Posted on 12/30/2011 5:23:14 AM PST by Colofornian
Edited on 12/30/2011 5:44:11 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
SALT LAKE CITY
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Well why not have multiple men and women all marry each other -- if 'self-structuring' a "family" is of such import? (Hey, why not include the family dog or dogs?)
Ah. Look what Joseph Smith has wrought!
From the article: While all states outlaw bigamy, some like Utah have laws that both prohibit having more than one marriage license at a time and also ban adults from living together and having a sexual relationship. The family — Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn, plus 17 children — fled Utah for the Las Vegas suburbs in January after authorities launched a bigamy investigation. No charges have been filed. Utah state attorneys say a bigamy prosecution isn't likely and that the lawsuit should be dismissed...Despite the ban in every state, Mormon fundamentalists still continue the practice, most of them in Utah, where bigamy is a third-degree felony...
Bottom line: Mormon authorities look the other way on these laws...is it because of the mainstream Mormon church's "past-present-future" practice of polygamy? (Past: U.S. Polygamy; future: Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie said that when the Mormon jesus returned, polygamy would be re-instituted; Supposedly "present": Mormons believe that their polygamous leaders from the past are living polygamous families now in another sphere...and even current Mormons who marry more than one spouse allegedly "for eternity" become eternal polygamists, they say, upon death).
Ah. Look what Joseph Smith has wrought!
>>Correction:What Lawrence v. Texas hath wrought!
Thank you gay America.
This 200-plus reply thread is but one example: Polygamy [Everything you might want to possibly know about historical Mormon polygamy] -- and links to one of the most thorough Web sites on Mormon polygamy from the past.
A Sampling of Other threads on polygamy in 2011 (not comprehensive):
* Mark 12:25 and Marriage in Heaven [Mormonism/Anti-Christian]
* Celestial Marriage & Eternal Exaltation / Redefining Celestial Marriage [Mormonism/Anti-Christian]
* Celestial Marriage: Key to Exaltation [Mormonism/Anti/Chistian]
* Eternal Marriage/Eternal Progression [Mormonism/Anti-Christian]
* Polygamy: Will You Have to Share Your Husband With Other Women?
* The Pharisee, the Temple and Polygamy [Wanna multiply eternal spouses? If Lds, rituals still occur!]
* Only for Eternity [Mainstream Mormon Ecclesiastical Polygamy...Supposedly Still Practiced!]
* Polygamy and me: Growing up Mormon
* Mormons Teach Polygamy is Divine [one-minute YouTube clip]
I am an atheist, and told a Catholic friend of mine a little about the LDS beliefs from an objective online souce. She was kind of shocked. She used to think “They believe Jesus Christ is the son of God” and that was pretty much all she needed to hear.
Not trying to stir up either Christians or Mormons, but from what I can see, it seems some of the beliefs that would repel Catholics and Protestants are not exactly being publicized. I mean, correct me if I’m wrong and I acknowledge I may be, but don’t LDS beliefs say that God is a man who elevated to Godhood, and when they die Mormons believe they, too, will be just as much gods as the Christian God? Also, it seems Joseph Smith ‘corrected’ a lot of the King James version of the Bible, though I’m not sure what the differences in these beliefs are.
I have no issue with politicians of any faith running for office. But we’ve already got one president helped by the media to cover up his decades of belief, and I’d like to have all the facts on whoever’s running for the most powerful office in the land.
Lawrence v. Texas didn't formulate the worldviews that built the U.S. polygamous foundations as practiced in the Apostolic United Brethren or the fLDS or the LDS. Joseph Smith did that.
Yes on both counts. This is CURRENT Mormon teaching.
Also, it seems Joseph Smith ‘corrected’ a lot of the King James version of the Bible, though I’m not sure what the differences in these beliefs are.
Also, yes. It's called the "JST" version. The Lds don't have copyrights to it...because Joseph's first wife, Emma, retained that when Smith died. Emma never went West with the Brighamite Mormons. Hence, she and her sons helped jumpstart the RLDS church, which has the copyright.
