239 replies to this topic

[RedSox]

Right now I'm doing research on Mormon fundamentalism.  It has been eye-opening to read quotes from Heber J. Grant about the evils of polygamy ("new" polygamy), while he himself was a polygamist.  Although I've not read the records from the Smoot hearings, I think that JFS probably struggled to both live and decry polygamy.

Today, many of us are the descendant's of Mormon polygamists.  Regardless of that fact, when you think of pre-1904 polygamy, are you disgusted? enthralled? intrigued? ashamed?

For me, I'm somewhat fascinated by the whole idea.  It's hard to imagine men and women willingly entering polygamy.  In a way, I'm proud of the great amounts of faith that my forebearers had in the principle, but I'm also somewhat horrified by some of the hardships a polygamist life exacted upon plural wives (and sometimes husbands...especially when they were on the lam).


What are your reaction to the practice?

[Freedom]

It was ordained of God. The practice is now being perverted.

[The Nehor]

My state is wondering if/when it will come back.  I've read journals of polygamous ancestors.  It just wasn't a big deal to them.

[kamenraider]

I'm fine with it -- I'm sort of a polygamist who doesn't polyg (not that I agree with those kooky polygamist cults though).

[Parser]

////

Edited by Parser, 12 May 2007 - 08:35 PM.

[ed2276]

Parser, on Apr 24 2007, 06:40 AM, said:

I feel sorry for the women of polygamy.  I don't believe it's the "highest" and "most holy" principle.  If men were more faithful, there would be no need for it.  God created Adam and Eve who came from each other.  He did not create Eve, Joan, Sherri, Martha, Bertha, Shirley, Mary and Gladys from Adam.  
1 Corinthians 11
  11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

Woman ... as in singular.  ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN, who came from each other, before the Lord.  THIS is the highest, most holy principle.

In your limited understanding of heavenly principles.

[Deborah]

I am fascinated by it and believe that when practiced under God's law there is nothing shameful or evil about it. But I do see how men can abuse it and then it becomes something else. I can see many advantages to it in certain circumstances.

[why me]

I believe that polygamy is a very colorful aspect of lds history and a practice that the lds should be proud of. It took a lot of courage for JS to implement this practice at the instructions of god. True, he may have made some mistakes in implementing it, but the practice demonstrates that JS was a man of god who took a risk to his own life to obey god's will.

I see nothing wrong with lds polygamy as practiced by the early church. Be proud lds.

[cole]

I would be one of those that was disgusted by it.  However, if some woman didn't mind her husband sharing intimate relationships with other women (no matter how much her reasoning unsettles me), then who am I to really argue?

[simply_disappear]

Parser, on Apr 24 2007, 06:40 AM, said:

I feel sorry for the women of polygamy.  I don't believe it's the "highest" and "most holy" principle.  If men were more faithful, there would be no need for it.  God created Adam and Eve who came from each other.  He did not create Eve, Joan, Sherri, Martha, Bertha, Shirley, Mary and Gladys from Adam.  
1 Corinthians 11
  11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

Woman ... as in singular.  ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN, who came from each other, before the Lord.  THIS is the highest, most holy principle.

Except that we have a living Church and if you go by that scripture you'd have to discount the Prophets who were commanded to take women into polygamy for the Lord's will from the OT.  

Marriage certainly is the highest and holiest when it is ordained of God.  Thank goodness plural marriage was ordained of God.  

I'm one of those polygamist women who don't currently polyg.  I would love to live such a principle and not just for the extra help around the home,( ) but because I love the Lord and my God and if that is what I was called to live, I would do it with a happy heart.

[kawikadave]

I have quite a few ancestors that practiced polygamy and I am inspired by their ability to maintain their faith while living under difficult circumstances. Joseph Lee Robinson is one of my ancestors and he did not take a second wife until his first wife said yes. She was very much against it at first until she received a vision that changed her mind.

By reading their journals it's very clear that this was not something they wanted to do, but they were willing to do it and the result was many many faithful and hard-working descendants (maybe I'll include myself one of these days :>)

Modern readers see this as mainly a sex issue. By reading about their experience, I don't believe they saw it that way.

[truthseeker2]

kawikadave, on Apr 24 2007, 09:54 AM, said:

I have quite a few ancestors that practiced polygamy and I am inspired by their ability to maintain their faith while living under difficult circumstances. Joseph Lee Robinson is one of my ancestors and he did not take a second wife until his first wife said yes. She was very much against it at first until she received a vision that changed her mind.

By reading their journals it's very clear that this was not something they wanted to do, but they were willing to do it and the result was many many faithful and hard-working descendants (maybe I'll include myself one of these days :>)

Modern readers see this as mainly a sex issue. By reading about their experience, I don't believe they saw it that way.

