Spot the flaw in logic

[_moksha]

From a letter in the Salt Lake Tribune:

Here we go again with the same old tired, invalid argument: Mormons are hypocrites because they practiced polygamy but oppose gay marriage ("LDS about-face," Forum, Aug. 29). In reality, Mormon polygamists did not seek government recognition of plural marriages, but only freedom from government interference with those marriages. There is a world of difference between saying "I want to conduct my private relationships as I see fit," and saying, "Government and society must approve of and validate my private relationships."

[_Some Schmo]

From a letter in the Salt Lake Tribune:

Here we go again with the same old tired, invalid argument: Mormons are hypocrites because they practiced polygamy but oppose gay marriage ("LDS about-face," Forum, Aug. 29). In reality, Mormon polygamists did not seek government recognition of plural marriages, but only freedom from government interference with those marriages. There is a world of difference between saying "I want to conduct my private relationships as I see fit," and saying, "Government and society must approve of and validate my private relationships."

That's hilarious. There are so many things wrong with that, it's hard to know what you're looking for in particular.

So, for starters, it's not ok for the government to interfere with polygamy but it's ok if they want to interfere with homosexual marriage?

How is that not hypocrisy again?

Also, I'm assuming that they are advocating letting people "conduct [their] private relationships as [they] see fit." What if the parties see marriage as a fitting way to conduct their relationship? What if they're *gasp* having oral sex?

It's BS like this that makes any thinking person realize the whole anti-gay marriage position for what it really is: fear-based discrimination and bigotry.

[_asbestosman]

So, for starters, it's not ok for the government to interfere with polygamy but it's ok if they want to interfere with homosexual marriage?

How is that not hypocrisy again?

If the government simply didn't recognize polygamy, much like it doesn't recognize homosexual marriage, then there is no hypocrisy. But the government interferred with polygamous relationships by punishing polygamists. What does the government do to gays nowadays? Oh yeah, nothing (except provide them protection from certain kinds of discrimination based on their sexual preference).

[_Ray A]

The government doesn't seem to do much to polygamist today, either, except when they step out of line with gross abuse.

KING: Are you surprised that there’s, apparently, a lot of polygamy in Utah?

HINCKLEY: I have seen the thing grow somewhat. I don’t know how much it is. I don’t know how pervasive it is.

KING: Should there be arrests?

HINCKLEY: It’s matter of civil procedure. The church can’t do anything. We have no authority in this matter, none whatever.

KING: Would you like to see the state to clamp down on it?

HINCKLEY: I think I leave that entirely in the hands of the civil officers. It’s a civil offense. It’s in violation of the law. We have nothing to do with it. We’re totally distanced from it. And if the state chooses to move on it, that’s a responsibility of civil officers.

KING: Should the church be more forceful in speaking out? I mean, you’re forceful here tonight, but maybe — they’ve been saying that it’s rather than just a state matter, encouraging the state to prosecute.

HINCKLEY: I don’t know. We’ll consider it.

That was ten years ago.

According to another report, GBH commenting on homosexuality:

“We cannot stand silent if they indulge in immoral activity, if they try to uphold and defend and live in a so-called same-sex marriage situation,” Hinckley said.

I guess it's all a matter of "perspective".

[_asbestosman]

“We cannot stand silent if they indulge in immoral activity, if they try to uphold and defend and live in a so-called same-sex marriage situation,” Hinckley said.

I guess it's all a matter of "perspective".

Keep in mind that the church isn't moving to outlaw homosexual actions, only homosexual marriage.

Also consider that the church sees nothing inherently wrong with polygamy since there are times when God allows it. God has never allowed homosexuality from the church's point of view.


Anyhow, as to the possible logic flaw from the OP, I think it might be a strawman or red-herring. The issue is not necessarily that Mormons are hypocrites with regard to wanting the government to recognize polygamous marriages. Rather one might claim we are hypocrites for trying to force our moral standards on others when we did not like others doing the same to us through the government. That said, I myself am actually glad the feds interferred with the church since I'm no fan of polygamy.

[_Scottie]

Take this article and replace "gay" with "interracial".

[_Angus McAwesome]

Bigotry is as bigotry does...

[_bcspace]

The logic of the letter is flawless. The arguments that it is flawed are flawed because such often involve assuming that marriage means a license from the government.

[_Ray A]

Also consider that the church sees nothing inherently wrong with polygamy since there are times when God allows it.

I know it's a paradoxical situation for the Church. It's sort of difficult to say, "they're doing it without God's authority, we did". Still, it's hard to escape the Book of Mormon calling it "an abomination", not just polygamy itself, but the consequences of polygamy, such as "broken hearts", then saying that the Lamanites were better in that regard because they were monogamous. It seems like a blanket condemnation of polygamy, even with the "unless I command otherwise" clause. When did he command the Nephites to practise polygamy? When, in the Book of Mormon, were the "times God allowed it"?

Can anyone show me a whole chapter in the Book of Mormon which condemns homosexuality? Like God's opinion of Polygamy. The arguments aren't very consistent in this regard.

But the obsession is with granting a gay couple a marriage license. No problem with them having most other civil rights, it's just the "M" word that evokes disgust.

Marriage © 2008 The United States Government.

Don't worry, my own government does the same.

Marriage © 2008 Kevin Rudd.

[_bcspace]

Can anyone show me a whole chapter in the Book of Mormon which condemns homosexuality? Like God's opinion of Polygamy. The arguments aren't very consistent in this regard.

Ray's post is the height of yellow journalism as is his wont.

Jacob 3 is not a whole chapter against plural marriage, if anything, it speaks more to the fact that one should not be engaging in homosexual relations as these always fall under the definition of fornication and adultery.

Ray also fails to mention that plural marriage is acceptable when sanctioned by God in the same book.

This illustrates the fact that the only way to bash the LDS Church is to invent a church that doesn't exist and call it LDS.