Comments about ‘Amy Choate-Nielsen: Mormons say polygamy morally wrong, Pew poll shows’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Jan. 15 2012 7:00 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Krissi
Phoenix, AZ

Hmmm . . . but according to Brigham Young - "The only men who become Gods, even the sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy" (Journal of Discourses 11:269). SO which is it?

It's not the only part of their doctrine that is wrong. BTW - Prevalence does not imply permission - just because it "happened" in the Old Testament does not mean God ordained it. In fact, the first instance came through the evil line of Cain and it ALWAYS resulted in discord and sin.

Cowboy Dude
SAINT GEORGE, UT

We are not Gods in the Celestial Kingdom. That is so far beyond Heaven I cannot comprehend it nor do I need to be preoccupied by it.

Eternity is a really really long time. Line upon line, precept upon precept.

Razzle2
Bluffdale, UT

The "Journal of Discourses" is not canonized as LDS scripture.
B. Young also said, "The woman's place is in the store" because men were used primarily for manual labor. A prophet for the time does not always utter as prophet to the eternities.

Cowboy Dude
SAINT GEORGE, UT

Razzle2 said, "A prophet for the time does not always utter as prophet to the eternities."

Agreed or else we would have no need for modern day prophets. Wilford Woodruff and Gordan B. Hinkley denounced polygamy. (Just as the Book of Mormon)

JKayDS
EULESS, TX

I am an active LDS mature(age wise) woman, I do not have a problem with polygamy.
The fact that the church at one time practiced it is not a hindrance to my testimony but is something that makes it ever stronger. We are told that this is the dispensation of the FULLNESS of time. All things are to be restored. For how long is up to God himself. If the church practice of sealing more then one woman to a man (one at a time) then so what.. It will not be on this earth that they will be practicing polygamy and I would like to see all you nay sayers telling the God of this universe that it is wrong and He cannot do it.
I know MANY wonderful single women that will never know the joy of an intimate relationship in this life and never know what it is like to hold her child and raise him/her where if polygamy were still legal they could.
The church stopped the pratice in the US because it became the against the law in America. It was not illegal in Mexico and other places.

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

The Lord has always taught the polgamy is wrong unless he has directed it. It was directed to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. It was not allowed to be practiced by the Nephites yet during their most wicked times it was. Read the Book of Mormon if you doubt me on that.

Brahamabull: I've gone through the transcripts of the so called time President Hinkley stated such and that quote is no where in the transcripts which comes from CBS and CNN.

As John Lambert states it really isn't polgamy if one is sealed again in the temple after his wife has died to another women. As also noted, Journal of Discourses are not formal LDS teachings. For the most part the Journal of Discourses are third and fourth hand statements made by the prophets. This is why they are not held as teachings. They may be referenced but any LDS who uses them must know they are not sactioned as true teachings. Many of you should really read, ROUGH STONE ROLLING by Bushman to gain a greater understanding of Joseph Smith's polgamy. You can't try a man based on today's morality for 1840.

Semper Fi
BAKERSFIELD, CA

Man, these comments are priceless. I need go no further to prove my point to my evangelical friends. You can't make this stuff up.

The Biblical facts:
First God gives Adam one wife and equips them with all they need to obey His words. Then about 1,000 years later, Abraham and Sarah mess up, suffer consequences for which Jews and Arabs still suffer. Isaac learned from his dad's mistake, (sorry Joseph, Isaac was not a polygamist). Jacob causes problems in his household by giving in to cultural norms, but God still makes His pact with him. Then God comes out and has Moses set it straight again (Deut. 17:17). David and Solomon deviate and get scolded right in the text, "for multiplying wives, horses, gold and silver". The Lord gave David "wives to care for", (no explanation or Avenging Angel over him), but he gets scolded by the prophet Nathan.

No Biblical prophet got ordered on pain of death to take a 2nd wife. But 4 centuries later the Apostle Paul tells Timothy exactly how God wants His leaders to live in monogamy.

Permitted, always discouraged. Like Jesus' explanation on divorce. Free agency is a weighty responsibility.

hermounts
Pleasanton, CA

I wonder what the Brethren in Salt Lake might think needs to be corrected based on these survey results? 26% don't think homosexuality is morally wrong? Maybe some of those were thinking of same-sex attraction itself, rather than homosexual acts.

Canyontreker
TAYLORSVILLE, UT

Practice polygamy in Mexico and you will be excommunicated from the Church. Are you saying the Church is wrong?

Mayfair
City, Ut

Bill in Nebraska said, "Brahamabull: I've gone through the transcripts of the so called time President Hinkley stated such and that quote is no where in the transcripts which comes from CBS and CNN."

It is in the transcript of President Hinckely's appearance on Larry King Live, which aired September 8, 1998:

"Gordon B. Hinckley: I condemn it, yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal..."

scojos
Draper, UT

Most Mormons I know think that obeying the law of the land was the reason for polygamy to be oblished. It wasn't a moral issue, it was a legal issue.The Manifesto said nothing about the morality of the issue. Quite the contrary, the Prophet actually informed all, after his revelation, that those who were already in polygamous relationships could remain , so that Mormonism could and would "honor" the families already united in polygamy. Ergo, if the revelation was about obeying the law of the land and if the revelation said polygamy was immoral then the Prophet could not have advised and sought permission from man and/or God to allow those already in a polygamous relationship permission to continue.Neither the revelation nor the prophet said anything about the inmorality of polygamy.If the Prophet had made a statement that polygamy was immoral then then those who stayed in the polygamous relationship did so at the peril of ascension into the Celestial Kingdom. Which all of reading this post knows DID NOT HAPPEN.

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

Yes, President Hinkley said it so what. Fact is also that he said. "I think it is not doctrinal, which is an opinion, not doctrine itself." He is allowed to give his opinion. Fact is he also said we don't practice it now. That also is true. Why, he said it is anyone's guess, but it doesn't change my belief in him being a prophet of God, or that he had a mission to accomplish. Those things stand. When he said THINK, he was no longer speaking as a prophet but a man just as anyone else. That is my opinion.

Brahmabull
sandy, ut

Mayfair - thank you, you beat me to the punch.

Bill in Nebraska - you searched so hard, yet you couldn't find that quote? It took me 3 seconds to find it. Just another example of how you look to deceive by saying that my sources are incorrect. Then, after Mayfair tells you where the quote is from you change your story back to the "opinion" thing. Well, if the opinion of the highest authority in the LDS church can't be counted as doctrine then NO statement by any general authority is ever doctrine. Again, you can't have it both ways, either they speak for god or they don't. Then I suppose all of the talks given in conference are opinion too, right?

lds4gaymarriage
Salt Lake City, UT

Semper Fi
David and Solomon deviate and get scolded right in the text, "for multiplying wives, horses, gold and silver". The Lord gave David "wives to care for", (no explanation or Avenging Angel over him), but he gets scolded by the prophet Nathan.

LDS4
In 2 Sam 12:7-12, God reprimands David for his adultery and reminds David that He (God) was the one that gave David his wives and also said that if they weren't enough, He (God) would have given him more. God then says that as punishment, God was to take those wives from him and would give them to another INDIVIDUAL man who was to lie with them in the sun.

If polygamy were wrong, God wouldn't have given David those wives nor offered to give David even more. Nor would God have turned around and given those women as wives to another INDIVIDUAL man.

1 Tim. 3:2 says that a bishop should only have one wife. This shows that polygamy was allowed in the early Church. If not, why would Paul mention that restriction if polygamy was regarded as sinful?

no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

Hope it's ok that I send all of this to the News Media for the next couple of Presidential debates.
Should be such fun!

lds4gaymarriage
Salt Lake City, UT

Brahmabull
..if the opinion of the highest authority in the LDS church can't be counted as doctrine then NO statement by any general authority is ever doctrine. Again, you can't have it both ways, either they speak for god or they don't. Then I suppose all of the talks given in conference are opinion too, right?

LDS4
Correct. Harold B. Lee and Joseph Fielding Smith both stated that if they say anything contrary to scripture, that scripture prevails and that their own words are to be rejected. The Brethren have stated that only scripture is the official doctrine of the Church and for anything to be on the level of scripture, that it has to be declared as a revelation and then brought to the Church for a sustaining vote via Common Consent as was done when Sections 137 & 138 were done in 1976.

The Brethren have stated that anything anyone says that scripture doesn't address, then it is only their opinion.

The bottom line is that if anything isn't sustained by the Church via Common Consent, it is NOT official Church doctrine. It is someone's private opinion and is NOT binding upon the Church as doctrine.

JoeBlow
Miami Area, Fl

"that it has to be declared as a revelation and then brought to the Church for a sustaining vote via Common Consent"

So, to make sure I understand.

The prophet gets a "revelation" from God, and it is then put to vote?

Does anyone know if some "revelations" get "voted down"?

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

Canyontreker says:

"Wilford Woodruff was an LDS prophet too and abolished the practice from the Church when it had no more purpose as a survival tool in the lone wilderness. "

---

That is one of the things I was taught as an active Mormon. It was untrue however. Every census in Utah from the time Mormons first arrived until 1900 indicate that there were always more MEN in Utah than women. Polygamy never was about "protecting the women and children". Never.

---
Canyontreker says:

"Those are examples of relations that started before the LDS ban. True, the Church did not break up the existing families, but new plural marriages did not take place after the 1890 manifesto in the LDS temples."

---
That's just splitting hairs. Living with multiple women, having children with them, is STILL practicing polygamy.

scotchipman
Lehi, UT

@lds4gaymarriage, You said "The bottom line is that if anything isn't sustained by the Church via Common Consent, it is NOT official Church doctrine. It is someone's private opinion and is NOT binding upon the Church as doctrine." If this is true then the Mormon church has A LOT of doctrine that is not official that I don't even know where to start!

@Bill in Nebraska, I just wanted to say that anyone looking for true church history is not going to find it by reading the Rough Stone Rolling by Bushman. Bushman is a well know church apologist that is only going to come to one conclusion in support of the church. Do a google search for "Mormon think" which is a more objective look at Mormon facts, scriptures, history, controversies, and contradictions much of it written by open-minded, active Mormons.

O'really
Idaho Falls, ID

@ scotchipman "If they are learned they think they are wise." Only Heavenly Father has all the answers and the whole vision and understanding of what has happened, who said what and what will transpire in the future to further His kingdom. To try to put the puzzle of Church history together in our own mortal minds is a sure step away from faith and towards apostacy. Basing our testimonies only on what we think happened in the past leaves us open for misinterpretation, taking statements out of context and relying to heavily on other imperfect individuals who made mistakes. For example, when President Hinckley said he didn't believe polygamy was doctrinal, did he then clarify by saying "it never has been", or "it isn't right now?" He was speaking to someone on national TV who wasn't a member of the church and wouldn't understand on a spiritual level much about church doctrine, nor did he have the time to delve into the intricasies of how polygamy worked in the church in the 1800s.

We need to see these issues more with spiritual eyes and humble hearts. Rest assured Christ is in control of His church today.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments