LDS again stress the difference from FLDS

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • fictionwriter1961 Kings Mountain, NC
    Oct. 21, 2017 10:54 p.m.

    I do not understand a lot of the division of these two religions. But doesn't the FLDS still take a lot or most of their teaching from the Book of Mormon? Or have they just re-written their own bible? If they do take it from the Book of Mormon, is it straight from the text, or do they ditort the text in some way?
    Just a curious writer.
    Susanne

  • Leester utah, UT
    Feb. 14, 2016 12:31 p.m.

    I don't understand the difference between FLDS and LDS and why one is a cult and the other is not. The only difference I see in religion, practice, culture, etc. is that FLDS continues to practice polygamy and the LDS only teaches about polygamy as doctrine.

  • Greg
    May 7, 2008 10:07 p.m.

    To Jean: Please read Isaiah 4: Thanks!

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

    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.

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

    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!

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

    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.

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

    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.

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

    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.

  • ...
    April 22, 2008 10:40 p.m.

    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.

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

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

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

    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.

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

    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

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

    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.

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

    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....)

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

    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.

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

    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?

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

    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

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

    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.

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

    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.

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

    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...

  • Andrea
    April 20, 2008 9:11 p.m.

    Re 6:48

    Dear Friend,

    I also feel the same as you and Janet. I cannot tolerate the polygamy issue. I was born and raised LDS and have ancestors who practiced plural marriage. My husband is still active, but I am not. I have been inactive for 3 years. Polygamy is WRONG! and I left the church because I believe Plural Marriage is all a big lie.

  • Just my 2 cents
    April 20, 2008 8:57 p.m.

    Does anyone know for a fact that the LDS church is NOT doing something to offer support or help of any kind?! As far as Polygamy in the history of the LDS church goes, it happened. I know for a fact that I wouldn't exist it not for it. Neither would my grandparents, parents, siblings, or my children.
    We seem to talk about Polygamy like it was a church wide activity when in reality only a small percentage actually practiced it. And, of those who did practice it, most didn't have more than 2 wives.
    Now, I personally couldn't live the law of polygamy, but I can easily say that because it is not part of our teaching. However, I believe Joseph Smith was commanded to take plural wives. He received the revelation a couple of years before he actually began practicing it. HE DIDN'T WANT TO DO IT! He knew it wouldn't be received well. Only God knows why he was commanded to do it. However, we do find it in the Bible. Look at King David for example. He had many wives and concubines, but he got in trouble for taking the one he wasn't given!

  • To Janet and To Jennifer
    April 20, 2008 8:22 p.m.

    Maybe Jacob should abandon Leah as his plural wife that way Christ would not be of the house of Isreal

  • G
    April 20, 2008 7:51 p.m.

    Beckstrand in Bakersfield:

    "If the LDS church put a stop to it really, instead of turning their heads the other way, it would keep, the keep sweet abuse, lost boys, and welfare and medicare fraud abuse from happening."


    Ah, but the LDS church *did* try to put a stop to polygamy. Go read the Wiki page on the "Short Creek Raid". The church supported that atrocity publicly, and was stamped on the foot for it when the media got wind of the cruelty involved. That was the end of LDS support of anti-polygamy raids. And rightly so, in my opinion.

    Funny how the church gets blamed now for Utah not kicking in every polygamist compound in the state. Some people will criticize the church no matter what it does.

  • What's the Secret?
    April 20, 2008 7:42 p.m.

    I noticed another difference between the FLDS and the LDS.

    The FLDS are SKINNY.

    I hope they come out with a diet book/cookbook!

  • to Janet
    April 20, 2008 6:48 p.m.

    I am in the same tormented boat that you are. I have considered leaving LDS faith because of polygamy and my husband is a bishop. Do others in our church feel the same. I feel very alone and scared to voice my feelings on this.

  • Robo force
    April 20, 2008 6:10 p.m.

    Steve
    Did someone take your fingers and push them down on your computer keyboard? I really feel sorry for you. I hope that you can live a normal life someday without someone telling you what to say and do. Thats only if you are truly a little boy. Tell your daddy he needs to let you think and breath on your own, along with all your little sisters.

  • latter day saint...
    April 20, 2008 5:48 p.m.

    i am grateful that i am a member of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints.i do agree with what one of the comments said. for those who are confused about these news reports ask a friend who maybe a member of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints. look at the church website or ask a neighbor or an LDS missionary. im sure they can answer the questions you have been longing to ask.

  • To Jennifer
    April 20, 2008 5:38 p.m.

    I have to agree with Jennifer. Most LDS cringe about the subject of polygamy. I have been in many discussions in sunday school about this subject. I am a young women's leader and I teach the girls that polygamy is wrong now and it was wrong 150 years ago. An upset parent went to my bishop and he backed me up (I still haven't been released 4 years later). I have seen two LDS girls from our area join up with the FLDS. I think the LDS church needs to abandon its practice of defending polygamy in the past.

  • Steve
    April 20, 2008 5:21 p.m.

    As someone who has been asked repeatedly about how many mothers I have (can you believe it?), I am glad the Church is doing something to dispel the erroneous beliefs of ignorant Americans and Europeans. But no matter how much the Church does it will not be enough, because the media love to improve ratings and sales with the salacious.

  • Jared
    April 20, 2008 4:15 p.m.

    The LDS church needs to keep their nose out of this one. It can only bring condemnation to a religion that is already scorned over polygamy. Don't touch the poison. It will kill you.

  • Georgia
    April 20, 2008 1:13 p.m.

    Some of you who state the LDS Church and FLDS Church have very little in common are either being comedic or are ignorant.

    Think it through. Which religion out there professes Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and John Taylor were God's prophets?

    That's right--the LDS Church and various LDS splinter groups. Even the RLDS Church only recognizes Joseph Smith as a prophet.

    Which churches recognize The Book of Mormon, Doctrine & Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price as the word of God?

    That's right--the LDS Church and its offshoots.

    Which "Christian" churches practiced polygamy during the last 150 years (including the marriage of girls under the age of 18)?

    Once again, the LDS Church and splinter groups from it (except the RLDS).

    Which "Christian" churches build "temples?"

    The LDS Church and its variants.

    I regard the LDS variant church members as "Mormons," just as I do myself.

    Right now, I find it puzzling that the Church wants to not allow them the privilege of being called "Mormons," while at the same time professing we ought to be recognized as "Christians" by others who feel we don't fit the mold.

  • Rulon
    April 20, 2008 11:53 a.m.

    Perhaps if the same plea might be given to the posters on here. A lot display the same ignorance. Apparently it's a human thing.

  • biblereader
    April 20, 2008 11:49 a.m.

    When the state determines what is appropriate for religious values, then where is religious freedom?

    In the world there are more cultures where woman marry as a norm in their teens and marriages are arranged, than the opposite. For that matter, the authorized practice of polygamy is common.

    The FLDS teach values we do not like, so we find excuses to persecute them. There fences could not keep us out, they were never intended to keep the believers in.

    And, for those that call this farce, right because it protects children. Please check out the reported abuse that occurs in the Texas foster care system, and for that matter foster care systems throughout the nation.

    Texas, has forever tarnished itself for any that believe and value the U.S Constitution and the 2nd amendment. But, it is doing no less than the U.S. President and congress in the 1800's. Let if never be said that this country is governed by a constitution which protects religious liberty, not now, not in the 1880's.

    For those that value constitutional law and religious freedom, Texas reminds in our land such is myth from which legends are made.

  • Beckstrand in Bakersfield
    April 20, 2008 10:55 a.m.

    Multiple Marriage is still very much apart of alot of Morman life in and around Salt lake it is an unspoke of life style that is very much alive and well. If the LDS church put a stop to it really, instead of turning their heads the other way, it would keep, the keep sweet abuse, lost boys, and welfare and medicare fraud abuse from happening. Every tax paying person in any state that continues to call these abuse's religious freedom is irresponsible and just plan sticking their head in the sand.

  • Wake up folks!!!
    April 20, 2008 10:26 a.m.

    Talk about a missed missionary opportunity! If the Church would simply volunteer to help these poor children, we might be looking at over 400 new members, not to mention some GREAT P.R.

    Couldn't they all be housed together in some college dorm, an old church, or even the MTC?

  • Just my thoughts, but
    April 20, 2008 10:21 a.m.

    Isn't it time to step up to the plate?

    Don't you LDS people think you should reach out and help the FLDS children? Wouldn't members of your faith be the most logical ones to understand their "unusual" beliefs?

