Basically, I think the state of Utah is hypocritical for taking a man to courtfor polygamy, it was a waste of state resources, the prosecutor was probably using a high profile case to make a name for himself (he's the governor's brother) and now I think this puts the LDS Church into a bad position because now when we discuss the horrible persecutions the saints endured at the hands of the US government in the 19th. Century we now can't condemn the anti-Mormons of that era since now influential Mormons in Utah are doing the same exact thing to minority religions in their state.
That said, I just wish the government (and certain anti-polygamy activists)would put more effort into stopping slavery in the US and abroad. Yes, slavery. It still exists worlwide and even is occuring in the USA.
Here are two sites, with links, about the evils of slavery and the thousands of Slavic women being tricked into forced prostitution (they answer an ad for, let's say, being a nanny in Israel and then are put into prostitution houses and barred from leaving).
The links even point out the extent of slavery in the USA. There are, at most, 30,000 people involved in polygamy in the USA (I don't know if that is true, or even if those responsible for those estimates also include the children in the figure). There are many more than that being forced into various forms of slavery in the USA.
President Bush is doing something about the situation in Sudan (although the press seems silent on this)and I would hope people would express their support at:
I guess with evils like slavery taking place throughout the world, and even in the developed nations, some guy out in the middle of the Utah desert with 5 or 6 wives doesn't strike me as a big issue. Please read the sites and write a letter to your elected representative.
Posted by Dead_Horse (Member # 3027) on :
Getting into this subject is going to cause me a lot of pain. I am not prepared to debate my position publicly. It is, however, my opinion...and for me, my knowledge. Take it or leave it as you like.
Ending slavery in all forms is a noble cause.
I do not see much of a difference between current polygamist husbands and slaveowners.
Rain
Posted by St. Yogi (Member # 5974) on :
Excuse my ignorance but what exactly is President Bush doing about Sudan?
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Pologamy is often just another form of slavery.
And it isn't the prosicutor that is giving the Morman faith a bad name, it's those splinter sts of "Mormans" that are doing it to themselves.
Hey michael, welcome to Hatrack. You're the same as the michael8 on Nauvoo, right? It's nice to see you here.
Just for some background, there's been a recent kerfuffle concerning the line between Nauvoo and Hatrack, due to some shifting demographics. Since not everyone can post on Nauvoo, there is still a place for some discussion of LDS issues when you want a non-LDS perspective, but the board is about a lot more.
I think you'll enjoy posting here, and it would be great if you could make an introduction thread where you said some things about yourself. This is more of a dinner party than anything, and right now all I know is Mormon and passionately-political. An introduction thread would be great as a hello to everyone.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
So, um, does this mean that michael's NOT a troll? Because, to be honest, that's why I haven't ripped him a new one yet; I've just been ignoring him.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
One of my resolutions is to be more gentle. I'm thinking benefit of the doubt.
Posted by michaele8 (Member # 6608) on :
Katharina, I'll post a profile real soon. I have some remodeling around the house but when I'm done today...
And TomDavidson, I'm REALLY lloking forward to debating you. Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Let us refrain from ripping new holes in peoples.
EDIT: Never mind. I recently rediscovered my penchant for selective apathy.
[ June 10, 2004, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: Scott R ]
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
I'm always nervous about other Mormons who say we shouldn't prosecute polygamists. There's no way to avoid making it look like you secretly condone it and long for the day when the practice is reinstated. I personally feel that the only way we will ever overcome the stigma of having practiced polygamy in the past is to vigorously prosecute it in the present.
When polygamy was a smaller, voluntary facet of a much broader church, and was handled in an organized fashion by people that I personally believe were called by God and had everyone's best interests at heart, it was a lot less scary. But these independent guys who keep their little sects alive by recruiting vulnerable women and deliberately keeping them dependent and depressed, are abusive powermongers, and I will be damned if I am going to do anything to give them the slightest impression that they have my tacit approval.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
psst, Geoff: All men are secret powermongers.
Didn't you get the memo?
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote:All men are secret powermongers.