Sex was certainly part of early polygamy in the church, why would the emphasis on procreation not be apart of the reason to implement the practice.  Brigham and Heber did realize many children through this principal.  Some times it makes my chuckle when I see the attempts to whitewash polygamy as purely spiritual or when we as LDS people attempt to down play the sexual dimensions to such unions.

[Doctor Steuss]

Deborah, on Apr 24 2007, 06:52 AM, said:

I am fascinated by it and believe that when practiced under God's law there is nothing shameful or evil about it. But I do see how men can abuse it and then it becomes something else. I can see many advantages to it in certain circumstances.

Same here.  I've read the Journal of Joel Hills Johnson a couple of times (and journals of two of his wives), and the poems to his wives are simply beautiful.  I think that in and of itself, there is nothing shameful or evil, but men (namely myself) could definitely abuse it and turn it into â??something else.â?  I doubt I would ever be able to share my love so completely and respectfully as to not turn it into something corrupt, but I know that it was/is possible for others to do so without being as brutish as I would be.

[Garden Girl]

I always think of Jacob and his four wives and the children of Israel... the chosen people of the Lord... from a polygamous marriage...
I believe the principle was of God for his purposes, ancient and modern.  I am not ashamed or disgusted because of the biblical precedent and my faith in modern prophets, so I don't think LDS should now be hanging their heads or apologizing.  Am I glad we are not required to live it today... certainly.  I fully expect in the eternities it's very possible polygamy will be in order...

Garden Girl

[urroner]

I don't even think about it unless somebody else brings it up, unless there is a good joke about it.  I have a polygamous ggggrandmother and I see nothing wrong with it when it's ordained by God.

[kawikadave]

truthseeker2, on Apr 24 2007, 10:01 AM, said:

Sex was certainly part of early polygamy in the church, why would the emphasis on procreation not be apart of the reason to implement the practice.  Brigham and Heber did realize many children through this principal.  Some times it makes my chuckle when I see the attempts to whitewash polygamy as purely spiritual or when we as LDS people attempt to down play the sexual dimensions to such unions.

Please pay attention to what I actually said - not what you wanted me to say:

"Modern readers see this as mainly a sex issue."

Thank you for proving my point.

Also, last time I checked, sex and procreation are often unrelated.

[truthseeker2]

kawikadave, on Apr 24 2007, 10:13 AM, said:

Please pay attention to what I actually said - not what you wanted me to say:

"Modern readers see this as mainly a sex issue."

Thank you for proving my point.

Also, last time I checked, sex and procreation are often unrelated.

First, there is no need to get so defensive about my comment.  I wasn't attacking you personally.

Second, procreation and Sex are in fact related the last time I checked.  You can't procreate without sex being an element in creation.  Unless you figured out a way that I haven't kawikadave???

[oats]

I would fall under the intrigued category.

It would definitely present a different dynamic to life to live such a lifestyle. It is not as documented as the one man one woman marriage, there would be less self help books and advice to guide you along the path to a successful polygamous marriage.

Imagine the difficulties and complexities there are to overcome. If men and women can raise children in righteousness, have a happy home, and learn to live a good life in those circumstances then their character, charity and compassion would be far above what I can ever imagine myself having.

The LDS pioneers certainly were not wimps, faint hearted, undedicated, nor without testimony of what they believed.

[truthseeker2]

Doctor Steuss, on Apr 24 2007, 10:02 AM, said:

Same here.  I've read the Journal of Joel Hills Johnson a couple of times (and journals of two of his wives), and the poems to his wives are simply beautiful.  I think that in and of itself, there is nothing shameful or evil, but men (namely myself) could definitely abuse it and turn it into â??something else.â?  I doubt I would ever be able to share my love so completely and respectfully as to not turn it into something corrupt, but I know that it was/is possible for others to do so without being as brutish as I would be.

There are also many journal entries of the abuse, the neglect and lack of closeness with these polygamous relationships as well.  It may well be a reality that man's ability to cope with such a relationship maybe made perfect in the eternities, but perfection was certainly elusive in the 19th century when it was actually practiced in Illinois and Utah.

As for fundamental polygamy (which this post threat began with ) it certainly has been abused, and I find it hard to find any good reasons to legalize it's practice today.

[kawikadave]

truthseeker2, on Apr 24 2007, 10:15 AM, said:

First, there is no need to get so defensive about my comment.

Heads up, when you accuse someone of whitewashing, expect them to respond in a similar fashion.

truthseeker2, on Apr 24 2007, 10:15 AM, said:

I wasn't attacking you personally.

Glad to hear you weren't attacking me personally. Who were you attacking then?

truthseeker2, on Apr 24 2007, 10:15 AM, said:

Second, procreation and Sex are in fact related the last time I checked.  You can't procreate without sex being an element in creation.  Unless you figured out a way that I haven't kawikadave???

Again, you aren't reading very well. What I said is that sex and procreation are often unrelated. I'll let you figure that out.