I don't recall any messages being posted in reply. After re-reading my post from almost two years ago, the story came back to mind, as did the questions. I doubt there are "answers" to all of the questions, but I assume there are answers to some of them.
Perhaps your post will inspire some folks to toss in their ideas. Interesting that there's still no Pa Supreme Court opinion. Jim Maule >>> "Stanley M. Shepp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 11/1/2005 2:59:45 PM >>> Hello Professor Maule (and other list members), This is Stan Shepp of the Pennsylvania case involving Parent-Child speech and polygamy. I just found your Dec. 10, 2003 post entitled "Speaking of Marriage" (link and text copied below) on the internet, but I could not find any responses. I was curious as to the outcome of any discussion that may have developed because of this case. I am particularly interested in any case law or arguments that might be of benefit to me if my case continues to the US Supreme Court. I hope you remember the case. To bring you up to date, we are still waiting for the PA Supreme Court to hand down their decision. If you have any additional questions or comments, feel free to ask or to share. Thanks! ORIGINAL POST: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/2003-December/016153.html Speaking of marriage... with one's children? There's at least an exam question here, but I've added a bunch of my own. Full story at http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/08/polygamy.appeal.ap/index.html and sufficient extracts follow to set up questions that follow the extracts: --------------------------------------------------------Begin Article (Extracted)-------------------------------------------------------- Dad sues to teach daughter about polygamy Stanley Shepp wants the right to teach his daughter about polygamy and his religious beliefs. HALLAM, Pennsylvania (AP) -- Tracey L. Roberts isn't trying to stop her ex-husband from voicing his support of polygamy, a belief that broke up their marriage. But she doesn't want him teaching their 10-year-old daughter, Kaylynne, about the practice or exposing her to it in any way. She's won her point in a lower court but now her ex-husband, Stanley M. Shepp, has taken the case to the state Supreme Court. "Religious discussion in the home between a parent and a child has got to be the most sacred freedom-of-speech issue ever," Shepp said. * * * * * A judge in May 2002 granted Roberts and Shepp joint custody, saying Kaylynne would continue being raised in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But Common Pleas Judge Stephen P. Linebaugh prohibited Shepp from "teaching (Kaylynne) about polygamy, plural marriages, or multiple wives," at least until she is 18. Shepp's belief in polygamy, Linebaugh wrote, "if he would follow through with it, would be not only illegal in Pennsylvania, but would also be immoral and illogical. The issue is not having such a belief, but his interest in pursuing that belief, which the testimony indicates he clearly would." * * * * * Shepp said if he loses in the state Supreme Court, he will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case. Johns wrote that he was unable to find a U.S. Supreme Court precedent directly addressing parent-child religious speech in a custody case. Pennsylvania's law against bigamy bars married people from entering into an additional marriage. Among other things, Shepp's brief contends that taking a second wife in an informal "spiritual marriage," lacking legal documentation, would not run afoul of the bigamy statute. ----------------------------------------------------End Extracts------------------------------------------------------------ Questions that pop into my brain: 1. Can it be that there is no Supreme Court decision speaking to the First Amendment (or privacy) protection of religious discussion between a parent and a child? Does the fact this is a custody matter permit the court to intrude where it otherwise would (or could) not, just as Pennsylvania courts require divorced parents to pay for a child's college education, an obligation not enforceable by a child of non-divorced parents? 2. Even though the question of whether a state supreme court would invalidate polygamy prohibitions won't be decided in this case, because the issue isn't Shepp's practice of polygamy, doesn't the assertion by the trial judge that the illegality of polygamy contributes a justification to the ban on Shepp's teaching it to his daugther raise the issue indirectly? If so, would the court dismiss the appeal as to that point as a matter of nonjusticiability? 3. Is the allegation that polygamy is immoral (is it, really?) an acceptable basis for reaching the conclusion reached by the trial judge? If it is permissible to take morality or immorality into account, whose moral code is applied? 4. Why is polygamy illogical? (Just wondering. Unwise, perhaps (and I'll leave out the jokes)). 5. If Shepp and his former wife had divorced because he was gay (that's not the reason for the divorce), could the court prohibit him from discussing with his daughter (or a son) his views on the religious aspects of "gay marriage"? 6. If two gay men adopt a child, and then split up, would it be permissible for the court to prohibit them from explaining their religious beliefs concerning marriage (including "gay marriage") to the child? Is it in the best interests of the child to leave the child confused? 7. What am I missing in not understanding the argument that an informal "spiritual marriage" does not run afoul of the bigamy statute? Or is it that this case (in dicta) could indirectly encourage the notion that religious nuptials and civil marriage are different concepts totally separate one from the other? Well, have at it. Jim Maule Professor of Law, Villanova University School of Law Villanova PA 19085 maule at law.villanova.edu <http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw> http://vls.law.vill.edu/prof/maule President, TaxJEM Inc (computer assisted tax law instruction) (www.taxjem.com) Publisher, JEMBook Publishing Co. (www.jembook.com) Owner/Developer, TaxCruncherPro (www.taxcruncherpro.com) Maule Family Archivist & Genealogist (www.maulefamily.com) Stan Shepp York, PA Center of the Universe [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
