Posted on 05/11/2008 6:58:25 AM PDT by MrEdd
In the days following the raid on the Texas polygamous compound, I took a call from a St. Louis radio host requesting one of our reporters to come on his show to "talk about the situation in Utah." Early in this cordial conversation, I informed him that this newspaper is owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and that I am a member of this church.
After a few minutes, it became clear that he thought I was somehow affiliated with the FLDS group. I felt like an anthropology specimen. The questions were friendly and good natured, but imbedded in them was the notion that there was really no difference between the LDS Church and the FLDS group, they were simply all Mormons to him.
Given the enormous national and international attention focused on the Texas raid, it has been abundantly clear that while many people understand the difference between the LDS Church and this polygamous group, unfortunately there is still substantial confusion between the two.
Much of this confusion comes from misapplying the name Mormon, as in "fundamentalist Mormon" or "Mormon polygamist." The LDS Church has gone to great lengths to protect the name Mormon (note video of Elder Quentin L. Cook on YouTube, www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUtjsdtDOkQ). However, much misidentification simply results from the confusion between the terms LDS and FLDS.
Not only are many of the FLDS teachings in conflict with, and repugnant to, the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but, in fact, a person who believes in or practices the teachings of the fundamentalists would be excommunicated from the LDS Church.
While not strictly speaking identity theft, the adoption of FLDS by this group at best is confusing and at worst undermines the credibility of the Latter-day Saints and tarnishes the LDS "brand." Sometimes damage to a brand or a trademark has been called attempted identity theft at the corporate level.
I am not making a narrow legal argument about trademark law issues here. Rather, my discussion is more broadly about brand identification and injury to a brand name.
While the terms LDS and Mormon are not brands in the commercial sense, these terms reflect the identity, reputation and teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The LDS Church has the right and expectation that the use of these terms will convey certain impressions to those who become aware of them. This is known in the business world as brand equity and in the words of NetMBA.com it "is an intangible asset that depends on associations made by the consumer."
An illustration from the business world might give us some insight. Suppose several engineers at General Electric invented an electric motor and decided that their product was superior to other similar products produced by the company. This group of engineers decides then to break away from General Electric and form a new company called Fundamental General Electric or FGE for short. How would General Electric react to this? Would it feel that its brand equity was being diminished or stolen? Of course they would. And they would be right.
Similarly, this group which claims to be a break-off of the LDS Church is, as noted, utterly different in its beliefs and practices. In an April 19 story in our paper, Brian Hales, a Layton physician and historian, notes, for example, that "brain-washing is a legitimate description of what occurs within the FLDS Church 'because they don't allow any outside information inside and vice versa.' On the other hand, the Salt Lake-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — which many continue to mistakenly associate with the polygamous sect — sends missionaries around the globe preaching a gospel message centered in Jesus Christ, Hales said. The opposite is true of the FLDS Church, which is insular, secretive and has no desire to share a message of salvation with others ... That's their world, and it's the direct opposite of what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young promoted."
The group that became known as the FLDS Church didn't begin until 1929. More significantly this group did not even adopt the name FLDS until nearly a century after the LDS Church abandoned polygamy.
Whatever their motivation, the consequence of this group's adoption of the name FLDS has damaged the LDS Church's identity, brand name and reputation.
Joe Cannon is editor of the Deseret News.
I’m not too worried about misconceptions and Mormons but I am very concerned that so many children can be stripped from their parents over one allegation of abuse. I know of children in horrible families who others trying to help spend years trying to remove them from abusive parents who not only are violent but also involved in the sell of illegal drugs. One child in particular finally was removed only after being institutionalized by his bad mother. Finally his father was able to get custody when they finally got the mother to go ballistic in court and drop her facade of “how her son was her life and how much she loved him”. All the beatings, the being burnt with cigarettes, the being left alone with a step dad who abused them. No one listened to the children or the concerned family members. The Mom even had free legal support and she sadly still has custody of two of the children.
That is what gets me. What level of abuse was different in the case of the FLDS? I don’t support their lifestyle, I don’t agree with their theology but there are far worse examples that no one gives a damn about. It seems that if anything the courts go out of their way to keep certain kids where the abuse is more than apparent in the hands of their abusive parents. That aside there seems to be real problems with the justification for taking those kids and now they are having a very difficult time finding the alleged abuse.
