Polygamy

[Bernard Gui]

Because if we made adultery illegal, two-thirds of Congress would be in prison.

Bernard

[Ihearya]

What other examples of double standards are you thinking of? Polygamy per se is not illegal, but bigamy is. That plus the added evil dimension of child rape have been the grounds for legal action.

http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/supopin/Holm051606.pdf

I have repeatedly stated that when polygamy is used to abuse minors, those engaged in such practices must be legally punished to the full extent of the law. We're no longer living in the 1800's when it was common for older men to marry younger women (underage). That constitutes rape as demonstrated by the most recent case involving Warren Jeffs.

The double standard I am thinking of is in regards to illegal immigration, which is also a violation of the laws of the land (a misdemeanor for convenience sakes) and yet it's not as highly persecuted as a polygamist group where rape is claimed. Illegal immigration produces more rapes, more violence and more murders than the polygamist compound yet it's not something we go after with equal passion. In fact, we seem to ignore the problem. But that's for another thread.

[Bernard Gui]

QUOTE

If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church. An article of our faith is binding upon us. It states, "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law" (A of F 1:12).

One cannot obey the law and disobey the law at the same time

One should note that Pres. Hinckley was condemning the current practice of plural marriage.

He says absolutely nothing about defending it.

Bernard

[Ron Beron]

Incestuous practiced by consenting adults would be socially abhorrent, but I do not see a rational need for it to be illegal regardless of my personal views.

Bestiality is a severe sexual deviation that shows undeniable psychosis, it would be a disservice to not correct such behavior. Also, how would one assertain the consent of the animal?

Many feel polygamy is equally socially abhorrent yet you seem to advocate it. As to zoophilia, I agree it is also a deviation along with homosexuality and 20 deviations, but not a psychosis. The practice of polygamy can be a cause of undue stress. In a study conducted among polygamous families in Turkey summarized, "It is clear that the participants from polygamous families, especially senior wives, reported more psychological distress. It is essential to increase awareness of the significance of polygamous family structures among psychiatrists and other therapists."

[Bernard Gui]

The double standard I am thinking of is in regards to illegal immigration, which is also a violation of the laws of the land (a misdemeanor for convenience sakes) and yet it's not as highly persecuted as a polygamist group where rape is claimed...

Double Standard Example 1:

Polygamy is illegal.

Multiple unmarried sex partners is legal.

Bernard

[Bee Eff]

Not if he was a personal witness which he was.

I then was a personal witness to this family's happiness. I interacted with them in their homes at times.

And you as well if you propose to defend polygamy while LDS. It is inconsitent with modern LDS ideals and you know it. As long as anyone in the church defends polygamy they are fair game. I thing Pres. Hinckley said it well,

Defending polygamy is not against Church doctrine or ideals. Practicing polygamy currently is against Church doctrine and ideals. Read above comments to this fact, it has already been addressed.

Not if the following criteria are employed

In this case we have evidence of the above.

You have not provided such. Were I to choose to do so, I would be capable of providing such. I would not do so though because of patient doctor confidentiality.

[Ron Beron]

One should note that Pres. Hinckley was condemning the current practice of plural marriage.

He says absolutely nothing about defending it.

Bernard

I thought that was exactly what we were discussing; the current practice.

[Bernard Gui]

Many feel polygamy is equally socially abhorrent yet you seem to advocate it. As to zoophilia, I agree it is also a deviation along with homosexuality and 20 deviations, but not a psychosis. The practice of polygamy can be a cause of undue stress. In a study conducted among polygamous families in Turkey summarized, "It is clear that the participants from polygamous families, especially senior wives, reported more psychological distress. It is essential to increase awareness of the significance of polygamous family structures among psychiatrists and other therapists."

Lots of things cause undue stress and psychological distress, yet they are still legal.

Bernard

I thought that was exactly what we were discussing; the current practice.

You miss the point.

Bernard

[Bee Eff]

Many feel polygamy is equally socially abhorrent yet you seem to advocate it. As to zoophilia, I agree it is also a deviation along with homosexuality and 20 deviations, but not a psychosis. The practice of polygamy can be a cause of undue stress. In a study conducted among polygamous families in Turkey summarized, "It is clear that the participants from polygamous families, especially senior wives, reported more psychological distress. It is essential to increase awareness of the significance of polygamous family structures among psychiatrists and other therapists."

Stating "a study" does not make a statement credible. Please provide the bibliographical information when citing such.

I do not believe anyone finds polygamy equally socially abhorrent to bestiality.

I doubt that bestiality would be considered rational. Psychosis involves irrational and/or disturbed thinking, I believe beastiality can be placed in this category while homosexuality and other human-human sexual positions cannot be viewed as strongly, but this is my personal view not that of the entire APA.

[Ron Beron]

'Bee Eff' writes,

I then was a personal witness to this family's happiness. I interacted with them in their homes at times.

It was still anecdotal unless you have alternate validation.

