The whole "groomed for marriage" thing is not limited to just polygamy. It is a major factor of a lot of devout religious groups.

The polygamy aspect really makes no difference.

For me the key word is "sexually"-- that's what makes this kind of preparation of young girls actionable according to the laws of our society, and wherever and whenever it's going on, it should be stopped. Since the discussion was about polygamy, however, I'm a bit confused as to the point of your comment.

My point is that your major complaint about polygamy is something that is not actually limited to polygamists - and that we do nothing about all the other religious groups that groom young girls for marriage (sexually or otherwise - as long as there isn't actual underage sex).

If we let the majority of religious groups raise their young girls how they want, I see no reason we shouldn't do the same for polygamists.

I'm not sure you really got what my "major complaint" is (either through my muddy writing or your understanding of it)- so let me be clear. When I use the words " sexual grooming" I am using a specific term that relates to pedophilia and describes the process that often leads up to child molestation and rape. Grooming involves behavior such as exposing children to sexually explicit materials (porn), discussing sexually explicit acts or ideas, engaging in non-genital fondling and touching in order to elicit or satisfy sexual urges, etc. I have a problem with child molestation, child rape, and rape, and a bigger problem with societies which promote and ritualize it. Part of that, but certainly not all of it, is the sexual grooming of children, which is a *totally* different thing than having a norm of women marrying in their late teens (such as the mainstream Mormon culture does). So, what are all these religious groups that practice sexual grooming that we're just allowing to raise their young girls however they want?

"Sexual grooming", as you describe it at least, has nothing to do with polygamy.

You think there is an inherent connection between polygamy and what is essentially child molestation?

Just because some off-shoots might have gone to that extreme doesn't really have anything to do with the way polygamy was and has been practiced. Many early cultures, especially in Africa, had polygamist cultures and did not practice child molestation. Early Mormons did not practice child molestation nor is there any evidence that they somehow had higher rates of child molestation - in fact, evidence suggests their women were given more rights (including the right to vote) than the majority of women at that time.

There is nothing inherent in the practice of polygamy that leads to "sexual grooming" or child molestation. Believing that there is, is the equivalent of saying gay marriage will inherently lead to people wanting to marry their dogs. Just because a few crazy people do it, doesn't mean that's how it would actually be practiced.

My point is, where polygamy DOES cause a problem for most of our liberal sensitivities is that it promotes a male-centric and often very conservative role for women and the family. That is NOT the equivalent of child molestation. Those cultures - those that promote "traditional family values" - are protected and have a right to exist in our society. Polygamy and polygamist cultures would be comparable to this.

I did not, at any point, state that all polygamist groups practice child marriage and therefore child molestation. I said that one of the reasons that legalizing polygamous marriages makes me nervous is that the polygamy practiced by particular small, closed religious groups often does include child marriage. I specifically said that if that's not going on, I think polygamous groups should be allowed to practice their polygamy. I'm not arguing that sexual grooming or molestation is inherent to polygamy. I'm saying that we've seen, multiple times, that cults that practice polygamy (not everybody who practices polygamy) also practice child marriage. If we're going to rubberstamp polygamous marriage we need to be sure it doesn't include child marriage (hard to do in groups that are not open to observation by anyone but members).

I'm going to stop arguing about this, because I think you're misunderstanding me (willfully or not), but I want to be clear- I don't think polygamists inherently abuse children. I don't think polygamy is inherently morally wrong. And I didn't say so anywhere in my answers or comments.

Look, I'm not trying to be a dick here or anything, but I think your post (consciously or unconsciously) was full of an assumption that polygamy inherently leads to "sexual grooming".

"...much of the polygamy associated with religion encodes a social system that does not limit marriage to consenting adults..."

"...over and over again we hear of children being sexually groomed for marriage at very young ages and married off when barely even menstrual in groups that practice polygamy."

My point is simply that what an extreme group made more extreme by demonization and being forced underground does is not representative of the whole.

The reason I felt the need to point out this bias here is because the EXACT justifications that you use (it promotes male-dominated societies, it contains child rape or encourages it "much" of the time, and it is inconsistent with American culture) were enough for the court to outlaw the practice, and essentially attempt to destroy the early Mormon church.

That same court logic has been later used to deny gay marriage. Justification, even unconscious justifications, based on how "icky" we feel about a minority group is never enough - in my opinion - to decide the legality of an issue.

My point is not to argue here, but just to point out that your language and arguments were laced with an unconscious bias against polygamy based on extreme examples, that informs a lot of your logic. Allowing unconscious biases to inform our logic in thinking about human rights and equality is a very dangerous thing. It has justified some great atrocities and some great violations of our Constitution.

Fair enough, Basil. I think you're making assumptions about how I think and why I do so (not to mention leveling some pretty serious accusations at me), but that's communication for you. And maybe you're right about me, I could be rationalizing- I just disagree. I also think that what I'm advising (caution) is nowhere near an atrocity or a Constitutional violation of anyone's rights. I didn't say, for example, adults that practice polygamy shouldn't be allowed to raise children (as those who rely on the "ick" argument regarding gay marriage say regularly). And since you keep bringing up the Mormons, I want to point out that I was not talking about Mormons (except when I mentioned their penchant for marriage in the late teens as an example of *not* what I considered grooming)- more about cults led by charismatics.
Also, the real thrust of my argument for why creating legal polygamous marriages would be questionable was about logistics, so this is pretty much all a tangent.