Good for him. I loved his Ender books, and apparently he’s a sincere person of faith.
It would be an interesting comparison to see HBO do a series about polygamy in the Muslim world. Something tells me the reaction of the “moderate Muslims” wouldn’t be nearly as restrained as that of the Mormons.
}:-)4
why would any man engage in polygamy?
on mother in law is enough!
Orson Scott Card on NRO?!
Does this mean his conversion is complete?
He’s had some excellent articles recently.
(BTW, just finished the Shadow series. Great writer!)
Links: his articles discussed at FR: http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/orsonscottcard/index and archived here (it is a must go place for all new to OSC political writing): http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/index.html
His fresh articles appear in the Rhinoceros Times, Greensboro, NC: http://www.rhinotimes.com/greensboro/ (before being posted permanently on his The Ornery American website). Read his books/movies/and everything reviews: http://www.hatrack.com/osc/reviews/everything/
His "About" page: http://www.hatrack.com/osc/about.shtml
Ping to article
I have an idea for a reluctant, tightwad, polygamist with 5 wives, who hates kids called “Big Glove”. He is too cheap to buy condoms so he uses a rubber glove.
Yes, there's been two key protecting marriage ballots in CA that LDS have stepped up to the plate & hit a HR (2008 wasn't the first time), but across-the-board "deep moral" issues drawing major Mormon influence? (I wish it was true in pro-life issues, for example)
LDS tend to be generally pro-life attitudinally and pro-child due to its theology, but pro-life activist wise? (That's much rarer)
LDS pro-lifers can't even get their own church leadership to cut out all the exceptions for abortion, let alone address the broader culture.
Exceptions: Mom's health; if the abortionist says so; if God says so in prayer (so that even the Mormon god becomes a before-the-fact supposed accomplice-to-murder); if the incest perpetrator says so of his victim; etc.
Uh... That's not EXACTLY right...
1890: Manifesto (a statement denouncing polygamy)
"Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriage...I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws..."~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President
To Whom It May Concern:
Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy
I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.
One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.
There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.
WILFORD WOODRUFF
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:
I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.
The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.
Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.
Hebrews 11:35-40
35. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection. 36. Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. 37. They were stoned ; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated-- 38. the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. |
Well, from Joseph Smith's opening vision, now elevated by Mormons as "Scripture," Smith labeled ALL (not some, ALL) Christian professors [professors as in professing faith] as "corrupt"...he labeled ALL (not some, ALL) their creeds as an "abomination" to the Mormon god...and he said they were all "wrong" and none of these Christian sects were worth joining.
Well, since Smith claimed these things appeared to him before a single soul knew about a Book or Mormon or a church of his, then I guess Orson Card is right in a weird sort of way: Mormons have [indeed] always been the exception to Americas policy of religious tolerance simply because Smith was 100% intolerant...
...of every Christian creed...
...and every Christian professor...
...and every Christian sect...
...and every Christian church...
And then latter-19th century Mormons "ratified" this intolerant position toward Christians as "Scripture." (And now contemporary Mormons who believe all of the Pearl of Great Price is "Scripture" also ratify this posture of tremendous intolerance...to the degree that they send 60,000+ missionaries around the world -- with one of the top 2-3 subjects of conversation being the supposed 100% apostasy of the Christian church)
From Orson Card's article: Throughout our history in America, Mormons have been oppressed by government... [Well, what occurred in Missouri was a two- sided mess -- with the LDS at times being just as provocative as gvt reps...and if Card means what happened in the 1880s when the feds were putting polygamists in jail, then if that's the "martyrdom" he's claiming, so be it]
From Orson Card's article: ...killed or driven out by mobs... [Again, if he's speaking about Missouri, it was two-sided violence...if he's talking about Joe & Hyrum Smith being slain, Joe Smith shot two people before dying...nobody but nobody today would wonder about an inmate today being shot in a jail if such a prisoner had a loaded gun on his possession...and of course, Card doesn't mention the two-sided "killed or driven out by mobs" when it came to the very first 9/11 American act of terrorism when Mormons executed 120+ children, women and men as part of the Mountain Meadow Massacre...I guess it's always convenient to play the role of victim even when your spiritual and family ancestors were the mass-murder perps]
From Orson Card's article: ...slandered, and libeled always by fellow Americans who professed to believe in religious tolerance.
Orson, didn't your family teach you that when you criticize, you should be specific? Is the above true? Maybe? Sometimes? Perhaps? Who knows? (It's easy to be "right" as a writer when you always speak in vague generalities.)