Gay Marriage & Polygamy

I just came across this article:

However, this article made me start thinking about what kind of position the church (as an organization) would be in if there was a push to legalize polygamy. :think:

It would be hard for the church to come out vocally against it, without sounding very hypocritical. The manifesto doesn’t exactly condemn polygamy. So, in order to take a stand against it, they would have to come out with some language that isn’t as open to interpretation, which would mean turning their back on our polygamist past, similar to the article about the priesthood ban for blacks. Or, would the church actually support it, or say nothing at all? Just something interesting to think about…

In my opinion, a terrible one. The manifesto didn’t condemn it in 1890, and neither did the essays in 2014. My hope is that the SCOTUS decision, whether it was right or not to legislate from the bench, will be the catalyst for taking polygamy out of the “doctrine” category and placing it finally, and firmly for all of mortality, in the “abandoned practice” category.

I just came across this article:

However, this article made me start thinking about what kind of position the church (as an organization) would be in if there was a push to legalize polygamy. :think:

It would be hard for the church to come out vocally against it, without sounding very hypocritical. The manifesto doesn’t exactly condemn polygamy. So, in order to take a stand against it, they would have to come out with some language that isn’t as open to interpretation, which would mean turning their back on our polygamist past, similar to the article about the priesthood ban for blacks. Or, would the church actually support it, or say nothing at all? Just something interesting to think about…

In my opinion, a terrible one. The manifesto didn’t condemn it in 1890, and neither did the essays in 2014. My hope is that the SCOTUS decision, whether it was right or not to legislate from the bench, will be the catalyst for taking polygamy out of the “doctrine” category and placing it finally, and firmly for all of mortality, in the “abandoned practice” category.

I had not thought about the church being faced with polygamy being legalized might prod it to actually say it is not doctrine. Interesting.

Honestly, I think the specter of polygamy hangs over this whole issue for the Church leadership and has influenced their actions and stances greatly. I think without that specter, their language would be different now. Not approving, but different.

Honestly, I think this is exactly why we climbed into bed with the evangelicals and the religious right to oppose same sex marriage (not just our leaders’ bent toward conservative politics). It’s the desire to distance ourselves from a shameful polygamous past. “See how much we love monogamy and normal traditional marriage?? See? See? We are normal, we swear!”

we climbed into bed with the evangelicals

queue in the Beavis and Butthead giggle.

Pardon my bad attempt at humor, but between SCOTUS decision and stresses at work – I am ready for a good laugh.

Honestly, I think the specter of polygamy hangs over this whole issue for the Church leadership and has influenced their actions and stances greatly. I think without that specter, their language would be different now. Not approving, but different.

I think there is no logical way to continue to outlaw polygamy, legally, now that same-sex marriage has been approved. I think its only a matter of time now – and the restrictions will be age and consent based (including incest), which is how I believe it should be. I also think it will be interesting how many people on both sides of the same-sex marriage divide will be united against polygamy being legalized – and how many of them won’t see or accept the irony.

I would love another official renunciation of polygamy in our time, but I don’t expect it to be applied retroactively. I actually think that would be more difficult than ceasing to openly oppose same-sex marriage – since that is in the process of happening already. Seriously, the churches calling for active opposition to the ruling do not include the LDS Church. Baby steps, I know, but that one is important.

If you’re okay with speculating, I’m curious to know how you think the approach to gay marriage would be different without the polygamy backdrop.

I have little time this morning, but I think the concern over gay marriage leading to the legalization of polygamy was a driving force behind the intensity with which the Church leadership approached the arguments. I think they would have been less inclined to be so vocal and “out front” without that concern.

Don’t get me wrong; I think they still would have opposed it. I don’t think there is any way around that. I just think they were willing to be a much more visible, forceful actor because of the ramifications of polygamy being the next domino to fall.

You may very well be right. Don’t know if I have a strong inclination either way. Not sure if I feel it matters. I know the 15 are smart men, but even outside revelation they may receive, many other smart men (and women) have misread things when they are insulated a bit. I study business management and it is a VERY common (almost the norm) for the CEO to be so insulated from reality that they make colossal blunders.

it’s bad enough we discuss religion here, politics is too much .)

:thumbup: