Plural marriage, the priesthood, and exaltation

[BRMC]

8 hours ago, sunstoned said:

I guess it is a personal thing.  To me, there is so much wrong with polygamy and the way it was introduced.  It is not a faith promoting story. And I believe this is why the church has gone to great lengths to keep the details hidden.

Latter-day Saint women marched on Washington to impress upon them their faith-promoting stories with regards to polygamy.

[sunstoned]

3 hours ago, BRMC said:

Latter-day Saint women marched on Washington to impress upon them their faith-promoting stories with regards to polygamy.

So what?  That does not change the sordid history of polygamy.

[BRMC]

1 minute ago, sunstoned said:

So what?  That does not change the sordid history of polygamy.

It changes the context.  You said it isn't faith-promoting.  Some women who actually practiced it disagree.   Your "sordid history" is another woman's blessing.

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, BRMC said:

Latter-day Saint women marched on Washington to impress upon them their faith-promoting stories with regards to polygamy.

Or were they told to, much like when the church had them come out against ERA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Equal_Rights_Amendment_and_Utah

[sunstoned]

2 minutes ago, BRMC said:

It changes the context.  You said it isn't faith-promoting.  Some women who actually practiced it disagree.   Your "sordid history" is another woman's blessing.

 

Those people who thought polygamy was a "blessing" were overwhelming old men with very young wives.  Here is a study that shows 85% of women did not think of polygamy in terms of a blessing.

Mormon women fear eternal polygamy, study shows

Quote

Pearson: Only about 15% of people said polygamy was just fine, and that they trusted God and it would all be worked out in heaven. The other 85% gave their personal stories of extreme pain and difficulty around those issues.

https://religionnews.com/2016/07/20/mormon-women-fear-eternal-polygamy-study-shows/

[BRMC]

8 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Or were they told to, much like when the church had them come out against ERA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Equal_Rights_Amendment_and_Utah

You can speculate whatever you'd like to fit your world view.  I'll take things at face value until I have reason not to.  Women then, as they do today, had varying opinions.  Many opposed ERA and didn't need to be "told" to do so.

[katherine the great]

3 hours ago, BRMC said:

Latter-day Saint women marched on Washington to impress upon them their faith-promoting stories with regards to polygamy.

Did you think they would have marched on Washington holding up signs that talk about the inferiority and/ or illegitimacy of their marital statuses? What’s the alternative? That their marriages were not legitimate marriages (unless they were a first legal wife which would make their husbands adulterers to the rest of America). Who would want to think that? If we devote our lives to a particular lifestyle, we like to think that that lifestyle is acceptable. That’s human nature. That doesn’t mean that they were happy in those arrangements. Probably some of them were (I think a couple of Joseph F Smith’s wives were) but we would have to read their personal journals/diaries to really know. 

[BRMC]

11 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

 

Those people who thought polygamy was a "blessing" were overwhelming old men with very young wives.  Here is a study that shows 85% of women did not think of polygamy in terms of a blessing.

Mormon women fear eternal polygamy, study shows

https://religionnews.com/2016/07/20/mormon-women-fear-eternal-polygamy-study-shows/

The women who marched on Washington weren't old men.   That poll doesn't mean much to me.  It's a modern poll of people who may or may not even be active in the Church.  We were discussing how polygamy was introduced and the effect it had on those women.  A poll 150 years later of women who never experienced it isn't really relevant to the conversation, in my opinion.

Personally, I'm more concerned with the voices of the women that lived it.  Some struggled, others were blessed.   I'm sure it must have been a very difficult proposition at the time.   Heck, most of the things Heavenly Father asked of early Saints is very difficult for me to imagine having to experience.   I respect them immensely for their sacrifices.

[BRMC]

2 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Did you think they would have marched on Washington holding up signs that talk about the inferiority and/ or illegitimacy of their marital statuses? What’s the alternative? That their marriages were not legitimate marriages (unless they were a first legal wife which would make their husbands adulterers to the rest of America). Who would want to think that? If we devote our lives to a particular lifestyle, we like to think that that lifestyle is acceptable. That’s human nature. That doesn’t mean that they were happy in those arrangements. Probably some of them were (I think a couple of Joseph F Smith’s wives were) but we would have to read their personal journals/diaries to really know. 

