Polygamy Becoming Popular, but not with LDS

[Bernard Gui]

Back in the Prop 8 days, a few of us (who were immediately castigated) predicted that polygamy would be the next fence to be broken down.

Lo and behold! Here it comes! Ironically propelled, in part, by Fundamentalist Mormons and their popularity on reality TV, and of course the media lionization of alternative life styles.

Moral values and social movements are now the province of entertainment. The jesters rule the court. 

So, as the rest of the country moves to embrace polygamy and celebrate our apostates, many of us LDS want us to discredit and disavow our now trendy past.

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-07-28/us-acceptance-of-polygamy-at-record-high-and-tv-might-explain-why

Quote

Support for polygamy in the United States is at an all-time high, and Americans' love for TV may be one explanation for the trend. Gallup polling on American values and beliefs in May found acceptance of a person having multiple spouses at one time has grown in the U.S., with 17 percent of people saying the practice is "morally acceptable." That number marked the highest rate on record dating back to 2003, according to Gallup data.

Pinning down the exact cause of the trend is tricky, as Gallup notes it's coincided with a general increase in liberal views on social issues like same-sex relationships and premarital sex, but hasn't come with a correspondingly permissive legal shift on the issue. Polygamy, in fact, is illegal in all 50 states. However, Andrew Dugan, an analyst with Gallup, also notes TV programming within the last decade or so started to feature polygamist characters. Perhaps most notable has been the TLC show "Sister Wives." 

Gallup has seen U.S. support for polygamy rise by almost 10 percentage points over the time "Sister Wives" has been on the air, according to Dugan, though he cautions "it is impossible to establish any direct causality between the show and changing attitudes." Still, it wouldn't be the first time TV has been referenced as a possible reason for Americans' changing social views. 

Former Vice President Joe Biden famously mentioned sitcom"Will & Grace," which featured multiple gay characters, as a reason behind why he thinks American attitudes have shifted on gay rights.

It's a strange world in which we live, no?

Edited July 28, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[thesometimesaint]

I acknowledge our past, but have no desire to repeat it.

[Tacenda]

Whoa, I have to say that I saw this coming. I guess women like to have other women around more, IMO.

I have a friend that tells me all the time that her husband never talks to her. And if she could she would live with a woman, not because she's gay, but that she needed that companionship in the home. So maybe this is contributing to it.

In the old days we had more relatives living near us, I don't know if there were many retirement homes set up back then. And I believe in the not so old days, women would see each other a lot more because they were stay at home. My mom use to get frustrated sometimes when a neighbor would pop in to chat constantly (I wasn't born yet). She wasn't LDS my mom would say, and she'd want to have coffee and chat. In my mind I thought how nice that would be, to have someone want to chat with me at all would be nice. 

[thesometimesaint]

That is one thing about our subculture that is disappointing. We marry for not just this life but for Eternity, then ignore the very ones we're married to.

[The Nehor]

I want another husband to play video games with and double my household income.

[Guest]

The Book of Revelation, tells us this will be so. 

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

. In my mind I thought how nice that would be, to have someone want to chat with me at all would be nice. 

I think you would change your mind pretty quickly if it started to interfere with getting things you planned done.  Calling ahead and not staying around for a couple of hours every few days makes a big difference.  Also was is chosen to chat about...if it is just the other person's interests, perhaps even tales of people you don't know or gossip and they don't ask about your life, you would likely be bored out of your skull.

[pogi]

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

...many of us LDS want us to discredit and disavow our now trendy past.

That is the part I have trouble understanding.  I mean, I get that people may dislike the idea of polygamy and may not like how it was implemented in the past, but shouldn't we be all for religious liberty?  If we believe that polygamy is a potential religious exception to the rule of monogamy as stated in Jacob 2 and D&C 132, and if we believe that God "will command" polygamy in certain circumstances, then why would we be against legalizing a religious practice that we have held, and may hold in the future if God so chooses?  

Isn't opposing legal polygamy also opposing the legal practice of the exceptions noted in Jacob 2, D&C 132, and is it not also in opposition to the declaration of D&C 134 that governments should preserve freedom of conscience and worship?  Does it not oppose the strong stance of the church on religious liberty?

Edited July 29, 2017 by pogi

[CMZ]

If and when polygamy is commanded by God and then lived in a God-approved way there is nothing for anyone to worry about. But even monogamy can be lived in a wrong, God-displeasing way... and often is. That doesn't make marriage itself wrong.

Edited July 29, 2017 by CMZ

[Stargazer]

5 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

That is one thing about our subculture that is disappointing. We marry for not just this life but for Eternity, then ignore the very ones we're married to.

Well, speak for yourself, mate!   I love talking with my spouse.  I'd rather talk to her than anyone else!

[Stargazer]

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I want another husband to play video games with and double my household income.

You may get your wish!

[Glenn101]

3 hours ago, pogi said:

That is the part I have trouble understanding.  I mean, I get that people may dislike the idea of polygamy and may not like how it was implemented in the past, but shouldn't we be all for religious liberty?  If we believe that polygamy is a potential religious exception to the rule of monogamy as stated in Jacob 2 and D&C 132, and if we believe that God "will command" polygamy in certain circumstances, then why would we be against legalizing a religious practice that we have held, and may hold in the future if God so chooses?  

