Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Polygamists are Coming!
Religion News Service ^ | June 1, 2015 | Professor Mark Silk

Posted on 06/01/2015 2:56:54 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

For years, religious conservatives argued against same-sex marriage by saying that it would put society on the slippery slope to (horrors!) polygamy. Now comes the New York Times‘ Ross Douthat, a day late and a dollar short.

In yesterday’s column, Douthat seizes upon a new Gallup study that shows a broad shift to the left in Americans’ social values during the present century. The exception, he says, is on abortion, but actually it’s not an exception; the pro-choice position has gained some ground. The exception is adultery — where the old-time disapproval is holding firm at over 90 percent.

You’d think Douthat would take some comfort in that, but instead he leaps at the polygamy approval number, which has jumped from seven percent in 2003 to a not-so-whopping 16 percent. He sees it as “bobbing forward in social liberalism’s wake,” even as he concedes that the only out-and-out polygamists are fundamentalist Mormons and traditionalist Muslims.

A couple of months ago, he had this to say about how a liberalizing American culture should go forward “on issues related to sex and marriage and abortion and homosexuality and more.”

One possibility, the one I favor and have argued for (for self-interested but hopefully principled reasons as well), is basically to allow a fairly wide latitude for these religious subcultures, with legal protections and a general tolerance that makes it relatively easy for the observant and traditionalist not only to worship and find fellowship but also to run businesses, schools, colleges, hospitals, etc. in accordance with their beliefs.

I’d have thought the principled position for Douthat would be to support a right to polygamy, along the religious freedom lines that he thinks are necessary to enable traditionalist believers to maintain their codes of conduct. Indeed, it would be interesting to know how many of those new supporters of polygamy are frequent churchgoers and how many not, or how many are Republicans and how many Democrats. Crosstabs, Gallup?

What’s certain is that the federal judge who threw out a hunk of Utah’s anti-polygamy law is a born-and-bred Mormon whose decision turned on the constitutional right of free exercise. If polygamy is to achieve legal recognition in 21st-century America, it won’t be because of what Douthat calls “the now-ascendant model of marriage as a gender-neutral and easily-dissolved romantic contract.” It will be because of the increasingly robust view of religious liberty now being embraced by him and his kind.


TOPICS: Islam; Moral Issues; Other Christian; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: homosxualagenda; mormons; muslims; polygamy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last
To: oldfart
That should be enough for the uber-religionists to trot out their arguments about God ordaining marriage as between one man and one woman.

To get past that dead-horse, let me point out that NOWHERE IN THE BIBLE does it say that.

Oh?


Genesis 2

 

18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”   (not 4 or 5)

19 Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.   (singular)  (Not a half rack)

23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones
    and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
    for she was taken out of man.

24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

25 Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.   (Not wives)

 

 

 

 Whinney!



41 posted on 06/01/2015 6:43:06 PM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 22202NOVA

heh heh heh...


42 posted on 06/01/2015 6:44:34 PM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 22202NOVA

Slightly off topic; but I knew a fella, who had a sister.

He married a lady who had a brother.

The sister and brother got married to each other.

Genetically, the children of each marriage were more like brothers and sisters than cousins.

(Would that make his sister also his sister-in-law?)


43 posted on 06/01/2015 6:47:52 PM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

You don’t remember me, do you? There was that crazy weekend in Rio....

Yeah, that one!


44 posted on 06/01/2015 6:49:23 PM PDT by 22202NOVA (Tagline? I don't need no stinking tagline!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Exactly. I look at the statistics and think about the Israelites dancing around the Golden Calf. Same as it ever was. When our leaders are weak and godless then so are the people....


45 posted on 06/01/2015 7:26:16 PM PDT by freebilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: x

x, Mark Silk does seem to think that he’s most clever. What Mark Silk fails to take into account is that we religious conservatives have recently adopted the policies of our Islamo-Moon God worshipping bretheren on the Arabian peninsula, and his impertinence requires us to remove his head from his neck for his own good.

Mr Silk shall deliver himself to the local mosque of our choosing, and he should wear his favorite collarless shirt.


46 posted on 06/01/2015 7:34:40 PM PDT by Pelham (The refusal to deport is defacto amnesty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The end result of the Homosexual Marriage scam has ALWAYS been the lower of the age of consent.

The ‘anything goes’ crowd want our children in a ‘bad’ way.

The support pedophilia is the dirty little secret of the hard core left.


47 posted on 06/01/2015 7:40:22 PM PDT by Willie From Austin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian; All
[Colofornian]"..no hubby, no living with Heavenly Father eternally."

[SP]Within the Celestial kingdom itself there are 3 degrees of glory. When we say celestial we're always referring to the highest. However, Heavenly Father has made allowances for all conditions. D&C 132 is the exception, not the rule.

D&C 132 16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.

17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever.


Now I've shown you the full doctrine, which you didn't understand. Will you admit you were wrong and correct your error?

Why haven't you posted a correction to your error?