  • Right out of the...
    April 20, 2008 9:20 a.m.

    Mormon playbook! Instead of comforting the FLDS people and showing compassion, love, and support the LDS church is once again trying to separate themselves. The LDS church is all about perception; how they look to others, what others think of them, etc... What an opportunity for the LDS church to... (guess what??) REACH OUT. Instead they point fingers, show how different everyone else is, and then make the point how they are justified in doing so.

    Love them as Jesus would, it's all about him anyway...Right?


    -Andrew


  • Jennifer
    April 20, 2008 8:37 a.m.

    I attend an LDS church in Utah county. I find it very hard to believe that you are 50 years old and have never heard polygamy discussed in Sunday School. I have on numerous occasions and I am 35. I believe that most people in the church share my distaste of polygamy (most women at least).

  • Jeffery T.
    April 20, 2008 7:45 a.m.

    I know that Polygamy is wrong and that is all that matters. Those who desire to go that direction in life are just lustful people following the ways of Satan.

    I have never seen so many messed up emotional people as what I have read and seen on here.

    Some of you need to ask forgiveness. The FLDS cult is nothing like LDS church.

    The FLDS people are inspired by Satan only.

  • .
    April 20, 2008 3:10 a.m.

    The LDS are advised not to even date until they are sixteen with boys near their age, and then to double date until at least 18. They are advised to concentrate on education. FLDS girls ages sixteen and under are forced to marry and bear children to older men and be one of multiple wives. Now if there isn't a difference, will someone explain that to me? Their freedom is taken from them. I have compassion for the moms and kids being separated, but who has compassion for the underage girls and the boys who are forced out of the communities?
    Joseph Smith did not want to introduce polygamy. He waited for years. It was also a common practice for people to seal themselves to prophets to take their name only and that was it.

  • Southern CA Porter Rockwell
    April 20, 2008 1:23 a.m.

    What don't you people understand? It is as easy as apples and oranges. Get it right!

  • TO JENNIFER
    April 20, 2008 12:44 a.m.

    Where are you going to church? I am 50 years old and have never seen polygamy disussed in any Sunday School class. If it's true that both your bishop and stake president said "maybe" polygamy was based on Joseph Smith's evil desires, which I highly doubt, it was only to be polite to you and to avoid further disussion. You are lucky to have leaders who are so gracious.

  • Opportunity for Service
    April 19, 2008 11:21 p.m.

    I am a member. I just want to say that I believe we as Latter-day Saints have an obligation to help correct the current "FLDS" situation. Our two traditions are born of the same roots, but theirs has obviously morphed into something terrible and sad. FLDS are our brethren and sisters, united by more than 99% of the same theology I reckon. Let us step forward to teach them that LAST 1%, which will make all the difference.

  • Evin J.
    April 19, 2008 11:13 p.m.

    To all pretenders

    How come some you active members contradict yourselves right and left-- like 10:52 P.M.. You support the leaders of your LDS church yet you say that FLDS children should be with their brainwashed mothers who only do what their husband demand and expect of them. Make some sense people! You people are the most confused, mix up, double standards, whacks on the face of the planet. None of you know what you want. You only pretend you know. By the way, I think polygamy is for heathens!

  • Lighten up
    April 19, 2008 11:08 p.m.

    Once when Mark Twain was lecturing in Utah, a Mormon acquaintance argued with him on the subject of polygamy. After a long and rather heated debate, the Mormon finally said, "Can you find for me a single passage of Scripture which forbids polygamy?"

    "Certainly," replied Twain. "'No man can serve two masters.'"

  • Anonymous
    April 19, 2008 10:52 p.m.

    Back in pioneer days, the United States had no laws against marriage for children and it was accepted in and out of the church that a thirteen year old could get married. However, the average lifespan back in pioneer days was 45 years old. There was more death due to small pox and influenza. The widowed wives were given to a chosen few however I venture to say it was not about sex. Go to the Gardner mill in Jordan Utah and look at Archibald's wives. I would say by the looks of them that it would have been more punishment then blessing. Most of the polygamists had very ugly wives. I rarely saw any younger girls in the mix. If they married a thirteen year old it would have been probly the first marriage and they were close to thirteen as well.

  • I belong to the church of jesus
    April 19, 2008 10:52 p.m.

    I think it's pretty sad that many of you think that our church can do nothing right. If we were in Texas helping and supporting the FLDS church then people would say that our churches are working together which must make them the same. But by emphasizing the differences between the two religions we are suddenly horrible people because we aren't helping the FLDS enough. I for one trust my church leader's decisions on where to stand on this and all subjects. (I don't think what's going on over there is right. The kids need to stay with their mothers. But our church is not responsible for what the state of Texas is doing. We can only do so much.)

  • Fascinating!
    April 19, 2008 10:42 p.m.

    I really do find this discussion fascinating. Religious folk are so charmingly earnest when debating peculiarities of 'faith'...a thing of no measurable substance or body...it's all terribly amusing. Yes, yes...you may dismiss my meager opinions as that of a godless heathen (please pray for me if it makes you feel better--doesn't bother me in the slightest) but I did want to let the Des News community know that it really would be better if the mainstream Mormon leadership concentrated more on what they could do for these children and those brainwashed women rather than focusing on this silly PR strategy. Even us Godless Heathens will be able to tell the difference between you folks then.

  • Elizabeth Anne K.
    April 19, 2008 10:23 p.m.

    I am LDS and my grandparents once mentioned to me how sad some of the plural wives were in my family who practiced polygamy with my Gr Gr Gr Grandfather. They said that my ancestors first wife was always treated the best while the others went without. I could go on and on about how horrible my grandparents said polygamy was for my pioneer ancestors, but it would take up too much time. All I can say is that my husband and myself will never practice plural marriage in this life nor the next. It is NOT OUR DESIRE to practice plural marriage and never will be. We have always question if it were truly a revelation from God or if Joseph Smith just turned to the dark side.

  • I agree "trufflelily"
    April 19, 2008 10:15 p.m.

    Most of the general population in the LDS church believes as the contributor above that the surplus of women needed taken care of by the men and that it was only temporary. They don't know all of the facts above. It is sad and it is time for people to face the truth!

  • trufflelily
    April 19, 2008 10:07 p.m.

    It is well documented that Joseph Smith married multiple underage teen girls, as well as older teens and adult women. So, what's the real difference between LDS and FLDS? They both believe Joseph Smith was a prophet, and follow his teachings. LDS may not openly acknowledge polygamy, but it is written in their doctrine (D and C 132). The FLDS it seems to me are just more honest in acknowledging what they really believe. The LDS choose to be deceptive.

  • why so much vitriol?
    April 19, 2008 9:30 p.m.


    "So the church posts a video on YouTube; the funny thing is, YouTube is blocked at BYU so students won't be able to see it."
    -----------

    why is it blocked?

    -----------

    Probably because the comments people leave on youtube videos are as inconsiderate and inane as these ones.

  • LDS DOES
    April 19, 2008 9:24 p.m.

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints does believe in polygamy and still practice it in the spiritual sense in the Temple. A man to this day can be sealed to multiple women but still a woman can only be sealed to one man. Polygamy is alive and well. Utah has perpetuated this mess in Texas as they have allowed polygamy to flourish in Utah and at the expense of the taxpayer. Where is the outcry that a religion is supported by taxes??? Joseph had a vision for polygamy after he had sex with young teenage girls and other mens wives. mmmmmm how convenient that this truth is not printed for the world to know

  • Chewy
    April 19, 2008 9:02 p.m.

    I am LDS and I am not ashamed of our past with polygamy. The reason we did this was because There were more men than women, and the women needed to be taken care of. Not some "Sex Drive" or whatever you anti-mormon geniuses think. Anyway, we are long past practicing polygamy and anyone who is caught is excommunicated. See the difference? We don't wear clothes like we're stuck in the 1800's. We only have one spouse and usually they're over 18. I hope your satisfied.

  • Jennifer
    April 19, 2008 8:25 p.m.

    I am LDS and so embarrassed about our history of polygamy. Does anyone else out there cringe when it is discussed in Sunday School? I believe that Joseph Smith started it out of selfish, evil desires. I even stated this to my bishop and stake president in my temple interviews and they both said that "maybe" that was the case. I think if the LDS church could just say, "Hey, we made a mistake" we could get a lot of this awful, evil stigma to go away.

  • EX-LDS
    April 19, 2008 8:17 p.m.

    I don't care who made that fateful phone call or why, I'm just so happy the call was finally answered.
    Way to go Texas!!