Patently false.
Some of us are quite open about it. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It's not just men.
I think all people are. Some are just more subtle about it.
To paraphrase a Seinfeld episode: Elaine: Girls don't beat up on each in junior high. We just give each other eating disorders.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
*notes that old memos are sadly out of date*
*goes back to plotting to take over the world (except for New Hampshire and South Carolina due to circumstances discussed in another thread)*
[ June 10, 2004, 02:55 PM: Message edited by: sndrake ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
*would happily live in a world that sndrake takes over*
Posted by michaele8 (Member # 6608) on :
A Rat Named Dog, I disagree. What do you think of a person who smokes marijuana but then gives it up and then promotes a petition drive to throw people in jail for using marijuana?
People would not respect him. I do not support joining the forces of the 19th. Century anti-Mormons/polygamists and attacking people who do live polygamist lifestyles -- using the law! I can disagree with their motives and choices all I want (just like I don't agree at all with the Catholic clergy practicing celibacy) but I do not want to use the law to persecute these people.
Posted by Richard Berg (Member # 133) on :
I don't see anything wrong with Michael's position. If by polygamy you mean getting legally married (using present-day laws) to >1 woman, then that's not a sex crime, it's plain fraud. On the other hand, if a group of people use contract law to give themselves legal protections similar to those of married couples, do we really need Virginia-style laws telling them they're morally inferior?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
That's a different world, michael. You live in this one, and you're supporting illegal behavior set aside over a hundred years ago.
The people enforcing the law now aren't doing it because someone a hundred years ago was resentful of the oasis in the west. They are doing it because its against the law now.
Defending polygamy now doesn't mean you are on the side of the 19th century prophets; it means you are on the side of Tom Green. That's the side you're choosing.
Posted by michaele8 (Member # 6608) on :
I say change the law. Not that I would want to be a polygamist, but in a society that says it is okay to have a wife and a mistress, or that two men can live a homosexual lifestyle (which until recent times was illegal) then there are no grounds for jailing a man with more than one wife.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Where's the intro thread? Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
I'm not a morman...nor do I really know the historical problems...though to me if it is consentual than what does it matter. Hell, Mass allows gay marriage...it seems to me that polygamy is less out there than gay marriage. It is not something I would do, but if others want to I don't care. You can have the issue of someone taking advantage of a group of women without being married. If someone is doing that then they should get in trouble because of what they are doing...regardless of marital status.
Posted by Professor Funk (Member # 5608) on :
I don't claim to know much about the current prosecutions of polygamists; however, from what I understand, the high profile cases seem to all involve underage girls being taken as "wives." Prosecution for bigamy is one (relatively minor) thing; prosecution for statutory rape is another altogether.
I had a very close friend in high school who grew up in an LDS break-off community that practiced polygamy and often the girls involved were minors. It was a destructive environment and she was abused by her father who was also the local "bishop." Polygamy as practiced today is not condoned by God. And in the far too many cases, it is not a choice among consenting adults but a method of brainwashing young girls and when that occurs I fully support prosecution of the offending parties.
Posted by Richard Berg (Member # 133) on :
Brainwashing is a tough issue. How do you distinguish it from, say, insular Hindu cultures with very young arranged marriages?
But none of this has anything to do with polygamy. Marrying "just" one 11-year-old is too many.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Good point. I cannot think of a case that did not involve an underage girl.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
P-funk, RB, and mr-p-h: Exactly.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Exactly what?
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
quote:A Rat Named Dog, I disagree. What do you think of a person who smokes marijuana but then gives it up and then promotes a petition drive to throw people in jail for using marijuana?
People would not respect him. I do not support joining the forces of the 19th. Century anti-Mormons/polygamists and attacking people who do live polygamist lifestyles -- using the law! I can disagree with their motives and choices all I want (just like I don't agree at all with the Catholic clergy practicing celibacy) but I do not want to use the law to persecute these people.
