I don't know about anyone else, but I have been very curious what Joel (and everyone else) think s about the raid on the compound and the removing of the children from the LDS families.

I know that not all Mormons believe Polygamy is an acceptable practice, but what about all of the other aspects of their lifestyle, i.e. the way the women dress, their hairstyles, the fact that they are basically cut off from society, the claim that many of the young girls were pregnant and the fact that none of the men have come forward in any of it, just the women fretting and crying for their children?

What do you think should be done? do you think the children should be returned to their families?

I have real issues with cultic behavior. IF their lifestyle was so awesome and God centered then why is there secrecy and walls. The stories that are sufacing are very "branch davidian" in theme. I believe the grown ups all know they are culpable in this.

number one. They are not Mormon and they are not LDS.

Most of them have never been affiliated with the LDS church, but rather were raised in the FLDS culture.

Using the term Mormon historically has been associated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Mostly throughout this ordeal, I've been concerned that these folks have been characterized in the mainstream media as Mormons, when they are not.

I have zero sympathy for the situation and truly feel that the children will be better off once separated from their parents.

The community has been propping up the corrupt system of Polygamy that it supports for far too long.

I do have a problem with the idea that we are potentially witnessing, in some sense, a serious violation of our first amendment right to freedom of religion.

But honestly, considering that historically we've turned a blind eye to polygamy as a society, we are culpable as well.

If there's a problem with polygamy it should have been handled years ago.

So, in a nutshell...

Zero sympathy.
Happy to see something done about the situation of the children.
Hope the media is making it clear that they are not Mormons.
Moderately worried about the overall implications on freedom of religion.

Yeah these boneheads are not Christian, Mormon, or anything related to Jesus Christ.
They are a cult and have twisted the Word of God to suit their own ideas of what God is and isn't.

Harm has been done. IT is a travesty. The United States should enforce laws upon the men and anyone involved.
Cults are not religions.

Maybe they meet and have leaders and congregate and whatever, but they are breaking the laws of our country blatantly and calling it religion. ANd here is the main thing.

They are doing it AT SOMEONE ELSE'S EXPENSE- the children.

Dont give me semantics and say they are old enough to have sex and babies and religions can do what they want.
What age is acceptable for sex and babies and forced marriage and multiple preteen and teenage girls having sex with grown men ?
There isnt one.
It isn't biblical either. Solomon and Moses and all the other Old Testament men who had multiple wives were not given Blessing by GOd for doing so. NEVER. In most cases it caused problem after problem after problem...even Islam is from an adulterous relationship.

THe bible is clear on what men and women are supposed to do and not do in a relationship. marriage is to one and it is a serious covenant. Men and women are created equal in God's eyes- each with a different role within marriage- to support one another. The women have no role in FLDS but to support the men and their baby-making philosophy.

whew.

There seems to be an issue with the 'girl' who made the call - so far they're saying it was a hoax. I'll find out more.

I understand the mainstream mormon church wants nothing to do with these people, but how far do they really stray from the older mormon teachings? Say the stuff taught in Joseph Smith's and Brigham Young's times? Do they not follow the book of mormon?

my one lil comment, ignorant though it is is this: those kids being taken from the life and people they have only ever known is going to make the adjustment terrible. and the fbi can be wrong ... and we should know that we dont know what went on behind those walls, so dont throw stones ... and freedom of religion, and maybe they were serving the Lord in the way they knew how.

sorry. ill get heat for this

No, I do agree, it may be all they've ever known, but it doesn't make it right. If you listened to any of the interviews with some of those women they were totally bewildered by the questions and didn't know how to respond. They seem brain washed to me. The babies are innocent and should be spared from living that kind of lifestyle, now while they are little so they can adjust. And again I ask... where are the men? Has anyone heard from them at all in the whole ordeal?????

Oh, and I found out about the hair... the higher your hair is piled on your head, the closer you are to God... it's a status thing, their crown of glory...

some of them are with God now based upon the heightedness of their hairedness.
I have been teaching a marriage class for 6 months and this scenario is so messed up. It is not of God. at least the God of the Bible (and BOM???). These women are messed up , these kids are messed up, these men and young men are messed up. There is something in us that knows right from wrong, and longs to do right, yet in the midst of teachings from childhood like these, balance is lost, confusion is triumphant, and morality is no longer from GOd -it is from a man, a leader who says,"this is from GOd". Anytime Man says he has heard from God and changes culture and contradicts the Bible, it isnt from God...Hello???? Jesus is the only one in history that validated and confirmed the Bible in so changing culture. The only one. Not Joseph Smith, or Muhammed, Or Buddha, Or rabjanhannnahannanamamimranja (hindu guy ) or L Ron Blubber, or this new guy wayne something (new ager) and the list goes on. GUess what it has been from the beginning of time, to confuse the real GOd with the false.
We have a hard enough time making marriage work with one man and one woman...let alone try and have multiple wives, and teen and preteen at that. married at 9th grade and having babies- is not a successful model for strong families.

No they don't.

Polygamy in the old days didn't consist of sequestering the woman and children from society, nor was it about marrying girls as soon as they hit puberty to squeeze out every last possible child they could bare.

AS far as this being hard on the kids. The FLDS communities in and around Utah are well known for taking the excess boys that they have, driving them to Salt Lake and telling them never to come back at the threat of their lives - eliminate competition for the Geezers. Most of the boys in Texas would have been forced from the community eventually anyway. Texas has just sped up the process.

Oh and Nabster, we've already had this discussion elsewhere... but the Bible doesn't actually condemn polygamy and in fact states that David was given Saul's wives by God himself (a tacit endorsement) that's the problem. The Book of Mormon also doesn't endorse polygamy and actually comes closer to condemning it than does the Bible. But that's a discussion for another thread that no longer exists....

interesting facts comeing out in da news.

1. young lady who made the call was a 33 year old black lady in colorado

2. Rangers and FBI found documentation of systematic abuse at the compound and siezed it.

Joel- in an act of mercy on Saul wives he placed them under DAvid's "house and rule" as was customary in royalty especially relating to succession of kings upon the death of the reigning one. IT was not a love fest of mad sexual relations with many women.
You would be well served to study the depth in which God has established covenant with His Bride the church and how it mirrors a man and a womans (singular) relationship.
God does not endorse polygamy.

True, I think Joel alluded that to some extent but offered the examples of God overlooking it in the OT. What I gleaned from Joels post is that since God did not specifically say "more than one wife is bad" then that left the door open to people like Jeffs (and the LDS in the earlier times) to use that for their own gain.

...and Mormonism up until 1890...

Hey, lookie what I posted on may 7, 2005 in a thread on "cults"



funny.

I loathe finding myself in the position of defending polygamy and I reject the notion that I'm defending polygamy as promulgated by Warren Jeffs et.al.

But, in Exodus 21, God is talking and revealing laws and reveals one in particular relating to plural marriage in verse 10 Don't you think that while God was in the business of dealing out "laws" regarding plural marriage, he might mention that it is forbidden? But he doesn't.

The kicker is in 2 Samuel 12: 7-8

The bolded parts are to point out that God is speaking to David through Nathan the prophet. As such, it is decidedly clear that David was given his plural wives by God.

So if polygamy is against God's commandments then he's broken his own commandment.

Now the Book of Mormon says this...

Jacob 2:27-30
This scripture says, no plural marriag, unless God commands it so, in order to build up a righteous seed unto himself.

The modern LDS Church freely admits that this is what God was doing up until 1890. Frankly, in today's free flowing sexual world, I don't believe anyone would have a problem with polygamy if all involved were consenting adults - as was the case with early LDS polygamy. I mean let's face it, we live in a society of swingers, cheaters, and multiple sex partners. Polygamy amongst consenting adults would, it could be argued be an improvement over open marriages and swinging as it necessarily entails some form of commitment rather than wanton, casual sex without repercussions.

The problem with the FLDS folks is that they've corrupted the system sequestered the women and children and engaged in the trafficking of women and children and sex with minors. It's organized crime.

The early polygamists in Utah while the church still practiced polygamy, were much different. Some of the first medical doctors in the Utah Territories were polygamist wives, who would turn over the duties of raising their children to another wife while they would travel back East to obtain medical degrees. They were not suppressed, they were liberated. Polygamous women, in the state of Utah were actually the first women granted suffrage in our country.

To be clear, I do not yearn for a return to polygamy. I do yearn for a clear distinction between the way polygamy was, and the way that polygamy is.

I'm not sure if the word I'm looking for is "happy", but I was "happy" to see three men finally come before the Today show and speak on behalf of the children. Sad thing was they seemed as distanced from reality as the women did. When asked why they hadn't been heard from until today they said that they had to keep working that the women were closer to the situation so they dealt with it. Then when asked what they do for work and how do they support themselves within the community the men looked like deer in headlights and said they didn't know anything about the finances of the community they just knew that they gave to it and weren't sure where the money was going... What?????