    We have a duty to protect children from abuse, sexual or otherwise.

    A choice cannot be made when there is no choice.

    These FLDS women and children have no choices, they must submit and defer to their husbands for all decisions.
    I can't tell you how many first cousins I have in Warren Jeffs FLDS, because I'm not sure. I know my Aunt gave birth (in this sect)to 22 children and where or how they are doing, I don't know.

    Lets just hope this ordeal will be over as soon as possible for the sake of the children.

  • Brian Utley
    April 19, 2008 7:56 p.m.

    Good grief! Why can't the Church get off it's high horse and stop worrying about its reputation? Why aren't they rallying to the needs and welfare of these people in Texas? The miscarriage of justice there is so clear that any fool could see those folks are suffering. Yet the Church is interested in distancing itself. It is unbelievable that this is what Momonism, so called, has come to. Pride. Pure pride. Instead of the humble providers of aid and comfort that any church worth its salt would be to those of their brothers and sisters who stand in need. Shame on the so-called "real" Mormons.

  • Oh Brother
    April 19, 2008 7:47 p.m.

    Roger,
    Nice parsing of D&C 132. The "..." are a dead giveaway of destroyed context and meaning.

    The section distinguishes between the new and everlasting covenant (eternal marriage without mention of number of spouses) and the law of Abraham (marrying more than 1 wife). Laws come and go - Law of Moses, Law of consecration, etc.. and the Law of Abraham.

    WW declared the end of the practice of the Law of Abraham and Lorenzo Snow and JFS had to enforce it until it died. Ironically, "obedience as the first law" would have saved the FLDS from their current predicaments.

    Many of your other declarations are equally deceptive and selective. We don't teach Christ in private, eh? You must have grown up FLDS.

    No wonder people are confused.

  • AP
    April 19, 2008 7:21 p.m.

    I am a LDS convert, but could never accept the concept of polygamy as it was practiced.
    And I don't feel bad saying that all, there are many many members I know that feel the same.
    And Mitt Romney called it "awful" in multiple interviews. Romney's great-grandfather, Miles Park Romney, married his fifth wife in 1897. That was more than six years after Mormon leaders banned polygamy and more than three decades after a federal law barred the practice.

    Romney's great-grandmother, Hannah Hood Hill, was the daughter of polygamists. She wrote vividly in her autobiography about how she "used to walk the floor and shed tears of sorrow" over her own husband's multiple marriages.

  • Roger
    April 19, 2008 7:18 p.m.

    Thanks Des News for your coverage. The ramifications are yet to be fully realized. They will eventually be of a positive nature leaving behind many disillusioned LDS members who, generally speaking know not the truth of their "only true Church."

    What LDS & FLDS share, and can't be denied, is DC:132, 1."I the Lord justified...having many wives..." 3."...prepare to obey...this law revealed..." 4."I reveal...a new...everlasting covenant, (that if you don't obey you will not) enter into my glory."
    61."...to espouse another, the 1st must...consent" 62."...if 10 virgins given unto him...they belong to him..." 64."...if a man teaches his wife the law...and she does not support him...she shall be destroyed...for I will destroy her..."

    To understand the relationship between JS & God/Lord, & see why & how WJ would see himself a "Prophet" read DC:132, in full.

    Fact: No Joseph and his invention, no Jeff and his enactments. Appreciable difference, Warren admits himself "false".

    Funny clothes? In Temple secrecy. Teach Christ? In public. In classes, "Lives of LDS Prophets". More similarities than differences. "Obedience is the 1st law...order is the result."

    Little wonder LDS concerned. Full disclosure?! YIKES!!

  • Joe
    April 19, 2008 7:22 p.m.

    I'm in my 50's. I was raised LDS in Utah, although I'm no longer active in the church and live in the eastern US. I remember that even when I was a child my grandmother had very harsh words for polygamists whom she had known while growing up. I didn't know what the word "polygamy" meant then, but I'll never forget her anger when she talked about them. Monogamous marriage is cherished in our family still, and I learned some wonderful family values from my experiences with the LDS church..

  • To Janet 6:18pm
    April 19, 2008 7:21 p.m.

    Did Moses, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David (for the most part), etc. also make a mistake? Did Martin Luther make a mistake when he authorized bigamous unions? Are present day Muslims and Christians (in Africa) also making a mistake? And what lie are you talking about? Read D&C 132. It's in your own scriptures. If you attended seminary or institute, it is in the teaching material.

    I assume you are serious and not just some internet phantom.

  • Consequences happen...
    April 19, 2008 7:22 p.m.

    I think it's great that people are being forced to acknowledge that there are consequences to all of their actions.

    Even the LDS Church has to live with the consequences of the policies that they have taught in the past.

    I'm glad that our society is becoming more enlightened and more willing to let go of problems from our past.

  • To: To Otis 12:15pm
    April 19, 2008 7:11 p.m.

    I think you may have misunderstood my point. The similarities people cite for mixing the LDS and FLDS are no different than the similarites between the other religions I cited. Thus, my point was that, when known, we should make an attempt to be clear that they are different. Who would say that the Greek Orthodox are nothing more than apostate Roman Catholics? No one. So why insist on confounding LDS with FLDS?

    As for your question about those asking authentic questions and why they are sometimes labeled "anti", the comments section of this article are a perfect case and point. I see so much erroneous information, assumptions passed off as fact, illogical connections, and outright deception - and that in an anonymous forum - that when a genuine question is posed, how is one to distiguish? LDS folk are so bombarded with distortions about their faith that they often show the same defensive reflex to an honest questioner. Sincere questions can most effectively be addressed in person, and not through anonymous blogs/boards. You should ask your questions in person to an actual, practicing LDS member of your acquaintance.

    Otis Spurlock

  • Terry
    April 19, 2008 7:02 p.m.

    To To Janet | 6:59 p.m.,

    God NEVER destroyed a whole people. Genocide has NEVER been part of God's program. Never.

    The Bible contains a whole bunch of stories that are offensive, murderous, immoral, racist, sexist, and contain any number of sins. But if you really read the text you will find that God NEVER commands or endorses these sins! Never! And the stories always go on to show how the sins create problems later on. Ever time.

    Do not be deceived. Polygamy was NEVER commanded by God. God's word is good and reliable. Read the Ten Commandments. They are still in force.

  • To Janet
    April 19, 2008 6:59 p.m.

    To me, being a member of this church is about the Savior. I go to church to partake of the sacrament, to repent, to commune with the spirit. I am not perfect nor is anyone else in any church building.

    Polygamy is something I don't think we can feel accepting of, because to have one companion to trust, to live and grow with is our greatest desire. It is against our nature to want to share our spouse physically, or for me, in any way.

    I've cried over this principle, I can't imagine ever wanting to share my spouse and the thought of it is a tremendous emotional and physical pain.

    I also cry over the thought of God destroying a whole people as He did a number of times in the Bible. How does He allow, or even command the slaughter of women, children, infants and I'm sure pregnant women? Did He make a mistake? Isaiah says "His ways are higher than our ways."

    I can't imagine what Sara went through to have Abraham sleep with her handmaiden and bring the child that she could not.

    I just try to accept that the restoration needed to include a lot.

  • Texas Ute
    April 19, 2008 6:51 p.m.

    Thank godness Janet you are beginning to see the light.

  • Donna
    April 19, 2008 6:47 p.m.

    For heaven's sake, give it a rest. This is not appealing.

    These silly press conferences could be held every day for five years and the public would still continue to connect Mormonism/The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with polygamy. It's part of our past, our present, and our future.

    Ugh!

    The most effective way to rid the Church of this connection would be to:

    - Denounce the practice by early Church leaders (although the public still won't care)
    - Change the Church's name
    - Change the name of The Book of Mormon

    Otherwise, get a thicker skin.

  • Shawn
    April 19, 2008 6:47 p.m.

    Both the LDS and the FLDS are mistaken. Jesus was opposed to and put an end to hierarchies of priesthoods (Hebrews7:28;9:12;10:12). There are many "ministries" mentioned in the NewTestament, including "apostles." The word apostoloi would be better translated "emissaries," that is people sent from one charismatic community to another with news and greetings, but never with any priesthood authority (because it was ended). These are functions, not offices that are priestly or episcopal. They derive from the Spirit, not from human organization or any bureaucracy (1Cor.2:11-16). They are never regulated or reduced to a hierarchy. These are strictly charismatic communities Paul writes his epistles to - that is why he addresses them to the entire community rather than to any specific person who is an "officer" in a priesthood. Not one of the Gospels mentions a Christian priest or priesthood. The world "elder" (presbyteroi) does not refer to an office. It simply means those who are older in the faith community. That is why Paul contrasts the elders with "young people" (1Peter5:1-5). Please do not be fooled by following a "prophet" or an "apostle" or an "elder" as an "office" in a false priesthood. Jesus ended all that.

