LDS question regarding polygamy - Page 2

[ZorroZ]

sadly most mormons don't know the actual history of polygamy in their church. if they did, i don't think they'd be willing to to accept it.

wait, wait, waittttttt! I just realized I know nothing about MY religion that I live everyday, Gee, I'm so glad I have been straighten out. What a relief!
Sorry, I'm having snarky fun. Weeeeeee!!!

I really think it is unbelievably rude to insult me & fellow members of the church & say we don't know anything. But people do that all the time & it drives me batty. Why do people have a need to point out that they know more then me...which most times..is not true? No really...I want to know. I'm not being snarky now.

Anyways, thanks magstphil, you always say things better then me. As for polygamy history, I knew all about it before I joined the church. Yes it weirds me out at times. But as someone who loves & studies history (the good & the weird) it fasinates me also.

& yes, there are some members who don't know much about the polygamy history. Thats fine, that's their choice. But people also need to understand that there is SO MUCH MORE to this church then just polygamy.

[lacysmommy]

Originally Posted by ZorroZ

wait, wait, waittttttt! I just realized I know nothing about MY religion that I live everyday, Gee, I'm so glad I have been straighten out. What a relief!
Sorry, I'm having snarky fun. Weeeeeee!!!

I really think it is unbelievably rude to insult me & fellow members of the church & say we don't know anything. But people do that all the time & it drives me batty. Why do people have a need to point out that they know more then me...which most times..is not true? No really...I want to know. I'm not being snarky now.

Anyways, thanks magstphil, you always say things better then me. As for polygamy history, I knew all about it before I joined the church. Yes it weirds me out at times. But as someone who loves & studies history (the good & the weird) it fasinates me also.

& yes, there are some members who don't know much about the polygamy history. Thats fine, that's their choice. But people also need to understand that there is SO MUCH MORE to this church then just polygamy.

:

I've almost always been well aware of the history of Mormonism and polygamy in general (I probably didn't know much about it as a child, but as a young teenager I absolutely was aware of it). I am the product of polygamy about 4 or 5 generations back. Regarding the young ages of the brides, most women married as teenagers in the mid-1800s. Regarding deception, Mormons were quite persecuted before they practiced polygamy when there was an extermination order put into effect in Missouri. In Nauvoo with polygamy in the picture, it would only get worse. Is it any surprise that many were hush-hush with polygamy?

Here are some great links to gain perspective on the Mormon POV: http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smit...to_young_women

http://www.fairlds.org/Misc/Polygamy...on.html#head08

[Niamh]

Originally Posted by lacysmommy

Regarding the young ages of the brides, most women married as teenagers in the mid-1800s.

Sorry to bring up an old thread, but this argument is one that (like the 'taking care of widows' argument) is patently false.

If you look at census data for the US in the 1800s, the average age of women getting married was in their early twenties, not as teenagers.

(quickest source: http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/Age.htm)

Originally Posted by lacysmommy

In Nauvoo with polygamy in the picture, it would only get worse. Is it any surprise that many were hush-hush with polygamy?

Something seems off to me about this argument. It sounds as if you're saying "Of course they were being deceptive about it, they were breaking the law and you wouldn't want anyone to know if you were breaking the law would you? They might put you in jail. So of course they lied. You'd do the same. Is it any surprise?"

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by Niamh

Sorry to bring up an old thread, but this argument is one that (like the 'taking care of widows' argument) is patently false.

If you look at census data for the US in the 1800s, the average age of women getting married was in their early twenties, not as teenagers.

(quickest source: http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/Age.htm)



Something seems off to me about this argument. It sounds as if you're saying "Of course they were being deceptive about it, they were breaking the law and you wouldn't want anyone to know if you were breaking the law would you? They might put you in jail. So of course they lied. You'd do the same. Is it any surprise?"

Funny this thread was brought up again! I was just coming here to search it to link a friend

Though the average age was the 20s it doesn't mean teens weren't marrying at all or that it was uncommon. It was far more common then now, for sure. But IMO that is besides the point. Then again I am now and have been for quite a while in the "teens are not babies but young adults" camp.

As for keeping it hush hush- the amount of persecution happening for whatever reason the mobs could muster up would make me withdrawl, I know. Why put your family in the line of fire? I don't understand why they were expected to then or now proclaim every last thing they were doing to the mobs and other abusers.

BTW- hey Niamh! Haven't seen you on the boards in a while but I might just not be looking in the right place.