Isn't opposing legal polygamy also opposing the legal practice of the exceptions noted in Jacob 2, D&C 132, and is it not also in opposition to the declaration of D&C 134 that governments should preserve freedom of conscience and worship?  Does it not oppose the strong stance of the church on religious liberty?

I am all for religious liberty, but I expect that polygamy will be legalized based upon other principles. But I do not expect that the church will resume the practice even if it does become legal. Of course that is just my opinion, but I believe that in coming years polyamory will become trendy also, as will open marriages, etc. and the church will not waqnt to go near that.

Glenn

[The Nehor]

33 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

You may get your wish!

Fingers crossed.

[carbon dioxide]

I for one will not disavow and discredit our past. It is sad that the Church sometimes wants to do that.  That fact that we don't currently practice polygamy should not mean we distance ourselves and pretend that the practice was wrong in the 19th century.  Should we disavow and discredit the Law of Moses because it that was then and this is now?  I don't think so.  Just because that was done away does not mean it was not valid during those days.

Edited July 29, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

I am all for religious liberty, but I expect that polygamy will be legalized based upon other principles. But I do not expect that the church will resume the practice even if it does become legal. Of course that is just my opinion, but I believe that in coming years polyamory will become trendy also, as will open marriages, etc. and the church will not waqnt to go near that.

Glenn

Open marriage is firmly entrenched as is no marriage but living together. 

[Bernard Gui]

34 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

I for one will not disavow and discredit our past. It is sad that the Church sometimes wants to do that.  That fact that we don't currently practice polygamy should not mean we distance ourselves and pretend that the practice was wrong in the 19th century.  Should we disavow and discredit the Law of Moses because it that was then and this is now?  I don't think so.  Just because that was done away does not mean it was not valid during those days.

Indeed. Some here question why the Church is always a step behind the trends, but in this case we've finally anticipated one Unfortunately, we won't be participating now that it's finally catching on.

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, pogi said:

That is the part I have trouble understanding.  I mean, I get that people may dislike the idea of polygamy and may not like how it was implemented in the past, but shouldn't we be all for religious liberty?  If we believe that polygamy is a potential religious exception to the rule of monogamy as stated in Jacob 2 and D&C 132, and if we believe that God "will command" polygamy in certain circumstances, then why would we be against legalizing a religious practice that we have held, and may hold in the future if God so chooses?  

Isn't opposing legal polygamy also opposing the legal practice of the exceptions noted in Jacob 2, D&C 132, and is it not also in opposition to the declaration of D&C 134 that governments should preserve freedom of conscience and worship?  Does it not oppose the strong stance of the church on religious liberty?

It isn't so much an LDS concern, since we no longer practice plural marriage (and are not likely to do so in the near future, even if it is legal), but that we have so many Muslims and Fundamentalist Mormons in this country who do accept the practice, that it should be permitted just on 1st amendment grounds alone.  It is not so much a religious as a Constitutional issue.

Edited July 29, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

9 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Indeed. Some here question why the Church is always a step behind the trends, but in this case we've finally anticipated one Unfortunately, we won't be participating now that it's finally catching on.

"Unfortunately"?  Brigham Young commented, when he first heard of the order to practice plural marriage, ""I was not desirous of shrinking from any duty, nor of failing in the least to do as I was commanded, but it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave, and I could hardly get over it for a long time.  And when I saw a funeral, I felt to envy the corpse"  Arrington, Brigham Young: American Moses, 100; JD, II:266.

[Garden Girl]

7 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

That is one thing about our subculture that is disappointing. We marry for not just this life but for Eternity, then ignore the very ones we're married to.

I agree with Stargazer...  I understand this can and does apply to some spouse relations, but was certainly not mine... your statement is incredibly broad TSS, so I will say simply not true for the majority of LDS.  Is this something that applies to you?  

GG 

[strappinglad]

I suspect that the Muslims will be among the first to establish a beachhead for polygamy. Some areas where their numbers are high are pushing for Sharia Law now.

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, strappinglad said:

I suspect that the Muslims will be among the first to establish a beachhead for polygamy. Some areas where their numbers are high are pushing for Sharia Law now.

Ah, the old xenophobe's canard. Why worry more about that then Catholic or LDS courts? We have a lot more of those and no one even mentions them. If we are seeking to impose LDS law courts as the law of the land I want in on this.

Sharia is similar. Most people have no idea what it is but Sharia law itself says it does not apply to non-Muslims. Who is stoking this hysteria about it and why?

Edited July 29, 2017 by The Nehor

[strappinglad]

46 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

 

. Most people have no idea what it is but Sharia law itself says it does not apply to non-Muslims. Who is stoking this hysteria about it and why?

For your info.

Muslims are wanting Sharia law to apply INSTEAD of secular law and not just for themselves . Youtube ' sharia law in America ' ,take what you see with a grain of salt if you wish but notice it doesn't just apply as you might think.

Edited July 29, 2017 by strappinglad

[MiserereNobis]

52 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Why it worry more about Catholic or LDS courts?

I'm wistful for the good ol' days of the inquisitions... whose official Vatican title was: Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition.

I'll say it again. Us Catholics sure know how to name things

 

[MiserereNobis]

10 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

Youtube ' sharia law in America '

Youtube... that shining source of accurate and unbiased information.

How about you provide a link to a reputable news and/or academic source that shows that Sharia law is being forced upon non-Muslims in the US?

CFR.

[strappinglad]

" the Nehor wanted to know who was stoking the hysteria. I showed him.