Posted on 05/02/2008 5:13:31 AM PDT by Zakeet
Isn’t it ironic that a country which espouses freedom of religion required a church to change their marraige practice to become a state in that country?
I didn't realize that the Church became a State.
I thought you were an expert on the history of the Mormons in Utah? Do you want to respond to the issue I raised or do I have to keep rewording the question to get a serious answer?
I'm not an expert. I'm simply an observer.
Do you want to respond to the issue I raised or do I have to keep rewording the question to get a serious answer?
Why don't you just find someone else to answer your questions. There's lots of people on this thread who would be more than happy to answer your questions, provided you don't insult them in the process.
Deseret had to change its practice.
The Latter-day Saints did not like their territorial status. Church leaders and the territorial legislature contiunously pushed for statehood.
Delegates met in 1856, wrote a Constitution and proposed the state of Deseret. Congress did not agree.
In 1872 a constitutional convention drew up a new Constitution, dropping the Deseret name from their petition. When that failed, the state of Deseret ended.
I didn't ask you initially to answer any question, you volunteered that non-responsive reply. I repied accordingly and now you're depressed and angry.
Look to your own behavior for the cause of your problem.
Thank you for that historical perspective. BTW, they didn’t have to do anything. They chose to do it.
Don't post to me anymore.
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.