Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Yoda

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _Yoda »

Mak wrote:That conflicts entirely with what years of experience at that board have taught me about their moderation. I'm not saying I don't believe you, but if you have a link to the thread, I'd like to see the tone of the thread and what exactly was said.


Honey, I was a Moderator on that board, myself. I know how the inner workings happen.

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you a link. I do not have access to the search feature since I am banned from the site. Also, my IP address is technically blocked. I just know how to tunnel in to read.

If you want details on my story there, PM me. I'm too tired to go into that whole mess here on this thread.

Also, to be honest, even if I could search and find the thread, I would not provide you a link. This happened several years ago, and the poster who was suicidal at the time has moved on with his/her life. I would like to keep that poster's identity confidential.
_Ray A

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _Ray A »

maklelan wrote:A handful of people here and at MAD can't even begin to say that.


And I think that's the key to understanding "board dynamics". It's like me and the job I work at. Last week one of my (cab-driver) workmates was stabbed, and is lucky to be alive. We deal with trouble-makers all the time, but I can objectively say they are only a relative handful, though that handful can seriously make you reconsider why you continue. With growing experience I've learned how to avoid most of them, and that's another key to survival. Quitting isn't an option for me at this stage, so I've had to learn how to deal with the challenges rather than surrender. There might be some lessons here.

This board has negatives, like all boards, and they can be irritating, but overall I think the openness and minimal moderation are positives, but, the downside is that you sometimes have to put up with personal irritation to allow that real openness to continue.

I've never reported anyone, and didn't even know there was a report button. Unlike posters like Selek, I don't go squealing to Mommy when someone gets on my nerves.
_maklelan
_Emeritus
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _maklelan »

liz3564 wrote:
Mak wrote:That conflicts entirely with what years of experience at that board have taught me about their moderation. I'm not saying I don't believe you, but if you have a link to the thread, I'd like to see the tone of the thread and what exactly was said.


Honey, I was a Moderator on that board, myself. I know how the inner workings happen.

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you a link. I do not have access to the search feature since I am banned from the site. Also, my IP address is technically blocked. I just know how to tunnel in to read.

If you want details on my story there, PM me. I'm too tired to go into that whole mess here on this thread.

Also, to be honest, even if I could search and find the thread, I would not provide you a link. This happened several years ago, and the poster who was suicidal at the time has moved on with his/her life. I would like to keep that poster's identity confidential.


Fair enough.
I like you Betty...

My blog
_LifeOnaPlate
_Emeritus
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:50 pm

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _LifeOnaPlate »

Mercury wrote:
LifeOnaPlate wrote:There are a few, and they manage to stay above the fray by largely ignoring people like mercury and college-whatever his name is this month.


You take Mormon apologetics more seriously than it deserves. Personal attack comments edited by Liz.Image

When we call you out on it (sometimes in what you percieve as a childish matter) you squeal and squirm, wrapping the description into mealy mouthed logical fallacies and faith-based garbage.

Get one thing straight. My audience is those close to the fence and those far over it. You die hards are of no interest to me. What you are is a mirror I can hold my creative writing up to.

You are providing the means for entertainment.

People like Jason and Liz are good people trying to work out some tough issues. I cut them slack because they engage at a level I am familiar with. Unfortunately you aren't really getting what the big picture is so its the Merc Lampoon for ya.

Too bad so sad, thanks for playing!


I don't really care. Your attitude is evident. I don't need the explanation but it's interesting to see that you are self-reflective enough to realize there is something deliberate about your disrespect for those from whom your opinions differ.
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*
_cinepro
_Emeritus
Posts: 4502
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:15 pm

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _cinepro »

for what it's worth, I was curious about the circumstanced regarding Hyrum's "conversion" to polygamy. Here is how Van Wagoner describes it:

Emma was not the only Smith strongly opposed to polygamy. Joseph received almost as much opposition from his brother Hyrum as from Emma. After citing an anti-polygamy passage from the Book of Mormon (2 Jac.) in his 14 May 1843 public denouncement of the practice, Hyrum "Said there were many that had a great deal to say about the ancient order of things Solomon & David having many wifes & Concubines—but its an abomination in the Sight of God.… If an angel from heaven should come and preach such doctrine, [you] would be sure to see his cloven foot and cloud of blackness over his head" (Levi Richards Journal, 14 May 1843).

[p.55] The following day Hyrum joined William Law, William Marks, and perhaps others in a conspiracy to ferret out evidence of Smith's polygamous relationships. William Clayton recorded in his 23 May diary a conversation with Heber C. Kimball "concerning a plot that is being laid to entrap the brethren [involved in polygamy] … by bro H[yrum], and others." Hyrum related to Marks that "he did not believe in it [polygamy] and he was going to see Joseph about it, and if Joseph had a revelation on the subject, he would believe it" (Newell and Avery 1984, 141).

