certification needed to call the conjugal couple(s) married. Furthermore, witnesses would be needed to state that they saw an act of marriage performed by the church leaders. This all would come out of a closed religious sect. In the end, the government will have established this cult as a church with all the legislated rights and protections they need to continue their practices.

It was also interesting to note that no sexual or child corruption charges make up any part of the Information in the proceedings. This clearly indicates that the police investigation did not have evidence of immoral acts conducted in the home. A home that is most definitely full of children.
The hypocritical thing here is that if the marriages are not legal, then the first wife is the true wife and the rest are all adulteresses. Up until 1985 it was a Criminal Offense to commit Adultery. But now Adultery is condoned by Canada! Just don’t conduct any private ceremony before ya do the deed. If you do, then its Polygamy and you start all over again.

It brings to mind the image of an Ouroboros, a snake eating its own tail. Because that is exactly what Canada is doing with is its morality code, consuming itself in a cyclical fashion. Our moral code neither lives nor dies, it just exist, with no teeth or ethical compass.

Whether it is Adultery or Polygamy, either act destroys the fabric of a family, degrades the women involved and can corrupt the morals of children. Having polygamy unlawful in Canada is a good thing. But it was only enforceable years ago before Canada legalized adultery and softened other sexual offences. The laws that protect society in these from these acts are soft and unadministratable.

Its about time that the Criminal Code be changed in a manner that strengthens society, protects our children from moral corruption and protect each citizen from each other.

Years of erosion have stripped us of these fundamental laws. How much more erosion can we take?

Armchair Accountability

The public has come accustomed to lip service by the people we pay to do a job. You hear it daily on radio and read it in newsprint. Lip service by definition is just that, phrases used by public servants to give the public the false impression that they are getting their money’s worth. Years ago when I was a police officer we had another phrase for it. It was ‘BBB’ or “bullshit baffles brains!”

A great example of this was reported in the December 1st issue of the Edmonton Journal. The story titled “Cease Fire Eyed for Hobbema” featured the RCMP’s plan to initiate a crime prevention program originally developed in Chicago IL, to fight gang related crime. The RCMP, in recognizing the increase of violent gun crime caused by gang activity on the First Nations Reserves, have looked into bringing “Operation Cease Fire” to Hobbema.

The First Nations Bands of Samson, Erminskin, Louis Bull and Montana have reported gun related crimes at an alarming rate over the past three years. To the RCMP’s credit, they recognize that they need a method of dealing with the victims, the public and offenders of these crimes. In response to this initiative, Kim Misik, a spokeswoman for Alberta Justice was reported as saying “If they come up with an idea for crime prevention, then we’re more than happy to hear about it.” The story concluded with that statement. To the casual reader the story showed that the police are doing their jobs and the government has responded.

All is well, right?

I say nay, nay! Hats off to the RCMP but ‘poo-poo’ to the Solicitor General’s Public Security Division. The simple fact that the P.S.D. appears to just sit around and wait for the police to offer up to the cop-gods solutions to serious short comings in the safety of the public is in direct conflict with the Police Act. Under the Police Act the Solicitor General responsibilities and accountably to the public is clear. According to the Solicitor General’s own website, “In Alberta, the provincial Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security ensures safe communities. Under the Police Act the minister must maintain adequate and effective policing services.”

The Police Act places a statutory obligation on the Solicitor General to ensure that there is adequate and effective policing and that standards are met. This would, by definition, include examination and the study of the violent crime out in Hobbema. It would include a pro-active role in developing or even finding crime prevention programs to assist the RCMP in meeting policing standards in any given community. This would not allow for the Solicitor General to issue a statement of “If they come up with an idea for crime prevention, then we’re more than happy to hear about it.”

You better be more than happy to hear about it! Perhaps we should be giving the salaries of the Public Security Division over to Hobbema RCMP detachment. They appear to be doing the P.S.D.’s job! The situation in Hobbema is clearly the P.S.D.’s responsibility to study, investigate, analyse and to develop, implement and carry out a solution to correct the problem. It is the responsibility of the P.S.D. to, through pro-active solutions, restore good order in the community. Anything less amounts to a failure to carry out the statutory obligation imposed by the Police Act and by the Constitution in placing the administration of justice with the Province, as it addresses the division of powers. I truly hope that the Solicitor General is not satisfied with the level of performance we now see in the Public Security Division.

This level of performance by the P.S.D. has also been demonstrated in the past two years as we witnessed small communities entering in appended agreements with the RCMP under the title of ‘Enhanced Policing’. One example was the Town of Millet funneling tax dollars to the RCMP for an additional Constable to patrol the streets. Like many communities, Millet has a concern regarding preventative patrols and response to several issues arising in their community.
To combat this, last year the Millet Town Council had entered in a three year agreement with the RCMP to provide an additional police officer for public safety. This should have at least raised the hackles of the towns folk, but since the Solicitor General’s Public Security Division had no issue with it, why not?

Once again I say nay nay. Why should the Town of Millet be put into a position of paying additional tax dollars for policing? Section 4(1)(b) of the Police Act states “As part of providing provincial policing services generally, every town, village and summer village that has a population that is not greater than 5000, shall, receive general policing services provided by the provincial police service at no direct cost to the town, village, summer village, municipal district or Métis settlement” Does the term ‘general policing services’ imply inadequate or ineffective? Thankfully, the Town of Millet approved to withdraw from this agreement in their last council meeting.

The tax payers of Alberta has been for too long allowing our public servants like the Solicitor General’s Public Security Division to function at a level that does not prevent victims, over-burdens law enforcers, and cost tax dollars that by law should not be required. It’s time the Solicitor General put people in position that have the abilities to carry out their duties and an understanding of their responsibilities to the citizens of Alberta.