  • DB
    April 19, 2008 6:47 p.m.

    for anyone to say that the FLDS are just like the LDS is dumb. That is like saying that Lutherans or Methodists are just like Catholics. Or any other religion for that matter, they all came from the Catholic church except for the LDS church.

  • REMO
    April 19, 2008 6:41 p.m.


    Amazing! | 2:28 p.m. Apr. 19, 2008
    That the LDS Church is so anxious to distance it's self from the FLDS. Why have they not said anything in defense of mothers and their children who have been criminally separated. Where is all the compassion? If it was a bunch of Mexicans or Islamics involved they would be all over the airways on their behalf!

    Ain't that the truth? For whom do these illegals work and make money for? Find the answer to that and bingo!

  • Janet
    April 19, 2008 6:18 p.m.

    I just pray that the church leaders will come out one day and say to all the members that Joseph Smith made a mistake about polygamy, because he was battling with both good and evil. I could accept this easily. Otherwise, I don't think I can live this lie any longer.

  • Karl
    April 19, 2008 6:04 p.m.

    Well, it certainly looks like there is a lot to question on here. I do not think it is all fault finding by any means. Just concerned folks looking for the truth. Something we all desire to know. No one like to live a lie when its right in front of their faces. You can see it and you cannot deny it.

  • There certainly is a
    April 19, 2008 5:55 p.m.

    Difference so make it final. It's time to admit that these people were a result of the terrible teaching of polygamy. It was almost the dimise of the LDS church and it will be the dimise of the FLDS.

  • CPW
    April 19, 2008 5:51 p.m.

    Fault finders will never find truths. It will be the truth seekers who will find the answers. And answers are available to those truly seeking,

  • Mr. Lambert...
    April 19, 2008 5:28 p.m.

    I do not know what the laws on the books said regarding marrying underage girls in the 1830's and 1840's, but I'm not quite sure why a prophet of God would marry two 14-year-old girls (Helen Mar Kimball & Nancy Wincester) and two 16-year-old girls (Fanny Alger & Flora Ann Woodworth), not to mention the 3 or 4 17-year-old girls he married. Joseph Smith was a polygamist and not much different from the current FLDS men we've all been talking about.

  • Sam Clemens
    April 19, 2008 5:13 p.m.

    Joseph had wifes that were 20 years or more younger. Brigham had some that were 30 and even 40 years younger. Same-same. Only difference is that the other happened years ago and the history has been written favorably by the church trying to cover up that it is based on men of very low moral fiber.

  • To Texasgirl
    April 19, 2008 5:12 p.m.

    Yes, women in the LDS church can choose for themselves. We ALL can. Yes, we have standards that we are expected to live by, but we CAN choose to dress however we chose, eat whatever we want, drink whatever we feel like, how to spend our Sundays, etc.
    We will not be worthy for a temple recommend (the consequence of our choice), but we are 100% welcome in the church. We will not lose our children or our home, we will still be allowed to attend church and virtually all activities associated with it.

    There will be consequences for our choices, eternal and during this lifetime...there are consequences for EVERYONE'S choices on this earth. If you chose to sleep with your coworker and tell off your boss and steal from your company, you may lose your job. That didn't mean that you had no choices. You will simply have a consequence. Obviously, FLDS women can chose to try to leave the compound, their consequences are just much harsher than the consequences that an LDS woman would face if she chose to stray from the doctrine. The consequences are so harsh that many are too afraid to leave.

  • ND
    April 19, 2008 5:05 p.m.

    RobertM - The FLDS do not believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet. They believe he was a fallen prophet.

  • About sealings
    April 19, 2008 5:02 p.m.

    Just so you all know, technically LDS women CAN be sealed to more than one husband. They have to wait until they have passed on, though, and then someone can seal them by proxy to as many men as they were married to in this life. That is according to the Church Handbook.

  • To Joyce
    April 19, 2008 4:59 p.m.

    I am sorry that you had a rough childhood. My husband came from very similar circumstances. About the bishop...as unfortunate as it may be, people of this church make mistakes...even very big ones. It is sad and terrible for the family, but we surely cannot expect all in God's church to be perfect, not even our leaders.

    About the money...I am very surprised that no one in your ward helped your mother out. Perhaps she is a very independant woman who didn't want to ask for help? The church is set up to help in many ways. My husband's family received money to help from time to time with paying bills, they used the Bishop's storehouse for food and they were frequently given support by the church. They were also recipients of "secret Santas" at Christmas time. Did this mean that they were suddenly out of poverty? No, but they survived. Tithing is a principle of faith in God. It is not because the church "needed" your mothers money. It is a commandment of God, and your mother could only receive certain blessings when she was faithful enough to pay tithing. Read about the widow's mite in the Bible.

  • Ken Goddard
    April 19, 2008 4:39 p.m.

    I would like to apologize for my insensitive comment on this board and others in the past. My ignorance sometimes gets the better of me; my heart goes out to these children.

  • New Testament Christian
    April 19, 2008 4:38 p.m.

    I do not believe in Joseph Smith any more than I do the pope. The only way to get to Heaven is through Jesus Christ and the Holy Bible,every thing else is a fraud.Once Christ was crucified and the temple wall/door was torn open everyone can approach The Holy Spirit.
    The Bible alone is the true divine word and nothing else is relevant,it is a sin to believe in anything else.
    There is but one true living Church and it is the Church that Christ founded.
    The hierarchy in so many religions is wrong,you only need to read the Bible and obey Christs word.
    There are no prophets living today,everyone today is a mortal human being that have all sinned and fallen short of Gods glory and can only be forgiven by prayer and belief in God.
    The book of Mormon,the koran,the catholic books are not right or needed.
    Christ and Christ alone through the Holy Bible.

  • John Lambert
    April 19, 2008 4:31 p.m.

    The FLDS church does not follow the original teachings of Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith did not violate laws against marriage to underage girls. This is because such laws were less stringent then, but it is a worthwhile point.
    People also have to accept that the church has an institutional history. The point is there is a succession in the priesthood. President Monson holds the keys, Warren Jeffs does not.

  • DIfferences
    April 19, 2008 4:30 p.m.

    I only have one question. The FLDS are polygamists. The LDS claim that in 1880 divine revelation meant that polygamy needed to end, but didn't actually end until 1906. Why is it that multiple General Authorities have been sealed to multiple women for time and all eternity?

  • Ken Goddard
    April 19, 2008 4:17 p.m.

    They both believe in that scoundrel Joe Smith and a fairy tale so whats the difference. Seems to me one is the parent and the other is the affiliate. Or are they both affiliates of the original one is Missouri (can't think of its name right now).

  • Duff
    April 19, 2008 3:44 p.m.

    There is only one difference between the FDLS and the LDS church. ONE difference and ONE difference only. And you all know what that minor difference is. Stop pretending they are from another planet from the SLC mormons.

  • to youtube blocked?
    April 19, 2008 3:49 p.m.

    The reason youtube is blocked on campus at BYU is simply because all the freshman who live in the dorms and use the on-campus internet would stay up all night long watching videos on youtube and would take up all the bandwidth which would prevent those who have been in school longer and who actually try to use the internet for scholastic purposes from doing the work they need to. It's not blocked because it's "bad" just because administrators KNOW keeping it open would take up TONS of the bandwidth.

  • Denice
    April 19, 2008 3:23 p.m.

    Diane,
    If you want facts, I'll teach you. I'm a female. Just let me know if you want me to. The reason it's important to know the difference between the two religions is: if it isn't known to the world, will injustices be brought upon the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Think about it people! This is critical.
    I did ask an attorney about the legality of this business. In a typical abuse case, every child in a home is removed. This is typical in every state. But, the problem was there were 416 children in this home (compound). The mistakes that Texas Authorities made are: they didn't substantiate the claims first. The second mistake they made was since there were so many children in the compound, it would've been better to remove the men from the compound instead of the children. Typically it's men who are perpetrators. Then, they should've done their investigations there. And if they didn't want the women to be present, send them somewhere else on the compound. They still could do this. Tax dollars then would be better utilized. Unless they have some kind of political agenda doing this.

  • Joyce
    April 19, 2008 3:26 p.m.

    I was a Mormon, however, when the Bishop of my Ward, the Bishop was married, had an affair that was it for me. Also, my father left my mother, me and my sister when I was very young. We did not have much at all. We did not even have curtains on our windows, not enough food, water turned off, doing laundry at the laundromat, etc. My mother always gave money to the church although we did not have it to give. I would suggest to my mother not to give our money to the church because we needed it badly. The Bishop knew our circumstances and had no problem taking our money. We definetly needed it more then the Mormon Church and I know he could see that. Looking back what church would take money from a single mother barley surving with two small children? I question all of this to this day. Someone from the Mormon Church please respond.

  • the DEFLECTOR
    April 19, 2008 2:43 p.m.

    take care of the missionaries , don't put them in danger by supporting dumb thoughts as people read these blogs and the missionaries shouldn't have to defend all the time against something that isn't there!

  • Amazing!
    April 19, 2008 2:28 p.m.

    That the LDS Church is so anxious to distance it's self from the FLDS. Why have they not said anything in defense of mothers and their children who have been criminally separated. Where is all the compassion? If it was a bunch of Mexicans or Islamics involved they would be all over the airways on their behalf!

  • texasgirl
    April 19, 2008 1:53 p.m.

    To "grandmab5g3"... Really you feel the FLDS and LDS are totally separate. And you have the right to choose. So you can choose what to wear, what to eat, what to drink, how to spend your Sundays. You can choose what time you go to church, how to serve your church. You can choose how to spend all of your money, you can choose what movies to watch, tv to watch and music to listen to. Ummm.... there are more similarities than you think. The FLDS women think they have a choice as well.

  • TheMadNuker
    April 19, 2008 1:42 p.m.

    I am so glad to know that the LDS women don't wear
    old fashioned clothes, and weird hair. Because some
    of the bloggers would have the States/CPS Pinnacles
    of Honor and Virtue, kick in your doors, and enslave
    your children. I must also say, that the absolute
    hate, that passes for intelligent discourse is very
    revealing of darkened minds.Lets be honest, if these
    people were Muslim,or some other protected political class, this whole incident would have not happened.

  • Mahonri
    April 19, 2008 1:41 p.m.

    I wish Elder Cook had also pointed out that most Mormon Fundamentalists "do not live in isolated compounds, arrange marriages, dress in old-fashioned clothing or wear unusual hairstyles," like FLDS members do.

    Most Mormon Fundamentalists get married around the age of 21, have never experienced child abuse, and many have college degrees and own their own businesses. Some are your doctors, teachers, lawyers, real estate agents, and computer technicians. They do not look or act differently in the outside world from anyone else.

  • john b
    April 19, 2008 1:32 p.m.

    some body said the LDS should help these people the baptist tried by furnishing buses so thay wouldn't be crowed and i have not seen agood line on it yet

  • Re: Amazed | 2:21 a.m.
    April 19, 2008 1:29 p.m.

    There was no law against polygamy until one was passed for the express purpose of pressuring the LDS Churchs authority.


    Not true. Most all states had bigamy laws on the books in the 19th century. They were derived from similar laws enacted in England during the 17th century. Refer to Revised Laws of Illinois 1833," Section 121, pp. 198-199.

  • Anonymous
    April 19, 2008 1:26 p.m.

    As far as I am concerned the 2 are the same...both cults and both an abomination is the sight of God

  • Aaron
    April 19, 2008 1:25 p.m.

    I'm disgusted with you anti-Mormons in Utah. The Southern Baptist friends I grew up with in Texas disagreed with me, but they were respectful, even when warning me about Hell. Anti-Mormons show contempt not only for the LDS faith they fear, but for others as well. They're the same sort of breed who hate African Americans and Jews. We should let the courts deal with this whole issue with the FLDS in Texas, and keep our mouths shut in the meantime.

  • Amazed
    April 19, 2008 1:23 p.m.

    Ben, Individual states may have had laws against polygamy, but the Federal Government made it a crime that was aimed at pressuring Mormons. The territory of Utah had representation in Congress, but when the people elected a polygamist to represent them he was not allowed to take his seat in Washington. I do not know if federal polygamy laws were enforced anywhere else, do you?

    Whether or not polygamy was sanctioned by doctrine, it was sanctioned by the example of Church leaders and their interpretation of doctrine.

    The fact remains that a good many of today's Mormons are uncharitable toward religious groups that have been persecuted by governmental authorities - even though their own people suffered similar persecution. They would do more for their image by championing religious freedom and the sanctity of the family than joining those who mock and vilify the FLDS.

  • Selling Papers
    April 19, 2008 1:22 p.m.

    Deseret does not take care of business in Utah

  • kbm
    April 19, 2008 1:20 p.m.

    Perhaps if the various news outlets simply described the FLDS as the group that still follows the original 19th century teachings of Joseph Smith, the founder and initial prophet of the Mormon Church, whereas the LDS abandoned some of those teachings in exchange for Utah statehood, it would help distinguish in people's minds the difference between the FLDS and the LDS church. The news organizations could just ignore all of the similarities as that would just keep things too confusing.

  • if all you guys had
    April 19, 2008 1:18 p.m.

    a strong testimony as you claim , you follow your leader.

  • No Win Situation
    April 19, 2008 1:17 p.m.

    I find it humorous reading many of the comments from this article and others relating to the FLDS compound in Texas.

    No matter what the LDS church does, people will find fault with it. If the LDS church lends a helping hand to the FLDS in Texas people will claim they support child abuse, underage marriage, etc.

    If they try to clarify the differences between the two churches, people claim the LDS church is not accepting and doesn't care about the children, etc.

    Of course that is to be expceted. Anybody who spends even a small amount of time on these message boards knows that there is nothing the LDS church can do or say that doesn't have certain people on here twisting it around and expressing their dislike for the church. For that matter, issues that haven nothing to do with the church will often turn into a "Mormon bashing" session. Go figure...

  • Brothers and Sisters
    April 19, 2008 1:11 p.m.

    I respectfully disagree with Elder Cook's approach here. We should not be so quick to disavow and judge members of the FLDS church. It is true that they lack the light of recent Gospel revelations that we enjoy in the LDS church, but their lifestyles and values are much more aligned with ours than with the secular world. As President Hinckley taught, let us not be ashamed of our status as a "peculiar people" too.

  • Box Elder Bee
    April 19, 2008 12:51 p.m.

    Isn't this just a case of the pot calling the kettle black?

  • Splitting Hairs.
    April 19, 2008 12:41 p.m.

    Splitting hairs seems kind of silly -- the word "Mormon" refers to people who believe in a certain book, the "Book of Mormon", just as people who believe in Christ are called "Christians".

    D&C section 132 was practiced by the LDS church just as it has been and is being practiced by the FLDS.

  • bilbo...again
    April 19, 2008 12:28 p.m.

    Religions historian Walsh said he also studies the mainstream Mormon church, which renounced polygamy a century ago and has no ties to the FLDS. He said without the polygamy aspect, the FLDS would resemble the Baptist or Catholic religions."


    ALSO: I feel...
    this last paragraph explains why the buses used to transport the FLDS members to the holding pens were labelled as "Baptist" vehicles...just helping another brother out....they may even loan the buses to Westboro BAPTIST Church for their next US Soldier field trip.

  • Beeswax
    April 19, 2008 12:20 p.m.

    To "Find out for yourself":

    Actually, the Catholic and Protestant churches ARE the same--CHRISTIAN. They are just different sects of same church, just as the LDS and FLDS are both sects of the MORMON movement. The Catholic church recognizes baptisms performed by other Christian sects. It DOES NOT recognize baptisms performed by Mormons.

  • To Otis
    April 19, 2008 12:15 p.m.

    You made the point well. Those LDSers that loudly say that the FLDS has NOTHING to do with the LDS are not helping the case they're trying to make.

    The question that i've got concerns "questioning." As an outsider I very often see even authentic "questioning" of the LDS and it's leadership labeled "Anti." ... i'm not talking about "haters" but just those that question. Why is that?

  • Chrystal Fabian
    April 19, 2008 12:09 p.m.

