DiscussMormonism.com

In virtually every story on the FLDS situation, there is the required disclaimer to appease the LDS church, "the FLDS is a breakaway sect from the Mormon church that renounced polygamy over a century ago," or something along these lines.

I would think there would be at least one reporter who would at the very least check this LDS official statement to verify it.

If they would, they would learn that indeed the LDS church does absolutely believe in polygamy. They would learn that some of its leaders are spiritually married to multiple women and believe they will be polygamists in the next life. They would learn that the LDS church has in its scriptures the teaching of polygamy. They would learn that there are, right today, men spiritually sealed to multiple women who are alive and well right here on the earth. They would learn that Joseph Smith claimed an angel with a flaming sword commanded him to marry teenage girls and the wives of other men. They would learn that indeed right in the CHI it states that a man can be sealed to multiple women while women cannot, (unless she is dead and the sealing is done by proxy).

The FLDS women are stating that they are not married to the father of their children, nor do they live with them, In other words, they are spiritually married which is not a legal marriage. Similarly, there are women right here on this earth who are spiritually married (but not civily) to LDS men with multiple spiritual wives. (Just ask the women who can't get a sealing cancellation).

I just don't get why reporters haven't done a little research. Or maybe they are just not asking the right questions, so the LDS church can deceive them?

Hmm....

~dancer~

truth dancer wrote:In virtually every story on the FLDS situation, there is the required disclaimer to appease the LDS church, "the FLDS is a breakaway sect from the Mormon church that renounced polygamy over a century ago," or something along these lines.

I would think there would be at least one reporter who would at the very least check this LDS official statement to verify it.

If they would, they would learn that indeed the LDS church does absolutely believe in polygamy. They would learn that some of its leaders are spiritually married to multiple women and believe they will be polygamists in the next life. They would learn that the LDS church has in its scriptures the teaching of polygamy. They would learn that there are, right today, men spiritually sealed to multiple women who are alive and well right here on the earth. They would learn that Joseph Smith claimed an angel with a flaming sword commanded him to marry teenage girls and the wives of other men. They would learn that indeed right in the CHI it states that a man can be sealed to multiple women while women cannot, (unless she is dead and the sealing is done by proxy).

The FLDS women are stating that they are not married to the father of their children, nor do they live with them, In other words, they are spiritually married which is not a legal marriage. Similarly, there are women right here on this earth who are spiritually married (but not civily) to LDS men with multiple spiritual wives. (Just ask the women who can't get a sealing cancellation).

I just don't get why reporters haven't done a little research. Or maybe they are just not asking the right questions, so the LDS church can deceive them?

Hmm....

~dancer~

Do you happen to know a reporter who wants to win a Pulitzer Prize?

There is a great article in the current DIALOGUE by B. Carmon Hardy called Polygamy, Mormonism and Me. He writes about his interest in post manifesto polygamy, the scrutiny he received, his resignation from BYU and the church and his scholarship. It's worth the price just for that article. It's a small world as I guess he was at Cal State Fullerton when I was there and I never knew what he knew - of course I was taking classes at the institute.

As most people don't accept polygamy for the dead, I really don't see what you want them to say. Maybe: "the FLDS is a breakaway sect from the Mormon church that renounced polygamy among the living over a century ago. They insist that dead people can still be polygamous though. Legislation is pending to end this foul practice."

karl61 wrote:There is a great article in the current DIALOGUE by B. Carmon Hardy called Polygamy, Mormonism and Me. He writes about his interest in post manifesto polygamy, the scrutiny he received, his resignation from BYU and the church and his scholarship. It's worth the price just for that article. It's a small world as I guess he was at Cal State Fullerton when I was there and I never knew what he knew - of course I was taking classes at the institute.

Is there a link?

truth dancer wrote:Similarly, there are women right here on this earth who are spiritually married (but not civily) to LDS men with multiple spiritual wives. (Just ask the women who can't get a sealing cancellation).

Hmm....

~dancer~

It took my mother at least 5 years to get her marriage cancelled. She went through hell attempting to explain why my father had no interest in keeping her for eternity. The GA's just wouldn't listen to her side for years - EVEN after her civil marriage in the temple to her current companion.

Her ex remains on the books to this day (after 23 years). He is not a Mormon by any conceivable stretch of the imagination.

They would learn that the LDS church has in its scriptures the teaching of polygamy.

The same is true of other Christians churches though obviously they don't have as many details and they ignore the doctrine (not having the details we do).

If they would, they would learn that indeed the LDS church does absolutely believe in polygamy. They would learn that some of its leaders are spiritually married to multiple women and believe they will be polygamists in the next life. They would learn that the LDS church has in its scriptures the teaching of polygamy. They would learn that there are, right today, men spiritually sealed to multiple women who are alive and well right here on the earth. They would learn that Joseph Smith claimed an angel with a flaming sword commanded him to marry teenage girls and the wives of other men. They would learn that indeed right in the CHI it states that a man can be sealed to multiple women while women cannot, (unless she is dead and the sealing is done by proxy).

I believe the Church is technically correct in it's statements, but I do believe that we should not be ashamed of our doctrine. However, I consider the way this doctrine is dragged through the mud gives reason for us to be so technical. Perhaps the (so far) happy result of the FLDS situation will go a long way towards and even happier result.

My bride is now divorced from me eternally (because of my resignation) - but we are still married civilly.

What should I do if she were to fall in love with a real tool and they inform me they are to marry in the temple for eternity - just not for TIME?

What would you do?

a) beat the guy to an inch of his life for coming onto your wife while you're still legally married to her?
b) civil divorce and walk away?
c) remain faithful to her all your life and even pop out a few more kids - for him?

Can this still happen as it did in the 1800's?


OK, then why not?!

Isn't a dirtbag, well, by any other name still a dirtbag?

bcspace wrote:I believe the Church is technically correct in it's statements, but I do believe that we should not be ashamed of our doctrine. However, I consider the way this doctrine is dragged through the mud gives reason for us to be so technical. Perhaps the (so far) happy result of the FLDS situation will go a long way towards and even happier result.

What result are you referring to and why would it make it an even happier one?

Seriously, what are you[quote] talking about?

Inconceivable wrote:My bride is now divorced from me eternally (because of my resignation) - but we are still married civilly.

What should I do if she were to fall in love with a real tool and they inform me they are to marry in the temple for eternity - just not for TIME?

What would you do?

a) beat the guy to an inch of his life for coming onto your wife while you're still legally married to her?
b) civil divorce and walk away?
c) remain faithful to her all your life and even pop out a few more kids - for him?

Can this still happen as it did in the 1800's?


OK, then why not?!

Isn't a dirtbag, well, by any other name still a dirtbag?

In this hypothetical, wouldn't that refer to woman too? Women aren't forced to fall in love with everyone and anyone who comes on to them. I don't recommend a. I recommend b--the woman obviously doesn't want you.