Uh-oh, I opened up the polygamy can of worms

asha, there was another thread about polygamy a while ago. It can be found here:

http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=27

Short version:

I actually am conflicted, since I personally view the hereafter in a different way than most members. If you take out the foundation assumption that our relationships in the hereafter will be “sexual” in nature, “polyandy” becomes nothing more than communal sealing in practice – a “grand counsel of the Gods”, per se, creating and ruling together. In that setting, unity and “marriage” mean totally different things than they do now – without losing any power, imo. In fact, it makes MANY things much easier to reconcile for me.

I don’t like a lot of the messiness and gender-relative issues of how polygamy was practiced, but I also know people who truly have loved more than one spouse DEEPLY and without reservation. I know it’s possible to love more than one spouse equally, so it’s not simply a “monogamy rules; polygamy sucks” issue for me. Taking actual “procreative sex” out of the picture in the hereafter makes a lot of sense to me and resolves nearly ALL issues relative to polygamy, sexual orientation, etc.

I know that’s a radically heterodox view right now, but it’s my own personal belief. Like almost everything else, it is subject to change in the future, but it’s what I “see” right now.

asha – First of all, I also find your DH’s comments distasteful because polygamy as lived on planet earth is of course inherently patriarchal and sexist. The question of which spouse you are with if you were a consecutive monogamist in life is valid, but who knows? Celibate polyandry (Ray’s suggestion below) removes the patriarchal sexism components, but I’m not sure I’m convinced he’s right. I certainly don’t buy that your DH is either. It’s such a weird thing to give one pause – only in Mormonism! I’m with you, though, that I’d be bothered that it’s your living DH’s view, far less concerned that he’s actually right.

I also think that he is not alone in believing what he does. The church has done so much to try to distance themselves from the practice of polygamy in the media, but I would be curious as to how many members truly believe that it is the manner of things in the celestial kingdom.

Here’s my observation of current belief levels on this one. I’ve certainly heard it before. I would guess that very few in RS believe what your DH said is true (mostly over age 60), most would say they don’t think a loving HF would do that long term, and a good chunk probably privately think polygamy was inherently morally wrong, and they would have poisoned BY’s coffee had they been married to him. That’s in RS.

However, I think the PH are far more neutral in their views, and it probably depends on how much they buy into the patriarchy ideas. Most LDS husbands are fairly progressive in my experience, changing diapers and being nurturing, and not ordering women around like Fred Flintstone demanding their dinner. Even so, my guess is that most LDS men figure it could be polygamous later or not (Ray’s probably the only man in the church who’s given much thought to polyandry – go Ray!), so if not, cool, and if so, bonus! In which case, I kind of want to kick their teeth in.

asha, there was another thread about polygamy a while ago. It can be found here:

http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=27

Thanks for this Ray, it was very interesting to read that thread.

I think hawk hit the nail on the head with her comment:

I’m with you, though, that I’d be bothered that it’s your living DH’s view, far less concerned that he’s actually right.

I am hopeful however, that my DH might just be regurgitating things that he hasn’t actually given much thought too… after all, if he TRULY believed what he claims to believe, then he would be searching for a different “eternal companion” since I certainly will not be very helpful in his attaining that version of the CK.

It is troubling to me that he does not seem to recognize that polygamy only works in cultures where women are inferior to men. I have to say that my DH has never behaved in a way that I would describe as sexist. He has always been a very hands-on father and husband, changing diapers, getting up in the night with our babies, clearing the table after supper, etc. Every night before he goes upstairs to bed he unloads the dishwasher and sets the table for breakfast. I just don’t want to paint a male-chauvinist picture of him that simply isn’t true. Perhaps it is given all this that I find his view on polygamy in the CK so confusing.

I know this could sound somewhat insulting, but I really wonder if members who think as my DH does have really given the whole idea of polygamy in heaven much thought other than just accepting that that is the way it is. Like so many other “issues” in the church, it seems to me that they don’t think to question it, because they don’t THINK about it. I am sorry if that sounds offensive, I am trying to be diplomatic here, but there are so many areas in the church where I wonder why intelligent, rational people can’t just take the rose-coloured glasses off for a sec, step back and say, yea, that’s kind of crazy. Again, sorry, I don’t want to offend… I just feel so bewildered by all this… as hawk said:

only in Mormonism!

I think this is important (truly critical), since I think the Church would have died a slow death ….

I’m not sure why that makes it important and why dying a slow death might not have been a good thing. Just because I am positively LDS doesn’t mean that the existence of LDS religion is necessary or even good for the world. I don’t know.

in that sense narrowly, I don’t think it was “wrong”.

Remember Ray’s maxim, “There are no academic issues. Everything is emotional for somebody.” Sure, it is necessary that offenses come. But wo unto him by whom they come. Perhaps in some narrow, academic sense it was not “wrong”. But in the real, human, moral, Golden Rule sense, the only word I can find for it is “wrong”.

It would probably surprise you all (given the tone of my posts in this thread) to know that I actually strongly believe that polygamy should be de-criminalized in both Canada and the U.S. Like same-sex marriage, I see it as more of a political/civil rights issue, and not a religious one, when it is practiced between consenting adults (child abuse, incest and forced marriage is a whole different story, and does not have to be viewed as part of the whole deal). If people find that it is a lifestyle that works for them, who am I to judge or tell them what to do?