There are some differences between this situation and your marijuana analogy. I'm not a polygamist, nor have I ever been one. It is also a doctrine of our church that polygamy is a very bad thing when not specifically condoned by God. IF we oppose gay marriage on religious grounds, we should ALSO oppose polygamy on the same grounds.
Yes, our ancestors had to run from the law to protect themselves. Yes, many of us, including myself, are descended from polygamous unions. But condemning specific polygamists in the present does not by any means imply that all polygamy throughout all of history should never have happened. It has been done well, and it has been done badly, both in the past and in the present.
The problem is, when we support or neglect these polygamist sects, we do several things.
(1) We give them ammunition to defend their practices with the claim that we secretly support them, and just cannot acknowledge them publically as being the Truly Righteous. This makes it easier for them to gain converts.
(2) We assume an equivalence between past Mormon polygamy and current Utah polygamy. Personally, I believe the two to be different. The latter is self-serving, exploitative, and harmful to all involved. It is taking place during a time when we should know better. The former was largely less so on both counts (though I'm sure it had its share of crappy situations).
There are polygamists that I would defend, including my own great-great-grandparents. But these guys aren't them. And I owe at least this much to my cousins (well, my cousins' cousins ... not blood related) whose family was destroyed by a polygamist group.
[ June 10, 2004, 09:28 PM: Message edited by: A Rat Named Dog ]
Posted by Jalapenoman (Member # 6575) on :
quote:Good point. I cannot think of a case that did not involve an underage girl.
I had some co-workers in Amarillo, Texas who practiced a polygamous lifestyle. The man was being supported by his two wifes (they were also supporting all six children). The women, both very open minded and seemingly intelligent, did not act as wallflowers. One was from a normal home in San Antonio and had been a homecoming queen. The other was from Dallas and had a degree in accounting. Neither had gotten involved with him until their 20's.
The stereotypical woman in such a relationship is an uneducated younger woman or girl who is forced on the man by her parents. She is generally not assertive and is a wallflower. THis description did not fit either of these two women. Both had been with him over five years and treated each other as sisters and best friends.
The man also was not charismatic. He looked, dressed, and smelled like a truck driver who had been on the road for a week.
The man was legally married to his first wife in the United States. He had been married to his second wife in Mexico and said that the marriage was not valid here, but that they were "married in their hearts and in the sight of God."
To this day, I have no idea why this relationship exists. All I know is that is works for those involved and they claim to be happy with it.
When they found out that I was LDS and curious, we had a couple of long discussions about their situation and about my church's history (they were not part of any LDS splinter group and attended a local Church of Christ).
My main problem with the whole situation was that he was a lazy bum that was allowing these women to support him, not the fact that he had two wifes.
[ June 10, 2004, 09:57 PM: Message edited by: Jalapenoman ]
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
See, I wouldn't prosecute those guys. I mean, they're not living by the standards of my faith, but they also don't belong to it, so that hardly matters As long as it doesn't involve cult-like exploitation, it really is none of my business.
Posted by michaele8 (Member # 6608) on :
A Rat Named Dog,
Again, as an LDS person I do not agree with the use of drugs but that doesn't mean I want to throw my co-workers in jail, or whip them in public like the Muslims do, if they drink alcohol. The polygamists who are splinter LDS groups believe they are doing God's will. Do we have a right to attack them?
Posted by RRR (Member # 6601) on :
Do you think statutory rape is wrong?
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
A lot of people believe a lot of things are God's will. It doesn't automatically absolve them of the consequences of their actions. I think it's reasonable to expect that our fellow citizens show a degree of conscience along with their faith.
Posted by Nato (Member # 1448) on :
quote:michael8 said: Again, as an LDS person I do not agree with the use of drugs but that doesn't mean I want to throw my co-workers in jail, or whip them in public like the Muslims do, if they drink alcohol. The polygamists who are splinter LDS groups believe they are doing God's will. Do we have a right to attack them?
So, in two sentences you condemn Muslims in general for whipping people in public (as they believe God wants them to), and you defend LDS spliter polygamists because they believe they are doing God's will?
