Deseret News | LDS again stress the difference from FLDS

Reader comments
LDS again stress the difference from FLDS

168 comments | Read story

Page:
< Previous
1
2
3
4

to jennifer et al | 9:47 p.m. April 20, 2008

I can't remember any discussion in SS about polygamy, at least any indepth discussion. Can you tell us what lesson plan you discussed it from?

To the YW leader who boasts that she hasn't been released even though she teaches her class false doctrine...that's something to be proud of. How arrogant of you to tell the Lord that He was wrong 150 years ago...maybe a little humility on your part would be great...what else do you tell your YW that you don't agree with? If your bishop actually agrees with you, and I highly doubt that he does, he is placating you...

I don't really understand how you women of today are all upset about polygamy of the past.... why not worry about your marriage today and let the hereafter take care of itself...maybe by then everyone will have been sanctified a little more to the point that we actually turn our wills over to Christ and what He wants from us, not our own wills....

to all of you who are saying the LDS church isn't doing anything for the FLDS, do you have any clue what is happening there by the church or not? Thought so...

Jeff | 10:44 p.m. April 20, 2008

Amazed, where in the heck do you get the idea that the LDS church should have to embrace the FLDS church in the first place? They are the ones that chose to leave the LDS church when they outlawed polygamy. The LDS church has every right to distance itself from the FLDS, especially since many people mistakenly assume that the FLDS and the LDS are one in the same. If you are so worried about religions embracing the FLDS and doing something to protect them then why isn't the Baptist church doing more than lending its busses to cart these poor imprisoned FLDS to their prison? It was fine for them to have their name plastered all over the globe when they lent their busses, but that is where it stops eh? Whatever origins and similarities we shared with the FLDS stopped when they left the church and started their own offshot. I sympathize with their problem, and I am a very vocal supporter, but that should not be expected.

Jeff | 10:55 p.m. April 20, 2008

Oh LDS person, you apparently are nothing more than a troll. The church has a responsiblity to help people understand the differences between the FLDS and the LDS. You make it sound as if no LDS members are interested in the plight of the FLDS, which is far from the truth. The LDS church has handled this approriately in my opinion, and its members care greatly about the plight of the FLDS.

Comments continue below

It is about time: | 11:03 p.m. April 20, 2008

1. That the government breaks up polygamy and the pain that it brings women and children - in Texas, Utah (still happening), and the rest of the U.S.

2. That "Mormons" are exposed for the double standard they live, I.E., carrying around scriptures that state women must live the law of "Sarah" to reach "Heaven" found in D&C 132 where women are condemened to hell if they do not accept their husband bringing another women into their marriage - But then say that they do not practice polygamy. Do they or do they not practice it?

3. That "Mormon" history is shared with the faithful followers - The history that shows that J.S., B.Y., and the past Apostles practiced polygamy just like the Texans. I.E., marrying very young girls. All of them did it and I want to know why I have not been told of their practices over the past 50 years of being a Mormon woman.

4. That you tell me the truth as a Morman woman. I am bothered that I hear this from Non-Mormons. The bretheren need to control the message AGAIN by sharing the truth - with me!!! Please

chris | 9:53 a.m. April 21, 2008

Did the Flds leave the church or did the LDS church leave them? Many of the founders of the FLDS had spent years in prison, suffered from the loss of their families and in the end were abandoned by those in SLC that did not want to lose their status, wealth and comfort. Read the manifesto, it states clearly, that the fear of loss was greater then staying true to section 132. I laugh at the story that polygamy was just a solution to take care of widows. Please! The goal was to build the kingdom as quickly as possible. Consenting adults 18 and over should be able to marry who they want. I wonder what would happen if the Law of the Land allowed Polygamy?

To Jennifer & More | 12:38 p.m. April 21, 2008

I'm active LDS. LDS members who feel "maybe" Joseph Smith mistakenly introduced polygamy have not studied its history and do not understand its foundation and to profess to be active members with testimonies, while harboring such thoughts, puts you at risk. They really are suffering from a form of "cognitive dissonance" - professing one thing (Church is true), while believing another (Joseph Smith and Brigham Young fell into evil ways).

It is talked about in Sunday School (check out manuals for OT and D&C/Church History available online).

