Comments about ‘Is LDS polygamy history relevant to 2012 campaign?’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Jan. 18 2012 1:58 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

Taboo subject will be revealed, discussed, twisted, turned, etc. to the Nth degree.
You can count on it!

Thinkman
Provo, UT

Doctrine and Covenants section 132. Go read it and tell me the LDS Church doesn't still adhere to the principle of polygamy. Will it be relevant in 2012 campaign? Likely no and shouldn't be.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

When Rick Santorum changed the subject when college students asked him about gay marriage, Rick Santorum instead chose to talk about polygamy.

Many of my friends on the FB asked me 'Is that a shot at Romney?'

Here is how I look at it: 'If the LDS church is NOT polygamys, then 'no' it would not APPLY to the lds church, correct?'

While Utah was the final state to deny polygamy, it was done. In 1890.

Even Amendment 3 in the Utah constitution changed marriage from 'two people' to 'one man and one woman' in 2004.

It is the EXAMPLES like 'Sister wives' and examples of the FLDS that promote the idea that the LDS church still supports polygamy.

Not, 'liberal propaganda.'

xscribe
Colorado Springs, CO

Polygamy has zero relevance to Romney or his presidential bid. However, with that said, it will be relevant because people (media) will make it an issue. It might be a plus for the church, however, as an explanation of that belief from Mitt to millions may put the myth to rest once and for all for the church.

Gramajane
OAKLEY, ID

Since the Bible shows most all OT prophets practicing plural marriage and so Jesus has it in his mothers ancestors, and the Bible does not speak against it, but does say not to marry out of the faith, plus the Bible speaks against adultery in all it's forms ( pre marital sex is one form) --- I hardly think Evangelicals have a leg to stand on to condem Anyone for his ancestors Biblically condoned actions.
There is not supposed to be any religious test.

Razzle2
Bluffdale, UT

@Thinkman "Doctrine and Covenants section 132. Go read it and tell me the LDS Church doesn't still adhere to the principle of polygamy."

OK, I read it. The LDS Church does not adhere to the principle of polygamy in any country legal or illegal. If you practice it you will be excommunicated.

Now go read the Book of Mormon and see the affirmation of polygamy's immorality.

JP71
Ogden, UT

Its becoming a common misconception among LDS that polygamy was bad and that it was discredited by LDS leaders. The LDS Church stopped practicing polygamy to follow the laws of the land. No Church leader has ever stated that the Church was wrong in practicing polygamy and they never will.

Razzle2
Bluffdale, UT

Rick Santorum's reference between Gay Marriage and Polygamy was not a swipe at Romney, although convenient.

His argument was that if you change the definition of marriage of one man and one woman, how far done the slippery slope do we go?

Polygamy will be the next debate and then the next debate will be there is no definition for marriage at all.

FatherOfFour
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

While the LDS church no longer practices polygamy, it is still practiced by quite a large group within Utah as well as Arizona and Colorado. At the same time, most people do not know the differences between FLDS and LDS. They are as big as the differences between Baptists and Southern Baptists (which is quite a big difference, unless you aren't familiar with the two religions).

Right or wrong, polygamy will play a part in the 2012 campaign. Gay marriage is a hot button topic that gets a ton of media attention. But polygamy continues on in Utah and even grows from year to year. It just doesn't get the media attention. Expect that to change soon. Also expect legislators that were quick to pass laws regarding gay marriage to suddenly jump on the enforcement bandwagon with regards to polygamy as the campaign season gets rolling.

Thinkman
Provo, UT

Razzle2,

The LDS Church does practice polygamy. It may not be a practice in "this life" but the doctrine is still in place as it relates to the celestial kingdom.

Joseph Smith needed a revelation to justify his taking on more wives than Emma. Wilford Woodruff needed a revelation to justify his staying out of jail and providing a way for Utah to become a State.

Wilford Woodruff, nor has any president of the LDS Church since, rescinded the doctrine of polygamy (aka plural marriage). Go read the LDS KJV Bible Dictionary (aka, Bruce R Mckonkie's Mormon Doctrine). You will see that I am right.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Does it go on unchecked with a nudge and a wink in Colorado city and hildale?

mightymite
DRAPER, UT

Mitt will loase this argument every time. Mormons created this mess and cannot wipe the history under the rug like they would like.

kargirl
Sacramento, CA

Assuming the question of polygamy didn't state which side of the veil was being referred to, one could say, yes, the Church still does believe in, and practice plural marriage. Not in this life, perhaps, however, but how many of our male members are sealed to more than one spouse? Without going into detail, there is much in our scripture telling us the polygamy question is not over, and in this country it is a question of the law, not of the Church's doctrine. I don't presume to know about other countries where multiple wives are legal. But if it does come up, I'm sure--I hope--the requirements surrounding the practice at the time, which kept it to a minimum and called for accountability from the men involved, will also be brought up. The trouble with living by the sound byte is, nothing is really understood as it should be, because no one takes the time to pay attention to the other person's thoughts. Each is too busy thinking up his own sound byte.

no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

What did I tell you?
The story of it all will go on and on and on...

The Deuce
Livermore, CA

I am still trying to figure out the relevance of this article to Romney and the campaign. This is old news at best and has been well discussed for years. It has nothing to do with selecting a candidate and helping America get things going in the right direction. I can read the history books to know about polygamy. What this has to do with politics now still is a mystery to me. Let's focus on how these candidates will make changes and help Americans. I am tired of hearing these side-shows. Show me the beef and how we are going to make America great again.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

It shouldn't be relevant though if I were a betting man I have to think at some point if it hasn't already happened Romney's going to get stuck with a "do you condemn Joseph Smith and Brigham Young's polygamous practices?" type question by someone who wants to trap him in a lose/lose situation.

Michigander
Westland, MI

Romney's tax returns going back to 1984 are just as important.

very concerned
Sandy, UT

There is not enough space to write it here, but anyone can become clearer in his or her understanding and discussion of polygamy if he reads the "Manifesto" and accompanying excerpts from additional talks by Willford Woodruff on the subject. Taken at face value, they are powerful witnesses to his prophetic calling.

These writings can put a lot of controversy and personal interpretations to rest. They can be found at the end of the Doctrine and Covenants published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints. They are only 2-3 pages long but suffice to give an accurate description of why and how the practice was discontinued.

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

Actually to those who think the LDS Church wants to wash this under the rug are wrong. At NO TIME has the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day-Saints apologized for their practice of polgamy, nor do I ever see it being done.

By the way as much as some would like to have it said, MORMON DOCTRINE is not formal LDS Church Doctrine, nor should it ever be construed as such. Though I may agree with it I don't endorse all of it. However, I do believe that polgamy will at some time be practiced again and when done under the direction of the Priesthood of God, will be fine. Those who condemn it because of the FLDS do not understand it nor do they wish to understand it. It is my opinion that the Lord was already in the process of rescinding the practice of polgamy before the legislature and courts interviened.

If it was to be put back in force, though I feel inadequate to do so I would adhere to the voice of the Prophet of the Lord, hands down.

Remember ONLY 2% of all members ever practiced polgamy.

What in Tucket?
Provo, UT

The demographics of the time the Church was in its early phase required polygamy. 15 religions failed because they had too few men. After a generation or two demographics improved and polygamy was not longer necessary. You would have to search a long time to find a member in favor of polygamy now. Of course bigamy is not unheard of.

to comment

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