Defending polygamy is not against Church doctrine or ideals. Practicing polygamy currently is against Church doctrine and ideals. Read above comments to this fact, it has already been addressed.

Why defend it if it currently against church rules. It is inconsistent with logic. It also makes a mockery of the questions asked in the temple recommend interview. I would think that any GA would take a dim view of either the practice or the avocation of polygamy today.

You have not provided such. Were I to choose to do so, I would be capable of providing such. I would not do so though because of patient doctor confidentiality.

Read Mormon Polygamy by Van Wagoner. It is replete with incidents.

[Ron Beron]

'Bee Eff' writes,

Stating "a study" does not make a statement credible. Please provide the bibliographical information when citing such.

Mental Health Aspects of Turkish Women from Polygamous Versus Monogamous Families

Ozkan et al. International Journal of Social Psychiatry.2006; 52: 214-220

I do not believe anyone finds polygamy equally socially abhorrent to bestiality.

I think they are both sexually dysfunctional.

I doubt that bestiality would be considered rational. Psychosis involves irrational and/or disturbed thinking, I believe beastiality can be placed in this category while homosexuality and other human-human sexual positions cannot be viewed as strongly, but this is my personal view not that of the entire APA.

The DSM-IV does not find it a psychosis. A psychosis means, "loss of contact with reality."

[Bee Eff]

Why defend it if it currently against church rules. It is inconsistent with logic. It also makes a mockery of the questions asked in the temple recommend interview. I would think that any GA would take a dim view of either the practice or the avocation of polygamy today.

You are mistaken. The Church is not against polygamy, we are not against anyone not LDS practicing polyagmy, we simply do not practice it. This is the fact.

Polygamy does not conflict with Church doctrine and never has. The practice of polygamy by a member of the LDS Church conflicts with current Church doctrine.

Mental Health Aspects of Turkish Women from Polygamous Versus Monogamous Families

Ozkan et al. International Journal of Social Psychiatry.2006; 52: 214-220

Thank you, I will read through the article.

[Ron Beron]

'Bernard Gui' writes,

Lots of things cause undue stress and psychological distress, yet they are still legal.

Yes, but polygamy is illegal in Turkey and the U.S.

You miss the point.

I guess.

[Bernard Gui]

I think they are both sexually dysfunctional.

Are unmarried adults engaged in multiple-partner relationships dysfunctional?

Bernard

[Bee Eff]

Yes, but polygamy is illegal in Turkey and the U.S.

Do you believe that the legality of polygamy does or does not effect the outcome of such studies? I have asked for evidence from areas where polygamy is legal of such. If polygamy is illegal, the simple criminal nature of the offense should be enough to provide the psychological issues presented. The study is not sufficient if such is the case.

[Ron Beron]

'Bee Eff' writes,

You are mistaken. The Church is not against polygamy, we are not against anyone not LDS practicing polyagmy, we simply do not practice it. This is the fact.

Polygamy does not conflict with Church doctrine and never has. The practice of polygamy by a member of the LDS Church conflicts with current Church doctrine.

I absolutely disagree. Heber J. Grant stated in an official declaration,

Now, in conclusion, let me state again, as I have done many times before-and my statement is meant for every member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for our neighbors and friends who dwell in the communities where we live, and for the whole world-that the

Church does not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate or sanction in any way, shape or form the contracting of so-called "plural marriages," but that on the contrary it absolutely forbids the members of the Church from entering into any such unlawful relations or teaching or encouraging such practices, and that it will continue in the future as it has done in the past to deal with and punish to the extent of its authority any persons who violate these injunctions. I do not know how to make it plainer or more forceful. If I did I would do so

.

I think that it says it in quite certain terms.

[Ron Beron]

Do you believe that the legality of polygamy does or does not effect the outcome of such studies? I have asked for evidence from areas where polygamy is legal of such. If polygamy is illegal, the simple criminal nature of the offense should be enough to provide the psychological issues presented. The study is not sufficient if such is the case.

Read the article. In the part of Turkey where polygamy is still practiced there isn't an onus against it. There isn't a fear of reprisals. Secondly, if the society approves of polygamy then I would have no problem with it. The question that was paramount her was why it was illegal in the U.S. First and foremost it goes against our society. Arabic countries with some exception finding it acceptable.

[Ron Beron]

Are unmarried adults engaged in multiple-partner relationships dysfunctional?

Bernard

To some degree they are. It would depend on the situation.

[Bernard Gui]

To some degree they are. It would depend on the situation.

Would you say the same thing about polygamy? Depends on the situation?

Bernard

[Bernard Gui]

QUOTE

Polygamy does not conflict with Church doctrine and never has. The practice of polygamy by a member of the LDS Church conflicts with current Church doctrine.

