Droopy wrote:Yes, that's what she's doing. Otherwise, she'd "come out of the closet" as an enemy of the Church and the Brethren, and openly clarify her positions to her leaders and fellow Ward and Stake members.
But the pose goes on, doesn't it?
It seems to me that you're the true enemy of the Church, denying its history, rewriting its doctrine to fit your own comfort, and publicly professing the same on openly viewed message boards.
You're Ed Decker level material hana. I've got to admit, I never really suspected that until now.
Classic Mopologist counter. You're an embarrassment to the leadership of the LDS Church. Seriously. Ed Decker's a hack, and so are you.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
Droopy wrote: Oh, it has disavowed the practice of plural marriage, but never the principle.
If the "practice" didn't involve sex, it wouldn't be currently suspended. If your argument above held any water whatever, then the LDS Church could continue "sealing" women to men in dynastic celibacy to its heart's content.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
I think the dog-and-pony show that should go on the road to RFM is the rcrocket/droopy routine. They'd last about, what, five minutes before Iron Maiden Susan gave them the royal boot?
I've been to RFM. Like some of its other siblings such as Mormons in Transition, its a psycho circus populated by self serving neurotics seeking justification for their developmental failures mixed with the usual assortment of intellectual juvenile delinquents, alienated misfits, adulterers, whoremongers, compassion fascists, and both professional and amateur religious bigots. Just good, decent folk.
I think the dog-and-pony show that should go on the road to RFM is the rcrocket/droopy routine. They'd last about, what, five minutes before Iron Maiden Susan gave them the royal boot?
I've been to RFM. Like some of its other siblings such as Mormons in Transition, its a psycho circus populated by self serving neurotics seeking justification for their developmental failures mixed with the usual assortment of intellectual juvenile delinquents, alienated misfits, adulterers, whoremongers, compassion fascists, and both professional and amateur religious bigots. Just good, decent folk.
RFM is the religious equivalent of The Daily Kos.
You'll get no disagreement from me on that one. I doubt harmony will disagree with you, either.
By the way, is Kershaw even big enough to have a branch? No wonder you go on message boards.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
It really is this simple, to anyone who understands the female psyche. A woman does not confess a "godparent" relationship on her deathbed.
Sometimes the simplest explanation really is the most correct.
In other words, you have nothing whatsoever but one of the classic options of the fatally cornered: a deterministic general principle that dictates what a unique human individual did long ago based upon her own unique character and motivations.
You have lost the argument disastrously, your knowledge of LDS doctrine is eggshell thin, and your intellectual honesty is in free fall.
It condemns it currently not just as a practice but as a principle. Check your Google ads on this page if you don't believe me.
From the official website of the Church:
The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. At certain times and for His specific purposes, God, through His prophets, has directed the practice of plural marriage (sometimes called polygamy), which means one man having more than one living wife at the same time. In obedience to direction from God, Latter-day Saints followed this practice for about 50 years during the 1800s but officially ceased the practice of such marriages after the Manifesto was issued by President Woodruff in 1890. Since that time, plural marriage has not been approved by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and any member adopting this practice is subject to losing his or her membership in the Church.
Parse, pose, and prevaricate your way out of this hana.
It really is this simple, to anyone who understands the female psyche. A woman does not confess a "godparent" relationship on her deathbed.
Sometimes the simplest explanation really is the most correct.
In other words, you have nothing whatsoever but one of the classic options of the fatally cornered: a deterministic general principle that dictates what a unique human individual did long ago based upon her own unique character and motivations.
You have lost the argument disastrously, your knowledge of LDS doctrine is eggshell thin, and your intellectual honesty is in free fall.
Close the thread, its gone as far as it can go.
How about you and Bob go back and answer all the questions you dodged first.
What argument, exactly, have I lost "disastrously?" The argument that Joseph Smith likely had sex with his wives? Or the argument that plural marriage implies consummation?
Last edited by Guest on Sun May 18, 2008 8:12 am, edited 2 times in total.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
What argument, exactly, have I lost "disastrously?" The argument that Joseph Smith likely had sex with his wives? Or the argument that plural marriage implies consummation?
The first was not being argued, in principle. The arguments you lost were two: that Joseph Smith had sex with Sylvia, and that sealing in this life necessarily implies sexual relations in mortality.
Last edited by Guest on Sun May 18, 2008 8:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
It condemns it currently not just as a practice but as a principle. Check your Google ads on this page if you don't believe me.
From the official website of the Church:
The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. At certain times and for His specific purposes, God, through His prophets, has directed the practice of plural marriage (sometimes called polygamy), which means one man having more than one living wife at the same time. In obedience to direction from God, Latter-day Saints followed this practice for about 50 years during the 1800s but officially ceased the practice of such marriages after the Manifesto was issued by President Woodruff in 1890. Since that time, plural marriage has not been approved by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and any member adopting this practice is subject to losing his or her membership in the Church.
Parse, pose, and prevaricate your way out of this hana.
It's a masterful piece of parsing in itself, if you notice.
Second sentence, I'll be quick to point out, backs up something I've asserted throughout this thread, which you've refuted.
So does third sentence.
About 50 years? The most generous thing I can say to that is that it's very conservative.
"Officially ceased?" Hmm. Do you really think that's accurate, if leaders of the church were continuing the practice, or if it was being continued outside the United States?
"Subject to losing?" Doesn't sound automatic. And the last sentence is a complete misrepresentation of the facts in evidence.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
What argument, exactly, have I lost "disastrously?" The argument that Joseph Smith likely had sex with his wives? Or the argument that plural marriage implies consummation?
The first was not being argued, in principle. The arguments you lost were two: that Joseph Smith had sex with Sylvia, and that sealing in this life necessarily implies sexual relations in mortality.
I never argued either point.
I argued that it was illogical to assume that a woman on her deathbed would confess a sealing relationship to offspring, and that the word "marriage" implies something beyond the understanding of the word "sealing," else fathers and daughers will be having sex in the hereafter.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.