I don't know if they found them enjoyable or not.  That isn't really relevant, either.  Many of the things Heavenly Father asks us to do are difficult, but that doesn't make the blessings we receive for our obedience any less.   

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Or were they told to, much like when the church had them come out against ERA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Equal_Rights_Amendment_and_Utah

I posted this on a previous page - is it really so hard to believe that there have been women who believed and supported polygamy without being "told to"?

 

 

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

Those people who thought polygamy was a "blessing" were overwhelming old men with very young wives.  Here is a study that shows 85% of women did not think of polygamy in terms of a blessing.

 

56 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Did you think they would have marched on Washington holding up signs that talk about the inferiority and/ or illegitimacy of their marital statuses? What’s the alternative? That their marriages were not legitimate marriages (unless they were a first legal wife which would make their husbands adulterers to the rest of America). Who would want to think that? If we devote our lives to a particular lifestyle, we like to think that that lifestyle is acceptable. That’s human nature. That doesn’t mean that they were happy in those arrangements. Probably some of them were (I think a couple of Joseph F Smith’s wives were) but we would have to read their personal journals/diaries to really know. 

 

Again with the monosplaining...all the monogamists explaining how unhappy all the polygamists were instead of letting them speak for themselves.

Edited December 23, 2021 by JLHPROF

[MustardSeed]

Present day polygamists say they love the lifestyle and it’s so hard to believe that they aren’t just mentally ill.  

[rongo]

4 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

Present day polygamists say they love the lifestyle and it’s so hard to believe that they aren’t just mentally ill.  

Isn't that what many outsiders think of modern Mormons who insist they love the lifestyle and culture?

Surely the people actually living the lifestyle get to be the experts on whether or not they like it. Unless everyone who thinks differently is simply dismissed as brainwashed or mentally ill.

[sunstoned]

13 hours ago, BRMC said:

It changes the context.  You said it isn't faith-promoting.  Some women who actually practiced it disagree.   Your "sordid history" is another woman's blessing.

My point was that women who had a positive view of polygamy were in a vast minority.

[sunstoned]

12 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

 

 

Again with the monosplaining...all the monogamists explaining how unhappy all the polygamists were instead of letting them speak for themselves.

Well, facts are facts. I guess the issue is really just academic because the U.S. government put a end to polygamy (or the everlasting covenant as it use to be called) many years ago.  Of course, this was shock to much of the Mormon hierarchy of the time: 

Quote

“Plurality of wives is a law established by God forever. It would be easier for the United States to build a tower to remove the sun as to remove polygamy.”

Heber C. Kimball, Millennial Star, vol. 28, p. 190 

[sunstoned]

13 hours ago, BRMC said:

The women who marched on Washington weren't old men.   That poll doesn't mean much to me.  It's a modern poll of people who may or may not even be active in the Church.  We were discussing how polygamy was introduced and the effect it had on those women.  A poll 150 years later of women who never experienced it isn't really relevant to the conversation, in my opinion.

Personally, I'm more concerned with the voices of the women that lived it.  Some struggled, others were blessed.   I'm sure it must have been a very difficult proposition at the time.   Heck, most of the things Heavenly Father asked of early Saints is very difficult for me to imagine having to experience.   I respect them immensely for their sacrifices.

Most struggled.

[BRMC]

7 hours ago, sunstoned said:

My point was that women who had a positive view of polygamy were in a vast minority.

Sure.  My point was that you're painting with a broad brush and assigning an opinion to people that don't necessarily share it.   That aside, mortal men and women both struggle with much of God asks of us.  I wouldn't expect this to be any different.  That doesn't mean we don't make attempts or that we aren't blessed for obedience.

[sunstoned]

6 hours ago, BRMC said:

Sure.  My point was that you're painting with a broad brush and assigning an opinion to people that don't necessarily share it.   That aside, mortal men and women both struggle with much of God asks of us.  I wouldn't expect this to be any different.  That doesn't mean we don't make attempts or that we aren't blessed for obedience.