Thank you for your help. I don’t know much about the LDS, but the more I look into it the, uh, odder it seems to me.
“Thank you gay America.”
Thank activist judges with NO sense of morality.
Vote Gingrich!
Should have thought of that BEFORE you aired you, not normal lifestyle on television. You can not have a controversial TV show, and be left alone.
But Lawrence v. Texas setup the legal framework for undoing Reynolds v. U.S. and Mormon Church v. U.S., which banned polygamy in the 19th century.
Lawrence v. Texas has enabled the evil of homosexuality, and by extension, it will enable the evil of polygamy.
Nor is it any of yours.
#1...If you were consistent with your own view, you would stay off commenting on threads like these. After all, it would be "none of YOUR business," either.
Since you can't stay consistent with your own worldview (you "make it your business" to tell others it's none of their business), why don't you go export your double-standard nonsense elsewhere? Or just go back to lurking?
#2...Such a position in effect endorses three guys marrying each other. This is a pro-family Web site. If you embrace that, you might as well "zot" yourself before somebody else does it for you.
#3...Your position would be much easier to handle economically in our society if we didn't have (a) DEAD-BEAT DADS; AND (b) Government welfare economically rescuing all those strange "family" configurations when most of them dissolve or deteriorate...
IOW, as a taxpayer who funds that "safety net" -- and as a government that "bails out" these individual configurations when they fail...I have a "say" and the government has a "say."
If the govt wasn't so financially invested (welfare), it would have to take a more "hands-off" approach. It doesn't. It has a vested interest in not having to bail out configurations that fail at higher rates.
That's social reality. Deal with it
(Now go be worldview-consistent and go mind YOUR OWN business and stay out of the government's and the taxpayers' business)
This was the next step, once homosexual “marriage” is normalized polygamy was not far behind. I wonder when we will have challenges centering around polyandry, I mean what are we going to do with those extra men after all.
Deal with it.
Your hatred of all things Mormon notwithstanding.
You posted a thread on a legal matter pending before the Courts. I commented on it. The fact that you don't like my opinion and can't use anything other than blind hatred to back up your own is irrelevant.
Since this isn't a Religous Caucus I'm free to comment.
It is my well considered opinion that consenting adults who aren't stealing Government funds or directly harming anyone else should be able to order their living arrangements any way they choose. That's called "freedom".
You seem to have a real problem with that. Perhaps it's you who's on the wrong website.
Just sayin'....
How much you want to bet that these women are getting food stamps...... and other government goodies....
When they start popping out illegitimate children that carry on their disfunction and become a burden to society, i.e. collecting food stamps and government health care, it becomes my business.
Mormonism is anti Christianity, wise up.
This is also a pro-Freedom, limited Government website Skippy.
Hey Skippy, when was the last time you've read Jim Robinson's statement regarding Mormonism?
It is my well considered opinion that consenting adults who aren't stealing Government funds
Again, do some research before opening your trap. Polygamists often get food stamps and other government aid. Look up the Warren Jeff's cult.
Nor is it any of yours.
The FLDS fiasco showed that there is plenty of fraud involved in plural marriages, it's just difficult to prove. Most if not all of those plural wives were receiving lots of federal and state benefits because they were legally unmarried mothers with no income. A man with 6 wives and 12-15 children by them has a whole heap of welfare checks and food stamps, plus medical benefits galore. All of that makes it "my business".
The Dugger family down in Arkansas with one wife and one husband and 20 or so kids is none of my business because they receive no tax payer dollars.
Aside from that angle, immorality is a concern for me. I'm against it for our country as a whole. Take a look around you at what our country has degenerated to. It can all be traced to disobedience to God's laws. Yes, it's my business.
It says right on F.R.s home page what this site is about, God, family, country, conservatism. The very reasons I'm here, to express opinions about these things.
I haven't read it. It wouldn't alter my opinion on this matter anyway.
Polygamists often get food stamps and other government aid.
Are the people in this article getting it? If so, prove it. If not, it isn't relevant and my opinion still stands.
Thanks for the input, Scooter.
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.