Sure there are 14-17 year old girls pregnant but I don’t see the federal government raiding housing projects taking hundreds of kids into custody. It just seems phony and it sets bad precedence. One unconfirmed phone call would not get this kind of attention if the group had been almost any other group.
FIP Ping to post 12.
Hilarious! (But it should have had a warning attached about reading if you have a mouthful of morning coffee...!)
(***I am often browbeaten verbally pummeled threatened told in no uncertain terms by SOME PEOPLE that it is politically incorrect to write the name of this group if the "f" is not capitalized. So perhaps I'll just write it as "F***", or perhaps the F-religion.)
Sorry, I didn’t realize there were two threads running the same article and posted on the wrong thread initially.
It is the same guy.
I suspect that part of it was the sheer magnitude--so many children at risk in this case. The other part, I'm sure, is the very real prospect of girls reaching puberty (which as you know can happen as early as 10) being "eligible" for becoming a celestial bride for some old guy that already has a harem bunch of wives.
ONE of the things the papers don't often address is even more dangerous, and that is their practice of "breaking the babies" of crying, resistance, etc., by holding them under running water or slapping them endlessly until the wee one just gives up. There are a LOT of baby graves outside of Colorado City and other enclaves, and I will forever wonder, not to mention worry, that some of those innocent babes who were treated that way didn't live through the "breaking."
No, the more I read about this group, the more I wish the Texas Rangers had acted sooner.
LDS forsook polygamy for statehood; men of the LDS priesthood "spirit" marry one earthly wife but unlimited previously alive but now deceased women.
The FLDS appears more rational than the LDS, in an odd sort of way. While it is illegal to "spirit" marry a minor, at least the minor girl is alive. And while it is illegal to consummate such a "union"; there is no law preventing an LDS man from "spirit" marrying your dead grandma!
Bingo!
So, I suppose we should expect headlines next week stating that the LDS is suing the FLDS for identity theft?
I think you’ve summarized it pretty well.
I had no idea the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or LDS, had anything to do with the FLDS.
Dang! How could I have missed the connection? It was so there.
I had assumed, based on various reports in the media, that it stood for the Church of Fornication with Little Daughters and Sisters.
How could I have been so wrong?
Now, if I just could figure out what the F stood for, I’d have all four letters and could solve the puzzle.
Maybe the FLDS should SUE the LDS??
“After a few minutes, it became clear that he thought I was somehow affiliated with the FLDS group. I felt like an anthropology specimen. The questions were friendly and good natured, but imbedded in them was the notion that there was really no difference between the LDS Church and the FLDS group, they were simply all Mormons to him.”
Well, when you put an orange, a tangerine, and a navel orange and their variations in a pile, confusion is obvious.
Here are some 100% facts that the LDS cannot deny:
1) FLDS polygamy comes straight from the words of Joseph Smith, enhanced by Brigham Young.
2) The FLDS can site an unbroken chain back to Smith and the early Mormon church that is as compelling as the LDS.
3) the FLDS uses the BOM and I believe the other main works. It isn’t like we are comparing Hinduism and Christianity.
The problem for the LDS is that they are indeed peas in a pod with the FLDS and while this FACT may cause them embarrassment, it cannot be wished away.
“Maybe the FLDS should SUE the LDS??”
If they were here First.
Oh, I get it. The F stands for First. Puzzle solved.
I like the comment about Mormons claiming to be Christians as an affront to Christianity. If the LDS doesn’t care for the FLDS claiming to be Mormon, maybe the LDS should stop trying to proclaim itself Christian. LDS was started by a child raping murderer who created a “religion” to entice people into giving him his way, nothing more. It wasn’t a religion, it was a cult.
“but I am very concerned that so many children can be stripped from their parents over one allegation of abuse.”
Then you’ll be happy to know that isn’t what happened.
SO....
In the FLDS , the priesthood marry the women and girls of Warren Jeffs choosing.
In the LDS, the priesthood marry the women and girls that are dead.
Either way, the females don’t get a choice.
I just want to know if they are going to sue the RLDS as well.
“but I am very concerned that so many children can be stripped from their parents over one allegation of abuse.”
But, I am very concerned that so many children can be stripped from their parents, from multiple states, and even Canada, by one man, and taken to Texas, to live like slaves on a large plantation, and there only be one charge of abuse.
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.