That being said, I repeat what I said before, that I think polygamy only really works in societies/cultures where women are of inferior status. This is why the whole idea of polygamy in heaven is disturbing to me… who would want to believe in a god that favours women over men (not very many women I’m sure)? I agree with Todd Compton’s view that the polygamy that was practiced in OT times was more a reflection of the semitic culture of the time, and did not have real significance in a religious/gospel sense. This would also explain why it is a system that will not work in our modern culture today where women share equal rights with men.

As for polyandry… I don’t think many mainstream members of the church are even aware that this took place. When I asked my DH what he thought about it (I brought it up with him a couple of times when I was reading ISL), he had never heard of it, neither had any of my other member friends. It is definitely not a part of the church’s “faithful history”. I think in many cases it was done for dynastic reasons, but maybe I am just being naive.

Personally, I find the whole notion of polyandry a heck of a lot more easy to stomach than polygyny , but I have a feeling my DH would not be as keen on the idea.

Hi asha, I’m kind of with you on this one – the situation just doesn’t seem fair (unless polyandry was in the mix as well but we know women can’t be sealed to more than one man). I have heard others make statements such as “men really can learn to love multiple wives equally” and while I agree in ideal cases that may be true — I largely feel it is irrelevant. The relevant issue to me is does each wife feel as valued in the polygamist union as she would in a healthy monogamist union? I haven’t seen much evidence to support this.

So in the end I say I don’t understand polygamy. Yes, as a child I was taught that all men would live as polygamists in the CK, but today I just can’t see it. I know for me I’m not going to be a polygamist on this earth (and I can’t see it on the other side either) – that’s all that matters to me right now.

That is to say (if you’re probabilistically inclined), if all the religions in the world were given probabilities of their truthfulness, the distribution (for me) would a uniform one. Since there are almost an infinite number of churches and theories, the probability of any one being “true” is approximately 0.

jmb, I really like your post. But then, I am an engineer too. Regarding the above, what interests me most is exploring what you mean by “true”. Can’t they all be “true”? Can’t they all be “false”? What kind of “truth” can a 12-year-old Latter-day Saint know? What kind of “truth” can a 75-year-old Latter-day Saint know? Are those kinds of “truth” any different than for a Hindu or a Muslim or a Catholic?

I think it is important to develop new, more honest, and more nuanced ways of communicating. I’m all the time trying new statements on for size. Here’s one I’ve been rolling around upstairs: “While the LDS Gospel is far from perfect, it is a giant step forward for a lot of people.”

Disclaimer: Nerd alert!!

Brilliant Tom, yes, I knew that was the next question. It was, in fact, the very question I asked myself when I came up with this. So let me try to explain. To me, what’s important is not that they all have approximately 0 chance of being “true,” but rather that they are all equally “true.” This is more in harmony with your theory. It is easy to interpret my explanation as one where the “y axis” represents “absolute truth.” I try not to think of it in these terms. For me, they are all equally true. There is as much to be gained from Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Catholicism and just about every major brand of religion as there is Mormonism. I have spent my entire life engulfed in a world where the distribution looked like a Gaussian with an infinitesimal standard deviation where Mormonism was the mean. For me, my disaffection has brought to my attention that other religions are worth investigating and learning from. Very much in harmony with the way Joseph Campbell views religion/mythology.

Hence the point is that I don’t spend much time worrying about whether or not there is some transcendent truth in polygamy in the afterlife. It is simply irrelevant. I can’t know this information with any form of certitude, and I would reject anyone’s claim to the contrary. Therefore it is of little import, especially in light of the fact that there is an endless sea of theories, ideas, and traditions about which I know nothing, and have largely excluded myself from. What can I learn from these other traditions? That is more interesting to me than whether or not there is any truth in polygamy. And I therefore apply this same reasoning to really all of Mormonism. I have used Mormonism as the standard against which everything else is measured for too long. And I’m not real interested in spinning anymore cycles on discovering its hidden meanings while they are wrapped in ugly wrapping paper (polygamy, blacks and priesthood, etc.) and have very plausible alternative explanations that are not any deeper than bigotry, sexual appetite, philosopher king, etc.

Incidentally, this is where my wife and I still don’t get along. She has “faith” that the CK is still a reality and can’t see why I wouldn’t want to do everything I can, even if there is only a sliver of a chance it is true. For me, I can’t know whether or not it is true with any certitude and don’t see why I should make decisions on a “sliver of a chance” theory. If this same logic of hers is applied to any other flavor of religion we’d all drive ourselves mad trying to do everything to get each reward. This is not the point of religion and spirituality. I am much more inclined to believe in the mythological nature of Mormonism and every other major religion. As Campbell says, eternity is inside us, God is inside us, and it is our opportunity to become one with it. The CK is here and now, not after death!! It is a state of mind, or a state of being, similar to “nirvana.”

So to answer your question, yes, the church can be “true” or “false” or whatever we wanna call it. And I agree with what you say except I am not sure I’m ready to say “While the LDS Gospel is far from perfect, it is a giant step forward for a lot of people.” This is only because I think there is a great deal of collateral damage involved in the Mormon culture and way of life. If Provo/Orem is the ultimate expression of the Mormon culture, then I suggest it would be better if we all stayed away from it. This is where I’m at now and why I question bringing up kids in Mormonism. Nevertheless, people here have given me good ideas for doing this, and have helped me see there are alternative ways of life within Mormonism that don’t lead to these things (it’s just all I’ve ever known since I grew up in SLC). And in some ways I’m relying on Rays analysis of having examined many other religions. As I am only 28 and have spent my entire life in the Mormon bottle, I haven’t had a chance to examine many other religions.

Once again, don’t want to belittle anyone who does think there is truth in polygamy, or ponders on it, but I just don’t spend any cycles on it.