I don't disagree with you on this.  But rub for me is that the overwhelming empirical evidence points to polygamy as not being from god, but from a man who wanted to justify is desires. Men (its always men) do this today end up in jail.  There is nothing holly about that practice at all.

If we want to debate this, we could start another thread.  It has only been debated on this forum about thousand times.

[BRMC]

56 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

I don't disagree with you on this.  But rub for me is that the overwhelming empirical evidence points to polygamy as not being from god, but from a man who wanted to justify is desires. Men (its always men) do this today end up in jail.  There is nothing holly about that practice at all.

If we want to debate this, we could start another thread.  It has only been debated on this forum about thousand times.

No need to debate it again at all.  We just don't agree.  For me, the evidence overwhelmingly points to faithful Saints following God's will.

[carbon dioxide]

On 12/19/2021 at 7:30 AM, Tacenda said:

"In Deuteronomy, kings were warned not to gather multiple wives and vast riches for themselves, because it would turn their hearts away from God.

 

In short, God grants people free will, even when the results can be disasterous."

If you read right before that, the kings were warned against taking too many horses.  I don't think this means God did not want the king to own more than one horse. 

[carbon dioxide]

The one great benefit for the church with the whole same sex marriage thing today is that is really is hard for anyone to argue against polygamy today.   Every argument that is used to support same sex marriage can be used to support polygamy.  The whole saying "Don't want a same sex marriage, don't have one" works just as well as "Don't like polygamy, don't have one".  For people who believe in the Bible, one can at least support the practice of polygamy with the Bible.  I have watched quite a few non-LDS people on youtube support polygamy from the Bible.  So honest people know the foundation is there.   Same sex marriage? NOTHING.  It is easier to defend polygamy today than say 20 years ago and it will be more so in the future as society "evolves".

[why me]

16 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Most struggled.

Most of us struggle. Life is a struggle. The lds church is a struggle. However, if JS was a prophet, it was  a needed struggle. If he wasn't a prophet, it was a useless struggle.

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

.  It is easier to defend polygamy today than say 20 years ago and it will be more so in the future as society "evolves".

It may be easier to defend modern polygamy (which includes polyandry) restarting because it is believed it would be fully consensual with the same laws of consent applied to it as monogamy, but it does not make historic polygyny more acceptable to many because they believe it was not mutually consensual, power dynamics, etc.  It may take some of the ew factor out though.

Edited December 24, 2021 by Calm

[JustAnAustralian]

57 minutes ago, Calm said:

It may take some of the ew factor out though.

With the rise of polyamory (see this recent SLTrib article https://www.sltrib.com/amplify-utah/2021/12/23/utahns-share-why-they/ ), and legal recognition of polyamorous relationships in some places (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/us/somerville-polyamorous-domestic-partnership.html), it's going to get harder and harder to legally deny polygamous relationships (regardless of sexual configuration) access to actual marriage law.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, sunstoned said:

I don't disagree with you on this.  But rub for me is that the overwhelming empirical evidence points to polygamy as not being from god, but from a man who wanted to justify is desires. Men (its always men) do this today end up in jail.  There is nothing holly about that practice at all.

If we want to debate this, we could start another thread.  It has only been debated on this forum about thousand times.

If you do not believe in God or holiness in the first place, why would this, and its heavenly application, even be an issue?

It seems the issue for you instead concerns a secular-based morality that you have not articulated in social, scientific or other "empirical" terms -- and of course any debate, by nature, relies on evidence that supports the bias, which is why it has been debated so often.

The interesting discussion to me would be on areas where religious and secular values meet, but that played out already, in the USA at least, some 130+ years ago. So the saints live with it, having compromised a degree of religious freedom to practice one tenet for the freedom to get people baptized and sealed (living and dead). Anyone practicing polygamy is doing it without the sanction of those with the sealing keys.

Individually, what would the heavenly compromise be for multiple women who are dissatisfied being sealed to one man, and his Christlike concern for them? This might fall outside your scope of interest since it deals with the hereafter, which is not empirically proven. But the purpose of plural marriages, for those who choose that arrangement, would be to do godly things (whatever they may be; the choice would be the consenting adults' and approved by Christ), all sealings having been rendered to Christ by Adam. It makes good sense within the parameters of the faith.