[Niamh]

"teens are not babies but young adults"

I agree with you there. 'Nuff said about that. I could say much, much more.

I do think, however, that Smith had a ... well, a leaning towards the quite young teenagers and his tactics to get the teenagers whose parents had issues with marriage at such a young age were manipulative at best. Threatening eternal damnation, promising eternal bliss.

On a happier note (and OT, but hey! )... HI! I keep up with you through your blog and my sister (who loves you). I don't come around here much, and then mainly to the unschooling board. I spend most of my online time keeping my blogs up and keeping up with a few unschooling blogs now. I think about you and your precious kids often. You're a class act.

[dianakaye]

I'm LDS and fairly educated about the history of polygamy.

Just the other night I was saying to my husband "wouldn't another wife around here be nice?". Maybe I was just lazy and not wanting to do the dishes or nag him to do them either. He is much more worried about the idea of polygamy being re-instated than I am. I think if it were legal and a commandment, then it wouldn't be completely terrible. Just one woman's opinions.

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by Niamh

On a happier note (and OT, but hey! )... HI! I keep up with you through your blog and my sister (who loves you). I don't come around here much, and then mainly to the unschooling board. I spend most of my online time keeping my blogs up and keeping up with a few unschooling blogs now. I think about you and your precious kids often. You're a class act.

To take this further OT:

I'm blaming the pregnancy hormones (yeah right ) because you just seriously made my day! I read and love your blogs. I share them with DH (hope you don't mind) and we feel like we are looking at a place pretty darn close to our idea of utopia. I don't usually comment simply because you'd elevate me to stalker status with all the "holy cow that's awesome! you're my hero!" comments I would leave

Kind of bringing this back on topic but not really... it's nice to know I'm not the only one who can go on and on about "baby-teens". My husband and I were just venting about this last night.

[ZorroZ]

Did you know that only 3-5% of the Mormons were polygamists as compared to 7% of the general population at that time. At it's hayday height...less then 15% of Mormons were polygamists.

Did you know that Utah wasn't Utah. The gov. really expected for the Saints to die out. No one, surely could servive the desert. It was considered a no mans land law wise. No usa laws. It was called the wild west for a reason. They were shocked when Utah became a thriving, advanced city. The gov. wanted Utah to become a state to tax them. Mormons wanted statehood because they wanted to be apart of the U.S.A.

Did you know Wilford Woodruff, President of the Church at the time, issued a document that officially ended the sanction of plural marriage by the Church in October 1890 and is published in the Doctrine and Covenants as Official Declaration 1

Just as the practice of plural marriage among the Latter-day Saints began gradually, the ending of the practice after the Manifesto was also gradual.Yes, some boneheads secrectly & wrongly continued w/ plural marriage. It was a hard thing for some to give it up. Confusion arouse because the gov. & the church had different opinions about what to do w/ the already plural marriages. The church said let them be, live their lives in peace. The state took no mercy & said screw the children & wives & threw the men in jail.

Was it all handled badly, yep. Do I understand everything, nope. Is there more to the church then plural marriage, yep.

[holyhelianthus]

I wouldn't call them boneheads, Z. They are people with strongly held beliefs as much as we are people with strongly held beliefs. We just happen to believe differently.

[ZorroZ]

No doubt there were truely wonderful people who struggled w/ what to do about this new situation they were put into.

And you're right..I shouldn't be imature & call people names..my bad. But boneheaded logic happened. A few people refused to listen to the councel & the official church doctrine. They refused to acept that the Prophet of the church told them poligamy is over, done, finished.

[holyhelianthus]

Yes but they did so based on their own beliefs revolving around what prior prophets had said. They didn't so much choose not to listen they just didn't believe the person speaking was the true prophet and therefore didn't believe he had the authority to discontinue polygamy as a practice. I wouldn't call that bonehead logic just a differing set of beliefs. I can't say I agree with them but I also can't say I don't see how they came to the conclusion they did. I feel that way about most religious beliefs.

[ZorroZ]

You're right. I can see where some people might have had a problem w/ Wilford Woodruff as Prophet, being he only assumed leadership of the Church as the senior member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in 1887. But a year later in 1889 he was ordained as President of the Church. 1890 the Manifesto ended poligamy. So I would think most people would have gotten over the "Is he, Isn't he" mind set. It was tough times back then. I often wonder what I would have done. I guess in the end we shouldn't apply 21 century thinking to 19th. century actions. But it's still fun to think about it till my brain explodes!

[holyhelianthus]

No doubt!