Before he had a chance to talk with Joseph, however, Hyrum ran into Brigham Young. Young reported in an 1866 address that the two sat down together on fence rails piled on the Masonic Hall lot. According to Young, Hyrum said he knew that "you and the twelve know some things that I do not know. I can understand this by the motions, and talk, and doings of Joseph, and I know there is something or other, which I do not understand, that is revealed to the Twelve. Is this so?" The canny Young, aware of Hyrum's entrapment plans, replied: "I do not know any thing about what you know, but I know what I know."

But Hyrum would not be denied: "I have mistrusted for a long time that Joseph has received a revelation that a man should have more than one wife, and he has hinted as much to me, but I would not bear it.… I am convinced that there is something that has not been told me." Young requested Hyrum to "sware with an uplifted hand, before God, that you will never say another word against Joseph and his doings, and the doctrines he is preaching to the people." After Hyrum consented, Young revealed: "Joseph had many wives sealed to him. I told him the whole story, and he bowed to it and wept like a child, and said 'God be praised.' He went to Joseph and told him what he had learned, and renewed his covenant with Joseph" (Young, Unpublished Address).

Evidently it was at this time that Smith explained to Hyrum the full meaning of "celestial marriage." Hyrum's first wife, Jerusha Barden, had died on 13 October 1837. Smith explained: "You can have her sealed to you upon the same principle as you can be baptized for the dead." "What can I do for my second wife?" Hyrum asked. "You can also make a covenant with her for eternity and have her sealed to you by the authority of the Priesthood," the prophet advised. Hyrum discussed the ordinance with his living wife, Mary Fielding Smith, and she responded, "I will act as proxy for your wife that is dead and I will be sealed to you for eternity myself for I never had any other husband. I love you and I do not want to be separated from you nor be forever alone in the world to come" (Ms History, 8 April 1844).

Less than two months later Hyrum became the catalyst for Smith's receiving the key revelation on "celestial marriage" (D&C 132). On 12 July the brothers, along with William Clayton, were in Smith's office discussing [p.56] Emma's opposition to polygamy. Hyrum still harbored concerns that polygamy was adulterous. Charles Smith, a Nauvoo elder, later said that Hyrum told the Elders' Quorum in the winter of 1843-44 "that the doctrine of Plurality of Wives had bothered him considerably and he felt constrained to ask wherein Abraham, Moses, David & others could be justified before God in practicing this to him repugnant doctrine—He asked his brother the Prophet Joseph to ask the question of the Lord—Joseph did so and the Revelation given 12 July 1843 was the answer" (St. George Record).

Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy, p.55
_Mercury
_Emeritus
Posts: 5545
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 2:14 pm

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _Mercury »

LifeOnaPlate wrote:
I don't really care. Your attitude is evident. I don't need the explanation but it's interesting to see that you are self-reflective enough to realize there is something deliberate about your disrespect for those from whom your opinions differ.


Why should I respect the opinions of those who do not return the favor on principle? Your constant blabbering needs to be corked. If you spend time replying to my posts then I have succeeded in directing you away from trying to scam yet another doubter. Its all about time management. Plus its also fun to see you get pissy.
And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space...and meaning
_Seven
_Emeritus
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:52 pm

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _Seven »

collegeterrace wrote:Those pesky FLDS just won't go away!

Check out this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmhjgaB2Hi8

He makes a great presentation, not that I agree with, but why is he wrong and the Woodruffites right?

in my opinion, both groups came from Joe & Co. Any following that began with Joseph Smith is wrong.

However, this is great. With these "mainstream" polygamists trying to show the good, normal, and non warren-jeffs polygamy and attempting to legalize it, it can only mean one thing.

Mo' bad press for LDS Inc.


The link doesn't match the OP. Did you post the wrong one? I did see a hilarious video of Madsen explaining plural marriage with birds chirping in the background.

I clicked on a few other polygamy videos by the person who posted Madsen and found this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg6dzPbjcUY
(anniversary of section 132 made the news)
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence...
That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith
_cinepro
_Emeritus
Posts: 4502
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:15 pm

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _cinepro »

Seven wrote:I clicked on a few other polygamy videos by the person who posted Madsen and found this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg6dzPbjcUY
(anniversary of section 132 made the news)


The Relief Society in my ward celebrated the anniversary with a bonfire.
_Seven
_Emeritus
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:52 pm

Re: Polygamist Apologists blurring the Mormon line even more

Post by _Seven »

cinepro wrote:
Seven wrote:I clicked on a few other polygamy videos by the person who posted Madsen and found this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg6dzPbjcUY
(anniversary of section 132 made the news)


The Relief Society in my ward celebrated the anniversary with a bonfire.


LOL :)
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence...
That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith
Post Reply