You didn't post that mess to deceive people did you?


Still waiting on your retraction/correction of your false claim.

You claimed I believe that if a person isn't married they can't live with Heavenly Father. I showed you exact proof that you were wrong and you refused to post a correction.


48 posted on 06/01/2015 8:35:02 PM PDT by StormPrepper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 22202NOVA
My wife's sister weights 270 pounds and is psychotic. Not to mention UGLY. I think not.


49 posted on 06/01/2015 8:53:48 PM PDT by Viking2002 (The Avatar is back by popular request.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Wonder where these society watchers were at in the 50s 60s and 70s when half of the adult population in the U.S was either swapping mates or wanting to.

I doubt we have to worry about polygamy with every one turning queer.


50 posted on 06/01/2015 9:25:19 PM PDT by ravenwolf (s letters scripture.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

He was married to both women — supposedly “for eternity” — in the Mormon temple.


What is wrong with that?


51 posted on 06/01/2015 9:32:52 PM PDT by ravenwolf (s letters scripture.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Far closer to normal than homo marriage.


It is telling the queers I LIKE WOMEN, NOT MEN.


52 posted on 06/01/2015 9:36:54 PM PDT by ravenwolf (s letters scripture.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Viking2002

No, not her! The other, hot one!


53 posted on 06/01/2015 9:40:05 PM PDT by 22202NOVA (Tagline? I don't need no stinking tagline!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: oldfart

There are a few basic truths about Love: Real love is constant and doesn’t ebb and flow with the tide – lunar or hormonal. Real love is forgiving, even the most painful injuries must be forgiven.


I have never heard it said any better.


54 posted on 06/01/2015 9:46:08 PM PDT by ravenwolf (s letters scripture.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: StormPrepper
You didn't post that mess to deceive people did you?

You didn't write this mess to deceive people did you?


Me?

Author and Proprieter??


55 posted on 06/02/2015 4:46:29 AM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: StormPrepper
You claimed I believe that if a person isn't married they can't live with Heavenly Father.

But not in THIS thread!


Which argument are you carrying over?


 
To: 2ndDivisionVet; Elsie; All
One of the Mormon "apostles" -- L. Tom Perry -- just died this past weekend.

He was on his second marriage (married again as a widower).

He was married to both women -- supposedly "for eternity" -- in the Mormon temple.

So, per Lds doctrine...as soon as Perry & his two wives arrives make it to the highest celestial kingdom...Perry becomes an eternal polygamist.

All from the religion that supposedly disavows polygamy!

10 posted on ‎6‎/‎1‎/‎2015‎ ‎6‎:‎23‎:‎50‎ ‎PM by Colofornian
 
 

56 posted on 06/02/2015 4:52:24 AM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: StormPrepper; Normandy; WilliamRobert; teppe
Now I've shown you the full doctrine, which you didn't understand.

There is NO 'full doctrine' of Mormonism.

If there were; a person could find the secret 'sacred' rituals done in the temples somewhere in Mormon 'scripture'.

They do NOT exist.


Mormonism makes another bold claim: fullness of the GOSPEL.

It cannot be found in the BoM like this plaque so arrogantly claims!


 

57 posted on 06/02/2015 5:01:37 AM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: StormPrepper; All
I showed you exact proof that you were wrong and you refused to post a correction.

Any one else want to see this proof?

I sure do!

58 posted on 06/02/2015 5:02:44 AM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

bump


59 posted on 06/02/2015 9:49:33 AM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: StormPrepper; Elsie; All
You cite D&C 132:16, yet ignore verse 4:

4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

So let's break down the 3 key phrases or words of D&C 132:4, shall we?

1. New and Everlasting Covenant

As with the quote from official Lds church doctrine says, "the new and everlasting covenant" is celestial marriage (though Lds general authorities once upon a time defined it in the 19th century as either outright polygamy or at least included polygamy).

The official Lds church curricula – Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual – defines "celestial marriage" this way: "The 'new and everlasting covenant' (D&C 132:4) is the covenant of celestial marriage, as President Spencer W. Kimball plainly stated: 'Though relatively few people in this world understand it, the new and everlasting covenant is the marriage in the holy temple by the properly constituted leaders who hold the genuine authoritative keys...' ('Temples and Eternal Marriage,' Ensign, Aug. 1974, p. 5) One can sense the importance of accepting this covenant by the emphasis the Lord puts in the following phrases: ...'If ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned' (vs. 4). 'No one can reject this covenant and...enter into my glory' (vs. 4)..."
(Doctrine & Covenants Student Manual, published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, p. 327, 1981, 2000)

2. Which leads to what the above official curricula emphasizes...the word 'damned'

"Damned" doesn't mean "celestial" kingdom, does it StormPrepper?

3. 'No one can reject this covenant and...enter into my glory'

So are you saying, StormPrepper, that "damned" men can live in the celestial kingdom without entering into Heavenly Father's "glory?" Really?
60 posted on 06/02/2015 12:25:06 PM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson