DiscussMormonism.com

The Church put out a news release stating:

SALT LAKE CITY 6 April 2008 The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints reiterated Sunday that it has no affiliation whatever with a polygamous sect in Texas that has been subject to investigation by state law enforcement officers and child protective services. The Church discontinued polygamy officially in 1890, but more than a century later some news and Internet reports fail to draw clear distinctions between the Church and practicing polygamous sects.

What does the church mean by "discontinued polygamy officially" in 1890? Does it seem to indicate that it had discontinued it UNofficially before that? Is it honest to claim that it discontinued polygamy in 1890 at all considering the levels of leadership involved in post-manifesto sealings?

I would have posted this at MAD, but I got banned for questioning DCP on his statement that Joseph Smith's use of the phrase "I have dreamed a dream" shows the hebraic origin of the Book of Mormon. But I digress . . .

I think it's a little rude for them to call themselves "the Church", with a capital C, as if there's only one Church and they're it, in the same sentence that they call the FLDS a sect. There seems to be an implicit demotion in the word "sect", like it's a cult or something, and not a "real" church, or Church.

For better or for worse, the LDS church is going to take a bit of a "collateral damage" beating whenever the FLDS or some other polygamous group makes headlines.

It's Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, John Taylor, Heber C. Kimball, and all the others, stupid. They set the church up for the kind of crap they're getting a hundred+ years on. Don't blame the press that the FLDS take the words of Brigham Young and John Taylor to heart and profess them and live the polygamous lifestyle. It may not technically be fair to the LDS after all this time, but it's their own early leaders' fault, and now they get to suffer the fruits.

You know how LDS like to talk about planting seeds? Well, Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and all the rest planted seeds for decades, the fruits of which the LDS church has to suffer all these years later.

mms wrote:I would have posted this at MAD, but I got banned for questioning DCP on his statement that Joseph Smith's use of the phrase "I have dreamed a dream" shows the hebraic origin of the Book of Mormon. But I digress . . .

Boo Hooooo! Blame DCP. Why not blame your own cerebral deficency arsehole?

When I looked at this before, I got the impression that this was a legal delaying tactic by the Church who still had hopes that the Supreme Court would come through. Therefore, I have no problem with any 'fuzziness' in whatever the actual date of stoppage was.

Ray A wrote:

mms wrote:I would have posted this at MAD, but I got banned for questioning DCP on his statement that Joseph Smith's use of the phrase "I have dreamed a dream" shows the hebraic origin of the Book of Mormon. But I digress . . .

Boo Hooooo! Blame DCP. Why not blame your own cerebral deficency arsehole?

Umm, because it was not my cerebral deficiency. That's why. Duh. Little slow are we?

bcspace wrote:When I looked at this before, I got the impression that this was a legal delaying tactic by the Church who still had hopes that the Supreme Court would come through. Therefore, I have no problem with any 'fuzziness' in whatever the actual date of stoppage was.

But, in an interesting twist, the church DOES have a problem with the media's "fuzziness". This is disturbing to me. Should it be, bcspace? Why is the church exempt from being accurate when it is telling others to be more accurate? Lying for the lord, perhaps?

mms wrote:Umm, because it was not my cerebral deficiency. That's why. Duh. Little slow are we?

I'm an exmo - forgive me.

But, in an interesting twist, the church DOES have a problem with the media's "fuzziness". This is disturbing to me. Should it be, bcspace? Why is the church exempt from being accurate when it is telling others to be more accurate? Lying for the lord, perhaps?

Oh, I think the Church is being completely accurate. The media just tends to fail to report all the details and come to an unbiased conclusion.

bcspace wrote:

But, in an interesting twist, the church DOES have a problem with the media's "fuzziness". This is disturbing to me. Should it be, bcspace? Why is the church exempt from being accurate when it is telling others to be more accurate? Lying for the lord, perhaps?

Oh, I think the Church is being completely accurate. The media just teands to fail to report all the details and come to an unbiased conclusion.

How is it "completely" accurate to say that polygamy was discontinued by the church in 1890 when the highest officials were performing plural marriages for at least another 14 years?

I used to misread the manifesto as officially discontinuing polygamy myself. The statement did not have the support of all the leading quorums. It was not as official as it looks at first glance. So for a time after the manifesto polygamy continued. I think FAIR Wiki has an article on the Manifesto that explains it better than i can.