Mormonism and Polygamy

Post Reply New Topic

Legato

You defend Mormons though are you don't claim to be Mormon.

Yet you attack other groups, the "ignorance" of it be damned.

Why the Mormon apologism for from a non-Mormon?

I guess he wants more than one wife and to wear magic underwear.

Solomon IN THE BIBLE was so much of a polygamist that I called him Snoop Dogg.

In cultures other than ours, the practise of polygamy is integral to that culture. The rich Arab sheiks had their harems, but we can only speculate how these households were like. Wait a minute, ws it that ancient kings and princes had many wives or many concubines? Big difference between a wife and a concubine. Maybe the Mormom men's many wives are ritualized concubines.

I never attacked any group of people. I stated that to call mormons polygamists is inaccurate and ignorant because of the facts I provided, and the reality of the situation.

I defend Mormons because they are looked down upon for something that isn't true - and people frequently and stupidly refer to them as polygamists even though they haven't been for over a century.

If you want to ridicule their magic underwear or weird cultish practices then be my guest, because those are reasons based in fact and not fiction.

My personal opinion:
Even though I have a very low opinion of their practices and beliefs myself, I defend them in this instance because it is the right thing to do. People are branding them something they're not, which is ignorant.
I defend them for much the same reason I defended VenomFangX's youtube account and petitioned for it to be reinstated. Even though I despise that liar and plagiarist and his stupidity, I defended him too. The purpose of debate is to convert your opponent, not to silence him forcefully. VenomFangX was banned for the wrong reasons, and I helped get him back so we could continue to tear each other apart. Idiots like him are what make youtube great

That's not quite true. Their church was founded by the same man (Joseph Smith), and had the same early leaders (Brigham Young et.all), and they use the same book (The Book of Mormon). In addition, some of them start out as LDS before they convert to FLDS.

You believe CNN?

sex isn't the problem.

. . .

that's very vague.

Joseph Smith did not found the FLDS church, and Brigham Young had no part in it either, they were long before the Manifesto.

The FLDS church was founded after the Second Manifesto. WIKIPEDIA WARNING: "The FLDS Church emerged in the 1930s when its founding members left The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church). The split occurred largely because of the LDS Church's renunciation of polygamy and its decision to excommunicate practitioners of plural marriage."

They may use the same book, but I heard (from Mormons, this is not verified) that it was doctored and changed, which nullifies it in the eyes of the LDS church, and is therefore no longer the same book.

Shouldn't both the LDS and FLDS churches both be considered descendants of the church that Joseph Smith founded? I don't actually know if this is the case with FLDS (thought their name suggests it), but if they're like most Christian movements, they probably see themselves as the "true" followers of Smith's and Jesus' teachings (for other Christian sects leave Smith off).

I'm sure both churches have evolved a bit since they split. Why should only one be identified as the one Smith founded? To me they both seem like descendants of the same one, even if one has a much larger following.

You do make a good point. Where I was coming from is the fact that the LDS church is the one Joseph Smith formed, and when the polygamists were excommunicated at the command of the church president, they were just like "screw you" and formed the FLDS church. So really, the LDS church is descended from the same, whereas the FLDS church broke off and formed their own.

Kind of like a royal bloodline I suppose. When a prince disowns his royal family to go join another faction for example, he is considered no longer a part of the royal bloodline, even though he technically has royal blood. Then that prince has children and mingles with this other blood, while the true bloodline stays strong. That's how Mormons see themselves anyway I think.

Legato, that is a damned good explanation!

I've been playing too much Medieval 2 Total War haha

Its the same thing. Christians are christians and sexual abuse is sexual abuse. If anything the cathlolic sexual abuse cases are worse due not only to their homosexual nature, but the fact that they are much more widespread. What a handfull of renegade Mormon sects do to increase their congregation through acts of procreation will never constitute the pandemic debauchery of the perverted catholic priesthood

They may not ALL be polygamists, but they're definitely all racists if they truly believe the book of Mormon.

They believe that Native Americans were actually Jews that did bad things, so God turned their skin dark.
Plus, black people are supposed to be the descendants of Lucifer, Jesus' brother.
It's pretty obvious that Joseph Smith pulled all that stuff out of his rectum.
OK, so he used the magic spectacles to read the gold plates that an angel showed him.
He was "told" never to let anyone see these plates...
So nobody saw them...
He read them out loud, and some guy took it all down.
He brought them home to his wife, who thought it looked suspicious.
She hid them, and told him to ask Smith to read the tablets again.
Next time he saw Smith, he told him that God was angry because he wasn't supposed to let someone read the book.
As a result, the angel took the gift of sight from him.
The guy's wife gave the manuscript back, and the book of Mormon was born.
NOW, can you honestly say that you believe that the book of Mormon wasn't founded on lies and racism?
If you can, there's something wrong.