    I would just like to say I feel bad for all of the children and mothers. A mothers bond between her and her child is sacred, I just couldnt see how people could live a life like the FLDS. I dont understand at all. I belong to THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS and I know this church is true, and to see the media bash it because of a seperate religious sect is baffling. There are many differences between the lds and the flds, but im more concerned on what happens to these crazy men! How are they going to be punished? What they did was wrong! Where are these childrens rights? Why are 16 year old girls getting married? I mean what is this? Do people really live like this. Ive lived through a lot within the last 19 years, but would never think people lived like this(in modern day). Everyone please say youre prayers for these families, judges and lawyers, that they may do whats best for the children.

  • Outside looking in
    April 19, 2008 12:04 p.m.

    It is interesting that Elder Cook focuses on the difference between the fashion and hairstyles of the women who belong to the two churches. It seems to be a rather superficial comparison to me.

  • scarecrowfromoz
    April 19, 2008 11:59 a.m.

    We want the right to be called Christians because we say we are, even though "traditional" Christians don't accept us, and on the other hand we want to DENY FLDS calling themselves Mormons, because only we are Mormons. Anyone else see a problem with this? Maybe now LDS will understand why "traditional" Christians don't want to be associated with LDS calling themselves Christians, the same way LDS don't want FLDS calling themselves Mormons.

    "We don't live in isolated compounds." DUH, what are BYU, the missionary training center, and members on missions? Members at any of those are controlled as much as anyone at the FLDS compound and have as many of their liberties most people enjoy every day taken away, all in the name of religion.

    "We don't dress in old fashioned clothing." DUH, what are white shirts and ties??? Have the LDS people looked at how modern people dress? LDS stick out like a sore thumb in SLC because they look like they are dressed for the 1950s.

    "We don't dress in unusual hairstyles." DUH, again, men look like they got their haircut from the 1950s.

  • Big "D"
    April 19, 2008 11:51 a.m.

    Getting lost in all this are the innocent victims, the children, I'm not so concerned about the LDS image as I am saddened and worry for all these kids. It is coming to a head finally. I blame Utah and Arizona for turning the other way for all these years. Texas has done what should have been done a long, long time ago. Why didn't officials in Utah and AZ stop the madness before? Makes me think there has been sympathy for the FLDS. A more Christ-like response would be concern and an offer to help the women and children of the FLDS and not worry about "image" or confusion between the FLDS groupand the LDS Church, of which I am a member.

  • Shane
    April 19, 2008 11:48 a.m.

    The more LDS leaders emphasize differences with polygamist groups, the more they draw attention to their own polygamist past. The more you struggle against the truth, the more mired you will become. Jesus dealt with this problem very simply. Only His truth can set you free:

    "Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. [consider] seven brethren: the first died having no children. The second brother married her, then died also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. In the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." (Matthew22:23-32)

  • Anonymous
    April 19, 2008 11:38 a.m.

    "Shame on us, Peoples Rights are being Violated and we are worried the world may get us confused, I think ill find a more Crist like Religion, im sure there is one out there some where."

    THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! This is the FIRST statement of this nature that I've heard in the days since this rats' nest of perfidy was uncovered that I've heard from a member of the LDS.

    It restores some of my belief in human nature that you can rise above your personal discomfort to consider the magnitude of what's happened to the women and children of that place and the places like it in UT & AZ.

  • Anon
    April 19, 2008 11:13 a.m.

    One hundred and twenty years ago, you wouldn't be able to distinguish the two sects. If the LDS church had NOT gone in another direction due to political pressure, the two would still be indistinguishable to this day. The fact is that Joseph Smith set in motion a theology which is being practiced much more faithfully by the FLDS than by the current Mormon church.

    So to split hairs seems kind of silly -- the word "Mormon" refers to people who believe in a certain book, the "Book of Mormon", just as people who believe in Christ are called "Christians". If the current LDS church is upset at being lumped together with a breakaway sect, they need to go back and re-examine their origins, starting with D&C section 132.

  • rdha
    April 19, 2008 11:02 a.m.

    It's an interesting dilema going on right now concerning the FLDS in Texas. I am a proud member of the Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day-Saint and I have been my whole life. I can testify of the HUGE difference between the LDS Church and the FLDS Church. We do not practice polygamy and everyone in the church has their moral agency; especially who they would like to marry, at which age, and what to study & or train for a career. I feel very sorry for those of the FLDS faith whose lives have been affected for the worst in Texas. I also feel sad for those in the FLDS faith who feel they don't have a choice in their lives. Especially the young girls who have their innocence and chastity stripped from them by misguided older men. I hope and pray that much good will come out of this big fat tragedy in Texas and more people can tell the difference between LDS and FLDS. I would choose Thomas S. Monson over Warren Jeffs for a prophet anyday. I'm so grateful and thankful for the truth I have in my life. God's Church really blesses my life. FANTASTIC!!

  • London
    April 19, 2008 10:56 a.m.

    Now that is funny.

    To me, the only difference between FLDS and the LDS is the "F" word.

  • Dear Amazed
    April 19, 2008 10:54 a.m.

    You too need to go back in history so that you can see that you are like so many others of the past and present who build momuments to the dead prophets and stone the living prophets.

  • Loralee
    April 19, 2008 11:00 a.m.

    Amazed:

    The reason for the LDS Church distancing ourselves from the FLDS sect is explained very clearly - in the 12th Article of Faith it reads:

    We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

    This FLDS sect may express belief in the Book of Mormon, but they certainly neglect the teachings where polygamy was abolished. Practicing polygamy is grounds for excommunication. We are known by our neighbors, as a whole, for being good law-abiding citizens. This association with a group that is no longer a part of the LDS faith is frustrating to us. Indeed, there are members of the LDS church who are Mayors, Senators, Governors, and former candidates for President of the United States!

  • I'm More Mormon than You
    April 19, 2008 10:48 a.m.

    Isn't this a bit like the left hand saying it is different from the right hand?

  • grandmab5g3
    April 19, 2008 10:52 a.m.

    As an active LDS member, I feel that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are totally separate. We have very few similarities. I feel free to go where I choose and do what I choose. I choose to try to follow our teachings. I feel the same compassion for FLDS members that I would for any people who are having similar problems. Those who oppress and try to control those women and children and prevent them from making choices and reaching their potential need to be punished. They have been crippled by the environment they have been forced to live in. That is not the Lord's way. I hope these women and children will not have to return to that environment and that they can somehow learn to find joy in life.

  • Find out for yourself . . .
    April 19, 2008 10:42 a.m.

    Those of you who are confused by all the news reports, should take this opportunity to talk to your Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saint friends and/or neighbors (I'd be surprised if you don't have at least one LDS member at your place of work or neighborhood weather you know it or not.) If you don't know any active members of the LDS church, look in your phone book and call the missionaries. They can tell you more about it. The similarities between the LDS and FLDS churches pretty much end outside of their common beginning. All christian churches use the Bible. It's pure ignorance to say two different religions are the same because they have the same beginning. If that's the case, all Catholic and Prodestant churches are the same because the have the same beginning too.

  • bilbo
    April 19, 2008 10:37 a.m.

    from CNN newsite, via Drudgereport...."Religious scholar John Walsh also addressed a particularly damning piece of evidence: At least one bed found inside a temple that was allegedly used to consummate such marriages immediately after the ceremony.

    "Historically, the only use of a bed in a temple is for temple worship itself," said Walsh, who said he has studied the FLDS practices for 18 years. "The worship lasts a couple of hours, so all the temples will have a place where someone can lie down."

    But, he said, "To my knowledge, there has never been any sexual activity in a Mormon temple."

    Walsh said he also studies the mainstream Mormon church, which renounced polygamy a century ago and has no ties to the FLDS. He said without the polygamy aspect, the FLDS would resemble the Baptist or Catholic religions."
    this last paragraph explains why the buses used to transport the FLDS members to the holding pens were labelled as "Baptist" vehicles...just helping another brother out....they may even loan the buses to Westboro BAPTIST Church for their next US Soldier field trip.


  • Jane
    April 19, 2008 10:37 a.m.

    Hey John Robert M,

    I have found out all I ever want to know about the FLDS and the LDS church.

    You and your church will never convince me that the law of not committing adultery was suspended for Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and all the others who practiced polygamy and polyandry.

    Never. Ever. Period.


    God bless Texas.

  • wrz
    April 19, 2008 10:42 a.m.

    "Okay, they're different. Most people in Salt Lake don't dress for the Little House on the Prairie 2 casting call every day."

    Here's what I don't get:

    Look at female TV hosts and guests or female starlets at important Hollywood events, etc. Many times you will see alotta leg and breast exposure and oddball quaffs. These women are gazed upon with admiration and envy. But look at the FLDS women and you will see modest dress down to the wrists and ankles... with equally strange quaffs. The women are castigated and belittled for their attire. Go figure.

  • Marice Parkes
    April 19, 2008 10:40 a.m.

    I just want to state that my great great grandfather was a polygamist and he gave four of his daughters to his older brother in marriage. There was quite a difference in the ages of the brides and the bridegroom. The bridegroom had a total of 12 wives and 56 children.

  • Ben
    April 19, 2008 10:32 a.m.

    To Amazed | 2:21 a.m.,

    You are mistaken. Laws outlawing polygamy were NOT passed simply to get at Mormons. Polygamy was already illegal in the state of Illinois during the Nauvoo era when Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball first began to take plural wives. (see Greiner & Sherman, Revised Laws of Illinois, 1833, pg. 198-199). There were a number of "Zionist" communities of different faiths that were experimenting with a variety of sexual practices, not just the Mormons.

    Additionally, the 1835 (first) edition of the Doctrine and Covenants forbade and condemned polygamy in the LDS Church, despite the possibility that Joseph may have been involved with Fanny Alger as early as 1833.

    No matter how you slice it, polygamy among the Mormons had a murky, questionable, "tawdry" beginning (Oliver Cowdery's word). Based on records and journals of many plural wives of these early leaders, their lifestyles were rarely any better than the lifestyles being lived by the FLDS in Texas. Most of them were much worse off in almost every respect.

  • RE: Gloria
    April 19, 2008 10:34 a.m.

    ........Too be honest, I don't find his words "Comforting". All I can see when issues like this arrive is fear. All any one of us LDS can do is mention the sentance to the world "OH, it's ok world, we stopped doing that in 1890." and after words,mention how we're so "Edd-you-cated" just to make the world kiss our behind.

    I can see why we need to clarify with others that the media is confusing our religion with the smaller sects. But yet, why do wee need to say more for the sole purpose of the world to love us?

    Speaking of the media. The way they're confusing our religion with the other sects is a good example of how the media can easily infuence the publics mindset and opinions.

  • youtube blocked?
    April 19, 2008 10:28 a.m.

    "So the church posts a video on YouTube; the funny thing is, YouTube is blocked at BYU so students won't be able to see it."
    -----------

    why is it blocked?

  • Religious Freedoms
    April 19, 2008 10:34 a.m.

    Don't (and shouldn't) include the things we are talking about with the FLDS! The line is being drawn now because due to the secretive nature of this religion many people didn't realize. They have been hiding under "religious freedoms". Young girls and women do not have to be in this and they didn't know. They thought their "eternal salvation" was at risk! It's high time this was recognized and we will never let it happen again.

  • Otis Spurlock
    April 19, 2008 10:19 a.m.

    So, if
    FLDS = LDS (shared scripture and 50 years history), then,

    Branch Davidian = Seventh Day Adventist (shared scripture and history), and

    Jonestown = Evangelical/Pentecostal (shared scripture and history), and

    Eastern Orthodox = Roman Catholic (shared scripture and 1,000+ years' history), and

    All Protestantism = Roman Catholicism (shared scripture and 1,500 years' history), and

    Shiite = Sunni (shared scripture and history).

    Agreed? And if not, why not?

    Or, let's just let each group maintain its own identify and recognize it as such.

  • To Why?? 5:57 a.m.
    April 19, 2008 10:13 a.m.

    I live in east Texas, far from San Angelo, and it gets ALOT of play here on the TV news. Also, have you watched nationwide CNN lately? They will mention it at least every half hour. Larry King, Nancy Grace, and Anderson Cooper seem obsessed by the whole thing. Maybe your locale "near" Texas is the unusual (and, perhaps, desirable) place to be.

    Based on the number of comments to the FLDS raid articles, the Des News appears to be operating like, um, a newspaper that must sustain its own existence. The FLDS stories invite alot of readership, apparently - even you, and this keeps adversizers and subscribers - the lifeblood of newspapers' existence.

    East Texan

  • RoyBoy
    April 19, 2008 10:19 a.m.

    To John Robert Mallernee:
    This is the first time I have heard that the Internet is God-given.
    I've come across some things there that I don't think could have come from God!

  • Time
    April 19, 2008 10:07 a.m.

    The current practices of the FLDS polygamist are not even close to the way God instructed polygamy to be practiced when the principle was restored to the earth. To say that the LDS and FLDS are similar in that fashion, is just incorrect. Do you think over a hundred years of rebellion to the commandment to discontinue polygamy, these members of the FLDS are practicing the way it was before? No, the Lord wouldnt stand for righteous people to abuse sex and hunger for control over their wives and children. Think about it, think, think about it.

  • I AGREE!!!
    April 19, 2008 10:10 a.m.

    RE: WHY?? I agree with you. Why is such a hot, overly covered story? How about it Deseret News? Any reply as to why you are so focused on this story?

  • California Reader
    April 19, 2008 9:50 a.m.

    Umm, actually quite a few people in Utah do look like they dress and wear their hair straight out of Little House on the Praire. They talk like them too.

  • Beatrice
    April 19, 2008 9:42 a.m.

    What kind of bonehead doesn't know the difference between the LDS and the FLDS? Come on people! And quit criticizing the LDS church. We have nothing to do with the FLDS and never did. They are not Mormons. Get over it.

  • Tanya
    April 19, 2008 9:43 a.m.

    The church seems to be more concerned about their image than the well being of these children. Why isn't Utah cracking down on these sex offenders? I believe it has to do with protecting the LDS church's image.

  • Amazed
    April 19, 2008 9:39 a.m.

    ok, so they dont dress the same. ???????

  • And?
    April 19, 2008 9:36 a.m.

    Once there was one population of Mormons. Then, there was a split creating the LDS Church and the Reorganized church. The LDS Church had another split over Woodruff's Manifesto. The LDS Church practiced polygamy after the manifesto in Mexico and Canada. The LDS Church assured the US Government that polygamy wasn't going on in the church.

    Today, no LDS Mormon are polygamous until they reach heaven. Mormon men can be sealed to many women. Women can only be sealed to one man.

    Have I missed anything here?

  • Gimme a break!
    April 19, 2008 9:29 a.m.

    LDS women "don't dress in old-fashioned clothing or wear unusual hairstyles,like FLDS members do"?

    What ward does this person go to? Has this person ever traveled much outside of Utah to see how the rest of the world dresses?

  • Seeking the Truth
    April 19, 2008 9:34 a.m.

    Both the FLDS and the LDS Church are followers of the teachings of Joseph Smith are they not? Was it not Joseph Smith that started the practice of polygamy? Which church follows the teachings of Joseph Smith the closest?

  • Rusty Keyes
    April 19, 2008 9:06 a.m.

    If, as you claim, the LDS are entirely different from the FLDS, Why are you promoting this story into the ground? Maybe, if you lay off the incessant updates and filler, this story will die down a bit and you can get back to reporting the REAL news - you know - the economy that's in the tank, the neverending war, the election campaign. Stories that affect EVERYONE and not just the select few. Enough already. LDS, FLDS, RFLDS - does anyone see a similarity in all those letters?

  • mimi
    April 19, 2008 9:07 a.m.

    Fox New Channel begins each of their reports about the FLDS situation by stressing that they are not in any way connected to the LDS Church.

  • GAC in Texas
    April 19, 2008 9:01 a.m.

    Fortunately my friends in Texas do know the difference between my church and the one on the news even though I get teased in a good-natured way.
    However, it is a concern when many people in the public do not have past experience with the "real" LDS church. One news cast actually tried. I heard, "This group is in no way connected to the Mormon Church with headquarters in Salt Lake City." This much effort unfortunately is few and far between. I even heard on a Texas channel, "The sect does not want people to view their temple because the Mormon temples are closed to the public."
    The effort needs to continue to make the differences clear.
    Perhaps it might help if everyone raided all the compounds and got those kids out like Texas has the courage to do. Texas may be making mistakes but at least they are trying. I'm sure we will weather this storm also.

  • me
    April 19, 2008 8:59 a.m.

    the best way to be a criminal is to get a badge and get the government to fund you.

  • falasha
    April 19, 2008 9:02 a.m.

