‘Sister Wives’ polygamists welcome 17th child

TLC/Jana Cruder Sister Wives reality TV star Kody Brown and his fourth wife Robyn welcomed their fourth child, a boy … Continued

TLC/Jana Cruder

Sister Wives reality TV star Kody Brown and his fourth wife Robyn welcomed their fourth child, a boy named Solomon, together Wednesday.

Sister Wives reality TV polygamist Kody Brown and his fourth wife Robyn welcomed their first child, Kody’s 17th, on Wednesday, according to reports.

The Brown family, whose four wives, one husband and 17 children star in TLC’s popular television show, are members of the Apostolic United Brethren faith, a breakaway sect rejected by today’s Mormon Church, but one that claims its roots in Latter-day Saint Scripture and practices, such as plural marriage. The LDS church, whose founder Joseph Smith brought the practice of polygamy to to the church in the 1840s, rejected plural marriage by the year 1890. A number of breakaway sects continued to practice polygamy and the Browns claim that tradition as their own.

Utah’s polygamy laws forbid the practice of plural marriage, and Kody Brown, who is legally married only to his first wife Meri, is leading the charge to change the legal status of polygamists. In July, the Browns filed a lawsuit to prevent Utah from prosecuting consenting polygamist adults for their sexual choices. The Browns are not (yet) asking for legal recognition of their union, but in a twist that has not gone unnoticed by the legal community, are using the same legal precedent that has helped to pave the way for gay marriage. “We only wish to live our private lives according to our beliefs,”the Browns said in a statement.

And if you’re interested in checking out the ‘private lives’ of the reality TV stars, Sister Wives appears on TLC on Sunday nights at 9 p.m.

More On Faith:

Under God:
Polygamy top term assiciated with Mormonism

Elizabeth Tenety
Written by

  • bobby20

    I admit I watch this mess and he has some ugly wives! He seems to be more in love with Robyn, his younger and new wife!

  • tallyhohohoho

    Are they all consenting adults of sound mind?

  • BetsyRossAMERICAN

    What’s good for the Muslims is good for the Mormons. In other words, if we are accepting of every other religion, why not this one?

  • eskarp

    Hey—bad reporting! Is the baby a boy or a girl? Most birth announcements do include that fact!

  • dvervena

    Wow, that’s pretty mean – and irrelevant.

  • bobby20

    It is irrelevant to the story & my opinion, I didnt ask you to agree!

  • ex-Navy

    nice to see mormon values portrayed in the mainstream media.

  • tattoocrazy

    Congrats to the WHOLE family.You can see the love in this family and thats all that should matter.ALL the wifes are beautiful in there own way

  • BetsyRossAMERICAN

    You agree it’s irrelevant. ??????

  • jschafin2

    Um – did you see the photo caption? Boy.

  • KLinford

    It’s completely legal for people to be trashy and sleep around with tons of people. So, why bother the polygamists? At least they’re trying to be a nice unified family.

  • lhale3

    Consenting adults? Perhaps.

    Sound mind? Hardly.

  • gb810

    Hopefully Cody and the girls are keeping themselves afloat in this economy so none of us are paying for all these kids….. haven’t a clue about that as I don’t watch tv and this is the first time I’ve ever heard about them.

  • houlyn

    difficult boundary between consenting adults and groomed from birth, but, I guess if they are happy now…

  • ddunsmore40

    That’s the first thing I thought. As long as they are supporting themselves since many of them do not, I don’t think about them at all.

  • BetsyRossAMERICAN

    There are worse religions in the US. Some openly hate America/Americans.

  • mages_kyria

    Polygamy is no longer a “Mormon value.” Mormons rejected polygamy in the late 1800’s as a prerequisite to Utah becoming a state.

    Personally, I think that if consenting adults want to be in a plural relationship, they should be allowed to do so. I think that plural marriages should be legal (not just religious) for consenting adults, and for the legal protection of everyone in those marriages, including the resulting children. I do not agree that children (i.e., anyone under 18) or anyone with a disability making it impossible for them to give knowledgeable consent, should be forced into plural marriages (ala Warren Jeffs) . Actually, no one should be forced into a plural marriage — it should be only if both, or all, partners agree.

    Is a plural relationship hard? It can be at times, but it can also be quite easy. Is there some jealousy? Some of the time, yes, but you learn to talk things through and work them out — especially when you love someone. What makes a plural relationship work? Open communication, honesty, trust and love, just to name a few things — basically the same things that make a monogamous relationship work, just multiplied. And if you think about it, is it really totally fair to expect that one person will meet ALL the needs of another person for the next 40+ years?

  • mages_kyria

    I’m pretty sure it’s safe to say that all of them are consenting adults and definitely of sound mind. Just because something doesn’t work for you or isn’t a lifestyle you would choose, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t work or is bad for others. To each their own.

  • youngshannon

    I think that they should be able to do what they want. They are all consenting adults and are not hurting anyone. If they are happy more power to them.

  • bmhurts

    Unfortunately, if you read into these relationships, you will see that alot of polygamous communities are supported by welfare. Most are homeschooled and the education is hardly sufficient to survive. Maybe if they stayed in their community, but the large ‘cult’ like ones normally ‘toss’ out the 18year boys. Think about it-their children grow up and unless you get a large number of women to join, their community cannot go on, so some-though no sign of this from the sect of ‘Mormonism’ that the Browns follow-groups make the boys, uneducated, untrained for anything, leave. As for the Browns, everyone of them has declared bankruptcy (something alot of polygamous families do, ring up bills on one person, bankruptcy, then on to the next). Only one wife, Janelle has her credit back. The 3rd wife declared bankruptcy about 18 mos ago and the 4th declared it, doing it in Mexico (supposedly, haven’t seen the documents in whole yet), right before she ‘married’ Kody. Some of the wives have also been on food stamps-right up to 2010. Now, they can’t, being on TV, but if the show goes off, who knows? They do not seem like the OCD type that Kate Gosselin was-always worried about the future and who did put money away for her kids.

  • Sula1

    Interesting, because I am sure that non polygamist has to have a high rate of bankruptcy as well… or all this people that got hit by this economy are polygamist. Where are your facts? But we love to see them as the whole problem of our society

  • Sula1

    No, but they still have the name of there former wives written in the book of life, so if he have as have more than two wives, and divorce them anyway, to marry again, or if the first one die and he marry again, in the spiritual life they all will be there wives. How is it that is not polygamy, at least will be after life.. is the same thing.. They rejected to fit with the government, but they follow it tacitly.

  • Telin

    The faith followed by the Browns is NOT a “sect of ‘Mormonism'” – there ARE NO “sects” of the LDS faith. Did you read the article ? They belong to the Apostolic United Brethren Church; does that even SOUND like anything remotely related to the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints” ? If you want to make statements, then become educated before you do it. The “Mormon” Church did practice polygamy for a short, short time before rejecting it through what has known as the “Snow Manifesto.” Both the Apostolic church and the LDS church reject each other.

  • Zoe5

    God is the only one that will fully satisfy anyone, mere humans cannot. In the Bible, Matthew 22:30 says “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.”. In other words, no one will be married.

  • betalisa

    Mages, “is it really totally fair to expect that one person will meet ALL the needs of another person for the next 40+ years?”
    Is it really totally fair to expect that one man will meet ALL the needs of four women for the next 40+ years?

    The problem stems from the fact that these religion-based plural relationships are predicated on one man, many women, and don’t allow for one woman, many men, or many men and many women. So if the law allows legal protection/benefits for the former, then the other two must be equally protected. This would get seriously complicated, methinks!

    (On another note, I don’t expect my spouse to meet all my needs, that’s why I have friends, teachers, a mail carrier, a butcher, a baker, etc., etc. in my life…)

  • betalisa

    I also read the photo caption, which said it was their fourth child, but the text said it was their first. Hmmm?

  • betalisa

    Oops, forgot that you’d also have to allow all-male and all-female plural marriages. And if you are averse to all these other combinations, then maybe you’ll understand why some of us are averse to the one you are extolling. If not, let’s talk.