I absolutely disagree. Heber J. Grant stated in an official declaration,

QUOTE

Now, in conclusion, let me state again, as I have done many times before-and my statement is meant for every member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for our neighbors and friends who dwell in the communities where we live, and for the whole world-that the Church does not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate or sanction in any way, shape or form the contracting of so-called "plural marriages," but that on the contrary it absolutely forbids the members of the Church from entering into any such unlawful relations or teaching or encouraging such practices, and that it will continue in the future as it has done in the past to deal with and punish to the extent of its authority any persons who violate these injunctions. I do not know how to make it plainer or more forceful. If I did I would do so.

I think that it says it in quite certain terms.

Do you interpret this statement as a condemnation of the LDS practice of polygamy prior to the OD?

Bernard

[Changeling]

Bee Eff, sounds to me like you are using the word "polygamy" (multiple marriage) when perhaps the more precise term would be "polygyny" (multiple wives).

In your opinion, is there a rational position against the practice of "polyandry" (multiple husbands)?

[johnny]

Bee Eff,

A discussion of LDS vs. Non-LDS theology is off topic here imo. I am not asking why a Christian should or should not practice polygamy.

The practice of Polygamy is not rational because for a Christian polygamy is merely adultery on a permanent basis. This is what the article below says about the problems of polygamy:

The Problem Of Polygamy

http://www.scripturessay.com/printpage.php?id=605

Christians are under a far better covenant containing better commandments through Christ (Hebrews 8:6-8 ) , God's original plan of one wife for one husband is enforce. Polygamy is fornication, fornication being the sin of unlawful intercourse by an unmarried person. The New Testament says that marriage to another partner while the first partner is still living is adultery (Romans 7:1-3). No fornicator or adulterer shall inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9,10). Since a polygamist is an adulterer, he cannot inherit the kingdom of God.

Polygamy does not conflict with Church doctrine and never has. The practice of polygamy by a member of the LDS Church conflicts with current Church doctrine.

Polygamy conflicts with the doctrine of the New Testament. 1 Corinthians 7:2 says, "Let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband." Polygamy is sinful for male or female. Women married to the same husband do not each have their own husbands. 1 Corinthians 6:9,10 lists many types of sinners, including fornicators and adulterers.

God made one wife, Eve, for Adam (Genesis 2:22). God's plan since creation has been that one male and one female, "the twain" (or two), become "one flesh" (Matthew 19:4-6). From the beginning, God never intended for men to put away their wives or to marry additional wives. Men began these practices because they rejected God's plan out of the hardness of their hearts (Matthew 19:8 ) .

During the Old Testament God allowed many practices of the Jews which He never planned nor approved. One such thing was a king, but He allowed a king in order to let them see for themselves the foolishness of departing from His way (1 Samuel 8 ) . In like manner, additional wives were allowed to the Israelites because of the hardness of their hearts, but not because such was God's plan or God's will.

Polygamy was never good for Abraham or any other Old Testament polygamist. Hagar caused jealousy, strife, and trouble until she was expelled from Abraham's house (Genesis 16:4; 21:9-11). Likewise, the wives of Solomon caused great difficulties and turned his heart away from the Lord (1 Kings 11:3,4). Polygamy in the Old Testament strongly shows us the wisdom of God's plan for one wife and the foolishness of man's way of additional wives. Since God made man, He knows the best plan for man's marriage and home.

[Ihearya]

One should note that Pres. Hinckley was condemning the current practice of plural marriage.

He says absolutely nothing about defending it.

Bernard

Sustaining the laws of the land nowadays has gotten a much different definition:

" Some Latter-day Saints question the church's baptizing converts and issuing temple privileges to members who are in the country illegally. Potential templegoers must avow to a bishop that they are honest in their dealings with others. Some members can't reconcile church membership and illegal status.

"It's not a problem for me," Pingree said. He made clear that immigration enforcement "is not the role of the church."

Church leaders do not ascertain potential converts' citizenship prior to baptism or temple attendance. They look for commitment to live the tenets of the religion, Pingree says.

The church, he says, does everything it can to encourage its members to stay in their home countries to strengthen local stakes and wards. "But once they're here, we want to make them feel like part of the community, a valued part of the community," Pingree said."

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635153068,00.html

Couldn't the same apply to polygamy? Of course not. One group is welcomed while the other one is shunned.

See a problem here?

[Ihearya]

'Bee Eff' writes,

I absolutely disagree. Heber J. Grant stated in an official declaration,

I think that it says it in quite certain terms.

Strong statement about unlawfulness in practicing polygamy. The same strong statement should apply to other unlawful issues today involving members. There is a double-standard that's hard to accept.

[Ron Beron]

Would you say the same thing about polygamy? Depends on the situation?

Bernard

Given the fact that we are discussing the legality of the situation here in the U.S. I would still think it is immoral, but if the general society finds it acceptable then it would legal not necessarily moral.

Do you interpret this statement as a condemnation of the LDS practice of polygamy prior to the OD?

Bernard

No. It was obviously after the OD. Again, we discussing the practice of polygamy post OD, aren't we?