(NABSTER)
MY GOODNESS JOEL- THE LAWS HERE PERTAIN TO MASTERS AND SERVANTS (SLAVES) EITHER FROM IMPOVERSIHED FAMILIES SOLD BY FAMILY OR SOLD THEMSELVES) IT SPEAKS OF A MASTER AND THE TAKING OF ANOTHER WIFE SHOULD HE FIND THE PREVIOUS ONE 'EVIL IN HIS EYES". IT IS ABOUT WHO GOES FREE AND WHO STAYS AT THE END OF THE 'CONTRACT OF SERVANTHOOD/SLAVERY". IT MOST CERTAINLY ISNT ABOUT MULTIPLE WIVES. YOU ARE KILLIN ME HERE WITH YOUR TRANSLATION OF SCRIPTURES.



(NABSTER)WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS ABOVE....

I am glad to hear you abhor the practices of your forefathers of LDS. it isnt and never was right.

I do not abhor the practices of my LDS forefathers. In fact, I believe it to be biblically supported.

I do abhor the practices of modern FLDS folks that practice organized crime in their systematic suppression of women, sexual abuse of children, and persecution of competing males in positions of weakness.

To be 100% clear, and we have had this discussion before, the Bible does not condemn polygamy.

I agree the verse cited from Exodus 21 is talking about a master that marries a maid-servant. It talks about governing that process in verses 7-9 and in verse 10 states that if the master takes another wife - in addition to - the first maid-servant he is already married to, that he should not treat the first maid-servant any differently now that he has two wives.

Again, the Lord is not condemning polygamy here. He is regulating it and allowing it.

I use the KJV translation of the Bible.

Additionally Nabster, your explaning away of God giving wives to DAvid above doesn't hold up under the examination of 2 Samuel 12

In that chapter we have God literally saying "I gave you these wives."

Again, if polygamy is against God's law, then God is breaking his own law.

To compare historical LDS polygamy to modern FLDS polygamy is like comparing Christianity to Hinduism. Never the twain shall meet.

Discussed in the closed topic, but I think we considered the older polygamy practices of the mormons to be essentially the same as how the flds people practice it:

"Suppression of women" - polygamy (check)

"sexual abuse of children" - marrying of early teen girls to older men (check)

"persecution of competing males in positions of weakness" - what were the competing males to do that weren't granted the "privilege" of marrying multiple teenage wives? (check?)

I can see why mainstream mormons work to distance themselves from these eejits.

Except for their current polygamy practices, are there any major differences between flds teachings and the teachings of old-time (Joseph Smith, Brigham Young) mormons?

One cropped up in the news today.

Apparently the FLDS folks gather with their families twice a day to engage in prayer, They consider this sacred time and don't want courts to oversee it. The courts on the other hand don't want the moms to be with their children unsupervised. So they've asked if local LDS folks could supervise. The request has baffled local LDS leaders - because while prayer is of course sacred it's not so sacred that a real Mormon would mind other folks watching or observing.

To be honest, I am no expert on FLDS beliefs. . . I know very little. But the idea that you have to have really tall swan like swoop in your hair if you're a woman to exhibit your righteousness is certainly different - I mean you don't see Brooke White with one of those.

Education in the FLDS church is discouraged for women and children, whereas Brigham Young was the founder of the University of Utah (the oldest University west of the Mississippi - I think) and Brigham Young Academy (today known as BYU) As I mentioned above, women under the old LDS system of polygamy were not suppressed but rather given access to higher education and I believe I recall reading that the first class enrolled at the University of Utah was 80% women.

Polygamy in and of itself cannot be viewed as suppression of women. It all depends on how it is practiced. If consenting adults choose to live polygamous lives, one can hardly call it suppression. IN the old days it actually led to liberation.

In the old system of polygamy, roughly 2-3% of the men in the church were polygamists, the rest were not. In fact in my family which traces it's roots to the first day of the restoration of the LDS church there are only a couple of polygamists through 5 generations back in my family tree. In the FLDS culture it seems like they kick you out if you're not going to have multiple wives.

I also know that until recently the FLDS didn't have a temple because they were taught that they were unworthy of temple blessings. Whereas, Joseph Smith began construction on 3 temples and completed 2 and Brigham Young began construction on 4 in his tenure as the Prophet, so that seems also to be a major departure. Additionally, it's been rumored that they have sex in their temples and that certainly would not fly in our temples.

I'll have to look into it and see what other differences in teachings I can find.

Hence the lack of education... anyone with any learning would know that is WAY off base.