    Most of these fundamental lds groups started after two apostles resigned from the quorum of the 12 in 1906. The names of the apostles who disagreed on the polygamy manifesto were John W. Taylor and Matthias F. Cowley.
    Currently the only polygamy the church authorizes is the sealing of a man to another wife after the death of the first wife. The church headquartered in Utah never annuls the sealing to the first wife after death. This marriage remains in force and they allow the man to marry a second or third wife for eternities. Most other Christian churches annul the first marriage by death whereas Mormons do not. There are only three current apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS who have entered into these forms of marriage sealings. Elder Perry married a second wife for eternity in April 1976 when he was sealed to Barbara T. Dayton in the SLC temple. Elder Dallin H. Oaks entered his first polygamous marriage for eternities when he married a second wife Kristen M. McMain On 25 August 2000. Elder Nelson married his first polygamous wife for eternities in April of 2006 when he married Wendy L. Watson.

  • Mormon
    April 19, 2008 8:59 a.m.

    As a member of the LDS church, I don't like it either when these polygamous sects get confused with our church. But I think it is a bit disingenuous to insist that they are not "Mormon". Like it or not, that term is going to apply to more splinter groups as time goes on.

    I think "Mormon" applies to anyone who believes that Joseph Smith was a prophet and that the Book of Mormon is the word of God. These splinter groups seem to believe those two things in spite of all the other differences they may have with our church.

    We take great exception to other churches trying to deny us the distinction as "Christians" yet we seem to be trying to do the same with other "Mormons". I don't think we can have it both ways.

    We need to stress that we are not associated with those groups and that not all "Mormons" are the same just as not all "Christians" are the same.

  • Anonymous
    April 19, 2008 8:57 a.m.

    Any Media Outlet that confuses the FLDS Church with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or uses the word "Mormon" to refer to FLDS or uses the Pictures of the Salt Lake Temple to misrepresent our Church needs to have his or her license revoked and no longer be allowed to be in the News Business, and yes, that includes Reuters News Service.

  • NY
    April 19, 2008 8:45 a.m.

    Amazing. The media never confuse Baptists and Catholics! Why is this so difficult for them? It makes you wonder if anything they report is reliable.

  • A former LDS Member
    April 19, 2008 8:37 a.m.

    I think the LDS church could get a much better impression into the minds of the public if they would ask what they could do to help the victims of the FLDS scandal, rather than being so defensive. Actions speak a whole lot louder than words! Where is the fruit of the spirit here? I see lots of other churches helping out by providing meals, opening their homes to the attorneys visiting San Angelo, making quilts for the children, etc. But what is the LDS church doing to help?

  • get real
    April 19, 2008 8:27 a.m.

    Anonymous 1 am provides a great example of the intolerance that many LDS experience on a daily basis

  • Anonymous
    April 19, 2008 8:14 a.m.

    I wish this artical would be addressed on Glen Beck or Fox News- Mormons are not a cult or poligamous sect.
    Prophesy prevails that many Hornets nests will be exposed before the next coming-I only hope that this group will be exposed for what it is and eradicated. I truly feel empathy for these FLDS women and children and their future.
    Praise to Elder Cook for his commnts and stewardship to the church and keeping our integrity.

  • Anonymous
    April 19, 2008 7:33 a.m.

    So you're not different enough to recognize the moral issues involved? But you wouldn't dress so tacky...
    Honorable.

  • Gunther
    April 19, 2008 6:43 a.m.

    So the church posts a video on YouTube; the funny thing is, YouTube is blocked at BYU so students won't be able to see it.

  • stephencpace
    April 19, 2008 6:21 a.m.

    I thought the LDS folks no longer wanted to be called "Mormons". Why do they care if the FLDS folks are called Mormon. Very confusing.

  • LDS
    April 19, 2008 6:17 a.m.

    Shame on us, Peoples Rights are being Violated and we are worried the world may get us confused, I think ill find a more Crist like Religion, im sure there is one out there some where.

  • Gloria
    April 19, 2008 6:11 a.m.

    I so appreciate Elder Cook's words.
    I am a devout member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who lives in Texas. I find the words by Elder Cook very comforting! I am glad he is speaking out in forceful and clear terms! I hope his words will be broadcast throughout the world, and reach our Church membership, to comfort them. I find it very distressing to witness the use of the sacred name of our Church, changed by one word -Fundamentalist-, to represent the opposite of what the Church stands for. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints stands for truth and righteousness. It invites people to "Come unto Christ," to delight in Him, to partake of His goodness and mercy, through His Redemptive Atoning Sacrifice and Resurrection. I worship the Lord Jesus Christ. I worship God the Father, my Heavenly Father. I know He cares about everyone. I know He wants our happiness. I know that He has provided a plan for us to return to His presence, through the Atoning sacrifice and resurrection of His Beloved Son Jesus Christ.
    Yes, I do have a college degree, a Master of Science in Engineering.

  • Why??
    April 19, 2008 5:57 a.m.

    If the LDS Church has to keep pointing out that they don't have ANYTHING to do with the this Texas group, why all the top story status, plus several additional stories about it EVERY DAY in the LDS- owned Des News? In our state, not far from Texas, the news station I watch correctly refers to this group as a "polygamist sect". What is different about the coverage here is that it is given a 2 sentence mention, at about the end of the news cast, right before the news of missing dogs that are found, and people finding cornflakes shaped like Illinois. Since it in no way has anything to do with LDS, why all the inordinate coverage by Des News?

  • Keep Sweet
    April 19, 2008 4:54 a.m.

    Anonymous. Is this the way Mormonism used to be when polygamy was accepted by the church, or has Jeff's and his followers taken their child bride theology to an extreme? Just wondering.

  • SLC
    April 19, 2008 4:07 a.m.

    Both groups recognize Doctrine & Covenants 132 as canonized scripture. LDS members no longer practice the plural marriage portions of the revelation, while FLDS members continue to practice it.

  • John Robert Mallernee
    April 19, 2008 3:30 a.m.

    Greetings:

    Personally, I'm glad folks are getting things mixed up!

    It's a great missionary opportunity for members of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints.

    You know the old Hollywood adage.

    It doesn't matter what the newspapers say about you, just as long as the name is spelled correctly.

    After all, whether it's good or bad, it's still publicity, and ANY publicity is always good.

    So, let's take advantage of this wonderful opportunity to answer questions about our Church!

    That's why God gave us the Internet.

    Thank you.

    John Robert Mallernee
    Bard of Clan Henderson
    Armed Forces Retirement Home
    Washington, D.C. 20011-8400

  • Al
    April 19, 2008 3:03 a.m.

    It seems easy, at this point in history, to see the divine and inspired wisdom that caused the LDS church to leave the practice of polygamy behind in 1890. It appears to provide nothing but difficulty, for those who cling to it.

  • RobertM
    April 19, 2008 2:26 a.m.

    But the people are Mormons no matter what the LDS(Brighamite) church says, as the FLDS believe in Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. If this were 120 years ago they would be embraced as Brothers and Sisters by the Utah based church. Instead of emphasizing the differences, how about looking at the similarities? There are a lot more similarities than differences and the further back you go into history one sees the differences fade into oblivion.

  • Amazed
    April 19, 2008 2:21 a.m.

    Many members of the LDS church seem to have forgotten their history as a pariah religion, driven from the eastern states to settle in the territories: harassed by the federal government and inveigled to give up hegemony over their settlements. There was no law against polygamy until one was passed for the express purpose of pressuring the LDS Churchs authority. The fourteen thousand polygamists in the church were left high and dry, driven into hiding, jailed, fined, and stripped of their civil rights. Now that an offshoot sect of those original Mormons is being subjected to the same harassment, pressure, and loss of rights, the LDS church only wants to distance itself and ignore this blatant assault on religious freedom.

    In 1993 when the government incinerated over 80 men, women, and children at Waco, the first thing I thought of was the federal government's assault against the early LDS Church. But today's Mormons are apparently more worried about being identified with people who have unstylish clothes and hair. It's trendy to help build synagogues for the Jews and temples for Asian sects, but they are applauding the destruction of a religion that shares their origins.

  • Diane
    April 19, 2008 1:32 a.m.

    It might help if the leaders of the LDS church told their history accurately and stopped hiding the things that make them look bad. Secrecy and distorted facts leave the door open for criticism. When people are told the whole TRUTH they are much more likely to perpetuate the TRUTH.

    It is clear that the world at large needs to be educated in the differences (and similarities) of the different factions that have sprung from the original church, so maybe the church should stop the PR and start sharing some real honest to goodness FACTS both inside AND outside the church.

  • Anonymous
    April 19, 2008 1:00 a.m.

    Okay, they're different. Most people in Salt Lake don't dress for the Little House on the Prairie 2 casting call every day.
    We're not so different that we'd ever prosecute them, like in texas. But there is a difference. Trust us.