Wow. Church get's tougher with media over polygamy

[_mms]

Here is a letter from the Church's General Counsel (who is also a member of the Seventy) to the media re FLDS coverage:

http://newsroom.LDS.org/ldsnewsroom/eng ... dia-letter

Here is the most interesting part:

We are confident that you are committed to avoiding misleading statements that cause unwarranted confusion and that may disparage or infringe the intellectual property rights discussed above. Accordingly, we respectfully request the following:

As reflected in the AP Style Guide, we ask that you and your organization refrain from referring to members of that polygamous sect as “fundamentalist Mormons” or “fundamentalist” members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We ask that, when reporting about this Texas-based polygamous sect or any other polygamous group, you avoid either explicitly or implicitly any inference that these groups are affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
On those occasions when it may be necessary in your reporting to refer to the historical practice of plural marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, that you make very clear that the Church does not condone the practice of polygamy and that it has been forbidden in the Church for over one hundred years. Moreover, we absolutely condemn arranged or forced “marriages” of underage girls to anyone under any circumstances.
Stated simply, we would like to be known and recognized for whom we are and what we believe, and not be inaccurately associated with beliefs and practices that we condemn in the strongest terms. We would be grateful if you could circulate or copy this letter to your editorial staff and to your legal counsel.

Bolding mine.


More interesting stuff here on new efforts to distance Church from FLDS:

http://www.newsroom.LDS.org/ldsnewsroom ... s-identity

[_mms]

Oh yeah, and in this article again begging for accuracy in reporting, the Church states:

Some Church members followed the practice for about a 50-year period until 1890, when it was officially stopped.

Uggghhh. How can we do this? Somebody please get a clue. It looks terrible to continue to make inaccurate states about our polygamous past in the very same textual breath that we ask for accuracy (and even imply potential legal action for innacuracy). Polygamy was "officially" continued until 1904. Duh. Everyone knows this, right, BC? We were all taught this in Seminary, right?

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Here is a letter from the Church's General Counsel (who is also a member of the Seventy) to the media re FLDS coverage: ....

My comments:

... On those occasions when it may be necessary in your reporting to refer to the historical practice of plural marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, that you make very clear that the Church does not condone the practice of polygamy and that it has been forbidden in the Church for over one hundred years.

Note the careful wording -- yes, the Church doesn't condone the "practice" ... unless, of course, you're a widower or civilly divorced man, then you can take a 2nd eternal companion (but a widow or civilly divorced woman cannot).

Moreover, we absolutely condemn arranged or forced “marriages” of underage girls to anyone under any circumstances.

Too bad this rule didn't exist when Joseph asked Heber for 14-year old Helen.

Stated simply, we would like to be known and recognized for whom we are and what we believe ....

But the LDS Church certainly still believes in polygamy (D&C 132) and practices it to a limited degree even today (the CHI), as evidenced by one-quarter of the current Quorum of the 12 who have taken a 2nd eternal companion (Perry, Nelson and Oaks).

... and not be inaccurately associated with beliefs and practices that we condemn in the strongest terms.

Well, except for in D&C 132 and the CHI (which Perry, Nelson and Oaks have taken advantage of).

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Here is a letter from the Church's General Counsel (who is also a member of the Seventy) to the media re FLDS coverage ....

I also note the letter is careful not to describe the FLDS as a "church" (but it does when referring to the LDS). Instead, the letter refers to the FLDS Church as "polygamous sect" and "that group."

[_truth dancer]

So, are reporters supposed to continue promote what the church wants them to as opposed to what is the truth?

I don't get this.. somebody please help me understand.

The truth is that the church in FACT continued to practice polygamy until 1904, why do reporters follow what the church wants them to state rather than the truth?

Why does the church get to (or think they can) say what a reporter can or cannot write, if they are in fact trying to write what is true?

If scholars, historians, reports believe that the FLDS are in fact fundamentalist Mormons, why does the LDS church get to say otherwise? What "authority" do they have that keeps reporters from writing what they believe or discover is true?

Does the LDS church think their priesthood authority can rule what reporters can write?

LDS legal counsel is writing a rather strongly worded (near threatening) letter to the press telling them what they can and cannot write... and reporters follow along? Are newspapers and various media outlets afraid they will be sued by the church if they report the truth or word statements against the church's expressed dictate?

I really don't get this whole thing.



~dancer~

[_harmony]

So, are reporters supposed to continue promote what the church wants them to as opposed to what is the truth?

I don't get this.. somebody please help me understand.

The truth is that the church in FACT continued to practice polygamy until 1904, why do reporters follow what the church wants them to state rather than the truth?

Why does the church get to (or think they can) say what a reporter can or cannot write, if they are in fact trying to write what is true?

If scholars, historians, reports believe that the FLDS are in fact fundamentalist Mormons, why does the LDS church get to say otherwise? What "authority" do they have that keeps reporters from writing what they believe or discover is true?

Does the LDS church think their priesthood authority can rule what reporters can write?

LDS legal counsel is writing a rather strongly worded (near threatening) letter to the press telling them what they can and cannot write... and reporters follow along? Are newspapers and various media outlets afraid they will be sued by the church if they report the truth or word statements against the church's expressed dictate?

I really don't get this whole thing.



~dancer~

Because newspapers would rather fight battles they can win, rather than uncover a truth no one cares about. No one cares about "eternal polygamy". The only polygamy anyone cares about is the kind that takes place here and now, and the LDS church doesn't allow plural marriages here and now. So your comments make no sense to them.

The church has deep pockets and lots of lawyers. Were a newspaper of lesser magnitude than the Washington Post or the New York Times to go after them, they'd flatten them. And since the Post and the Times don't care squat about what happens in SLC or Texas, they aren't about to worry overmuch about uncovering this kind of "news".

[_Mahonri]

Have the brethren read carefully Bill Clinton and 'it depends on what the meaning of is is'.

They can't have it both ways. Legal hair splitting and the truth are two different things. The FLDS are FUNDAMENTALIST LDS, it is right in their name.

Course the guy is a lawyer so what else is new about misrepresenting reality?

[_Seven]

So, are reporters supposed to continue promote what the church wants them to as opposed to what is the truth?

I don't get this.. somebody please help me understand.

The truth is that the church in FACT continued to practice polygamy until 1904, why do reporters follow what the church wants them to state rather than the truth?

Why does the church get to (or think they can) say what a reporter can or cannot write, if they are in fact trying to write what is true?

If scholars, historians, reports believe that the FLDS are in fact fundamentalist Mormons, why does the LDS church get to say otherwise? What "authority" do they have that keeps reporters from writing what they believe or discover is true?

Does the LDS church think their priesthood authority can rule what reporters can write?

LDS legal counsel is writing a rather strongly worded (near threatening) letter to the press telling them what they can and cannot write... and reporters follow along? Are newspapers and various media outlets afraid they will be sued by the church if they report the truth or word statements against the church's expressed dictate?

I really don't get this whole thing.



~dancer~

Hi Truth Dancer,
I wouldn't be surprised if this threat from the church causes more reporters to dig deeper. We might see future articles comparing the differences (if any) between the FLDS and Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy. (the New York Times already did one a few months back) If I recall correctly, the Salt Lake Tribune did an article about the current Mormon doctrine/spiritual practice of polygamy in the temples today and how disingenuous the church is to the media on this issue.

This letter will backfire on the church in my opinion.
We'll see.....

[_Jason Bourne]

hat the church in FACT continued to practice polygamy until 1904, why do reporters follow what the church wants them to state rather than the truth?

Why does the church get to (or think they can) say what a reporter can or cannot write, if they are in fact trying to write what is true?

If scholars, historians, reports believe that the FLDS are in fact fundamentalist Mormons, why does the LDS church get to say otherwise? What "authority" do they have that keeps reporters from writing what they believe or discover is true?




~dancer~

When the FLDS thing was really heated up FOX news regularly called the FLDS Mormons or Fundamentalist Mormons. So the news reporters will use whatever term they want.

Again, really for most 1890 or 1904, who cares?

[_mms]

Again, really for most 1890 or 1904, who cares?

Are you serious? Who cares? I know a lot of people who care and who would care if they knew about it, which is why the Church continues to avoid it by misleading statements.

Does it not bother you at all that the Church makes blatantly false statements to the media regarding when it stopped polygamy in the very same writings in which it is admonishing (some would say "threatening") the media to be accurate? That's is just a big "so what" to you?

Wow.