Posted on 09/16/2013 2:42:49 AM PDT by markomalley
Brady Williams has five wives, 24 children but no organized religion.
The newest polygamous family from Utah on reality TV considers itself progressive and independent. Williams and his wives slowly withdrew from the fundamentalist Mormon church in their rural community outside of Salt Lake City during the mid-2000s after re-evaluating their core beliefs.
The family no longer teaches the tenets of fundamental Mormonism to their children at home, opting instead to take from other teachings such as Buddhism to instill good, morale values in their two dozen children, who range in age from 2-20.
"Since we have left the religion, it's now about love and it's about commitment, and it's about happiness as a family," said Brady Williams, 43, a project manager in his brother's construction business. "It's not about the fear of hell or the promise of heaven."
It wasn't the first time Brady Williams has crossed religious lines. As a teenager, his parents left mainstream Mormonism and joined polygamy. He said that transition was very difficult, but not as hard as leaving the fundamentalist church his five wives all grew up in.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Sorry, but we don't live in a jungle "outback"...We live in a society that -- for both better (on the lookout for your neighbor) and worse (hyperbureacracy) -- prides itself in establishing governmental safety nets.
Therefore, when "family" configuration/experimentations fail, guess who foots the bill? That's right: Uncle Same...That's right, you & me the taxpayer.
Therefore, government HAS a say on which family configurations are to be sanctioned -- and which ones lead to greater negative fallout upon society.
All you have to do is review the vast welfare support rec'd by the fLDS members in the twin cities of Colorado City, AZ and Hildale, UT...too see what I mean.
This cult's polygamous arrangements has led to vast welfare support.
And if a church, or non-churches, wishes to recognize that as some sort of "marriage," that is their right.
You flunked history, right? The very territory of Utah was denied statehood over polygamy.
B.H. Roberts, a Mormon leader, was then elected to Congress as one of the first Utah congressmen in 1898. And guess what? Roberts was denied a seat in Congress because he took a third wife around 1893 and was practicing polygamy.
Hard to believe that our 1898 Congress was more upright about defending traditional marriage than you are!!!
And, btw, it wasn't like Congress didn't have grassroots support on blocking Roberts from taking office.
Grassroots America took up 28 banners and collected 7 million signatures...telling Congress NOT to seat Roberts. That 7 million signatures in pre-mass media America!
Those 7 million Americans -- unlike you -- represented the true original spirit of Republicanism. In 1856, the fledgling Republican party set their sights on two social issues' goals: To take on what they called "the twin relics of barbarism" (slavery & polygamy).
Polygamous Muslims, limited to 4 wives at a time Thank Allah, infest a town near you. Guaranteed.
Yes. And this is precisely the barbarism the GoP took on in 1856...yet we have the likes of you who call yourself a conservative?
In every city in this country this is occurring, with multiple women receiving lavish welfare benefits for themselves and numerous offspring resulting from liaisons and living arrangements of which you and I would not approve.
So what? Why should we continually cater to the lowest immoral common denominator?
Ask a Rabbi. Accurately put: "Still legal under Jewish Law, but the practice is heartily discouraged."
The fact that something is accurately documented does not express support. Of course, polygamy is to be actively discouraged by legal means. However, right now, it is not.
We are in a battle which is not won.
Why should we continually cater to the lowest immoral common denominator?
Why indeed? However, be advised that while you are sermonizing, not to mention raining fire and brimstone down on those who largely agree with you, the lowest immoral common denominator is out-voting us.
Because if you took that argument to it's logical conclusion you would have to disband the NBA.
Hey, on second thought......
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
The polygamous husband on "Sister Wives" used that exact argument---"All the 'cool' guys in the Old Testament were plygs." It holds no water, regardless of who attempts it.
Early Bible figures did all kinds of things that were not a model of good behavior. They were human beings and no less prone to sin than any of us. God's original ideal for marriage was one woman, created for and joined to one man.
A lesbian friend of mine asked what I had a against gay marriage. I told her that I would support it when she came out in favor of plural marriages. I also mentioned that the guy across the street was very fond of his Doberman pincher and was interested in forming a family with her as well. Or how about that guy at the other end of the block that was very fond of his sister, should they be allowed to marry as well? How about her gardener. he is very fond of that John Deere riding lawn mower, is he allowed to marry that as well?
I told her we all lines we won't cross. I just draw mine ion a different location than she does.
"Everyone did what was right in his OWN eyes..."
You do realize that this is the very definition of Protestantism.
He is following his own conscience, like the Pope said he should.
Raciss ... but accurate.
No more calls we have a winner. Post of the day.
I think it started earlier with the advent of "the pill."
Thank you for documenting the inability of prots to engage in an intellectual discussion.
I didn’t start it and you Catholics need to stop slamming us Bible thumping Jesus believers. Just because you aren’t comfortable with your faith.
And what is a person who is against homeschooling doing on a Conservative site? Sheesh...
SLC no longer teaches fundamental Mormonism: must be a succession of Living Prophets® fault.
Thanks for pointing this out.
I wonder how many OTHER laws are on the books that are being ignored.
I know that Mainstream Mormonism ignores a lot of their very own Scripture.
I agree; BUT... Our vast Welfare State has CREATED the mess we have in ALL of society today!
Who do NOT follow what the OT has to SAY about the subject!
Kinda like...
58 Now, as touching the law of the apriesthood, there are many things pertaining thereunto.
59 Verily, if a man be called of my Father, as was aAaron, by mine own voice, and by the voice of him that bsent me, and I have endowed him with the ckeys of the power of this priesthood, if he do anything in my name, and according to my law and by my word, he will not commit dsin, and I will justify him.
60 Let no one, therefore, set on my servant Joseph; for I will justify him; for he shall do the sacrifice which I require at his hands for his transgressions, saith the Lord your God.
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse aanother, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have aten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to amultiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be bglorified.
64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.
65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take aHagar to wife.
66 And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present. Behold, I am Alpha and Omega. Amen.
Someone is hellbound!
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;
and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,
and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.
Brigham Young - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.