I think it is GREAT that all this discussion is taking place (though my heart goes out to the abused and deprived children in TX). We need to confidently declare we believe the revelations and that God has sanctioned in the past and may in the future, the practice of plural marriage. Christ himself came through lineage from a plural marriage. Sure, many are "embarassed" by the practice and want to hide from it or surpress it, but it is part of our history. I'm a convert and researched this when I joined and prayed about it. It's not something we should hide not hide from.

How Plural Marriage is practice | 12:49 p.m. April 21, 2008

Those who believe the "way" in which polygamy is practiced by this particular closed community is identical to the way in which the LDS church practiced polygamy in the 1800's are mistaken. Study some firsthand accounts (many, not just one you come across on the internet). For instance, there were not MASS expulsions of young men that had reached "marrying age" as is done in Bountiful BC and in Utah/Arizona. This is perhaps one of the more absurd thing that is done and a clear example of not practicing polygamy under inspired priesthood leadership. Selfishly practiced in a cult leads to an unsustainable social structure (too many men....)

Chris Plummer | 4:53 p.m. April 21, 2008

seems to me that the LDS church says the term 'Mormon' is a nickname... because of the Book of Mormon (which the FLDS church reads and believes in as well, so the nickname fits them too). The LDS church prefer the name "the Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints."

So the question is who gets to trademark the nickname "Mormons?" I don't think you can do that. Technically both groups are Mormons... FLDS and LDS is how you tell them apart.

ANGEL | 7:57 a.m. April 22, 2008

THIS COMMENT IS IN RESPONSE TO ALL OF YOU. THE LDS CHURCH IS DIFFERENT FROM THE FLDS CHURCH. NO LDS DO NOT LIKE TO BE CALLED MORMONS BECAUSE IT IS NOT THE CHURCH OF MORMON IT IS THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST BUT WHEN YOUR CHURCH IS SO WELL KNOWN BY THE NAME THEN YES IT IS OFFENSIVE

Very Confused | 12:53 p.m. April 22, 2008

There is something that is confusing me. LDS faithful no longer practice polygamy or plural marriage. I fully understand that. However, isn't only because the abandonment of polygamy was a condition of statehood for Utah? LDS faithful and the doctrine of the LDS church still hold that plural marriage is a doctrine that will be practiced again. They beleive that a man can be married and sealed celestially to more than one woman. So...my confusion is this...why the fuss from the LDS church? It is still something they believe in.

Oh Please | 4:04 p.m. April 22, 2008

The LDS church does not mind the use of the word mormon or their link would not be mormon dot org.

... | 10:40 p.m. April 22, 2008

God works with us and world events...and the forces of nature...so why is it so difficult to believe that He might give the LDS a break and rescind polygamy just in time to receive statehood? Why is it so difficult to accept polygamy in the eternities when Abraham and Jacob had other wives? It becomes ugly when God does not approve of it at times and people break the laws of God and the nation they live in.

to Chris | 10:57 p.m. April 22, 2008

Read the book Shattered Dreams, written by a wife who got away from FLDS...she said the whole group was started by the LaBarons and then splinter groups broke off into the different states. These people blatantly went against the counsel of the LDS leadership and have reaped nothing but sadness.

And why is so hard | 8:03 a.m. April 23, 2008

To accept that your religion was wrong? It is really convenient for people to make excuses for bad behavior which is what polygamy is. Let's move on into the 21st century and leave these bad behaviors behind.

Anonymous | 11:47 p.m. April 23, 2008

You have no idea what God is thinking or any of His ways...I don't either, so don't tell me my religion is wrong. We're going to have to wait and see. It doesn't matter what century we are in because God lives in an eternal state.

Dennis | 8:49 a.m. April 25, 2008

To Anonymous,

Yes, I'm sure that we just don't understand God's eternal perspective. I'm sure that there will come a time when we realize that the genocide in the Old Testament was really a good thing; and we will understand how multiple child-brides for each man is the height of righteousness; and we will someday know for certain that the entire human race will be better off just mindlessly "following the Brethren" like a bunch of clones. It is this appeal to ignorance (pawned off as "faith") that is SOOOO dangerous!

Jean | 12:46 p.m. April 25, 2008

I just have one simple question that I would like an honest answer to. What is the LDS stand on Polygamy? I have been told that the LDS Religion believes this lifestyle will be practiced in Heaven. And how many LDS members would stay in the religion if they knew this.

Greg | 10:07 p.m. May 7, 2008

To Jean: Please read Isaiah 4: Thanks!

Page:
< Previous
1
2
3
4

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.