Posted by michaele8 (Member # 6608) on :
Who is condemning Muslims? In many Muslim nations a person caught drinking alcohol is whiped in public -- is that condemnation? They cane people in Singapore -- now have I condemned people in Singapore?
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
[ June 11, 2004, 07:33 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
So michaele, let me see if I understand you correctly. Are you trying to say that individuals who hold any kind of religious beliefs should be prohibited from making rules against the practices of other religions, regardless of what those religions' practices are?
Personally, I don't feel there is an automatic equivalence between the beliefs of one religion and those of another. It is actually possible, believe it or not, for a religion to be wrong, and some instances of being wrong are more dangerous than others. As a society, we have an obligation to maintain order, prevent crime, and thus give every citizen a chance to pursue happiness.
The state has no right to tell religions what to believe, what to preach, and to a certain extent, what to practice. But when religious people begin to severely infringe on the rights of others, they should not be allowed to use their religion as a shield to evade the consequences of their behavior. The only way to have equality in this nation is for all people to share the same accountability for their actions. Neither race, nor religion, nor ethnic or economic background should absolve an individual of their obligation to show a degree of decency and conscience.
The same goes for my ancestors. Leaving the United States to practice polygamy was a good idea, because the government really did have some solid footing when they suspected us of doing something wrong. I believe that the claims against us were severely exaggerated in a lot of cases, but if the government believed that we were doing something very harmful, then they did, in fact, have an obligation to pursue the matter. I don't blame them at all for that, nor do I think the present generation of Mormons should be blamed for a similar, much better-founded reaction to modern polygamists.
Posted by solo (Member # 3148) on :
Hey Geoff, did your ancestors found Cardston, Alberta? I seem to remember hearing that somewhere but never knew if it was true or not.
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
Yeah, they did. Partially for this very reason Charles Ora Card had three wives, and he was near the top of the US Marshals' list. Had to go somewhere.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: What do you think of a person who smokes marijuana but then gives it up and then promotes a petition drive to throw people in jail for using marijuana?
I would think that this person has had a change of heart, and is doing what they thing is best. I would assume that he's seen both sides of the issue, and has a more informed opinion about the matter.
But, like Dog said, it's not a good parallel to the polygamy situation.
Posted by Jalapenoman (Member # 6575) on :
I lived in El Paso, Texas for almost thirty years. The LDS population in the town is mostly descended from the Mormon polygamists who went into Mexico. "The Colonies" (Colonia Juarez and Colonia Dublan, among others) are 200 miles deep into Mexico and look like any othe small town farming community in the U.S.A.. I have many friends who can still remember their multiple grandmothers.
Also, many of the young people from the Colonies will go to UTEP or BYU to find a spouse as it is hard to find anyone down there who is not a "cousin."
Posted by Yozhik (Member # 89) on :
quote:So, um, does this mean that michael's NOT a troll? Because, to be honest, that's why I haven't ripped him a new one yet; I've just been ignoring him.
I'm not so sure you were wrong, Tom.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'll believe he's not a troll when he makes an honest intro thread.
Posted by St. Yogi (Member # 5974) on :
quote: Okay, I am active LDS and live in Europe, although originally from California. Have 7 kids, love the outdoors and love to travel. Politically, I am somewhat moderate on economics, somewhat libertarian on religion and free speech issues and one of those anti-globalist individualists. I see big government and big business as potentially just as bad -- although I am firmly anti-communist as I have visited many sites in Russia where they used to execute people by the thousands. I enjoy a wide range of activities -- I can find myself feeling at home at a hippie gathering, a hot spring or a rodeo or shooting range. I would say my favorite personalities that I like in recnet times would be Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Brigham Young and Boyd K. Packer.
There you go.
[ June 12, 2004, 09:38 AM: Message edited by: St. Yogi ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*nods* Okay. Thanks. Was this on the other side? I didn't see it before.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
My great-grandmother used to talk about hiding in the corn-fields when the federal agents came to her father's house. When they broke up the polygamist families, the father could be thrown in jail if they maintained any contact with their old family. She did not break off contact with her father, but they couldn't let the feds know that.
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)