The Ghost of Polygamy

[Anonymous]

There has been a recent uptick in the talk about Polygamy since the release of Carol Lynn Pearson’s book, “The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy: Haunting the Hearts and Heaven of Mormon Women and Men” In the book she talks about the heartache that polygamy continues to cause in faithful LDS women, who worry about sharing their husband for the eternities. A good overview of the book can be found here at Mormon Matters.

I recently ready that the “Sister Wives” court case is winding its way to the Supreme Court. Since polygamy was terminated in the early 1900’s in the Brigham Young lead church due to civil penalties, what will the church do if polygamy is legal in the USA? Will the church be forced to issue a statement that polygamy was never God’s law, that JS, BY and other prophets were wrong when they said you can’t be exalted without “celestial marriage” (original definition )?

This will make for some interesting times, as the church is required to relook at D&C 132, and maybe make some changes?

[Anonymous]

No, it wouldn’t force any statement like that. The official statement of apostasy after the Manifesto would suffice.

Frankly, I think one of the reasons for the extent to which the Church leaders fought same-sex marriage (perhaps the strongest practical reason) was them seeing where it would lead with polygamists challenging the current restrictions on their marriages.

[Anonymous]

I am sure the church is really wishing this wasn’t headed to the supreme court. If it makes it there and polygamy becomes legal, it will probably draw enough attention that the church will reiterate it’s current position in countries where polygamy is legal (and even common). My understanding is that the current position is that the church does not allow members to participate in polygamy even if it is legal. But to your point, it is going to shine (even more of) a spotlight on our history with polygamy and the split-off groups (FLDS, AUB, Kingston, LeBarons, Centennial Park, etc).

I agree with Sheldon that it is interesting that we are having a rise within the church (the book being the most clear pressure) to denounce polygamy just as the same time that it may become legal. I wonder if it will weaken the church’s current stand of “marriage is only between a man and A women”?

[Anonymous]

If it strengthens the current monogamous stance, it would be a blessing, imo.

Having said that, it is a bit ironic to support same-sex marriage on the grounds that legally consenting adults should be allowed to make their own choices regarding their sexual and marital relationships but reject that exact same argument for consenting adults who want polygamous arrangements. I am okay with that irony (and even hypocrisy), but it is important to recognize the tension and logical inconsistency openly and honesty.

Frankly, recogniIng that kind of inconsistency in my own views helps me respect others who have different inconsistencies in their views. It doesn’t change my disdain for some examples of inconsistency, but it lessens any condemnation or judgment of the people who hold them.

[Anonymous]

LookingHard wrote:

But to your point, it is going to shine (even more of) a spotlight on our history with polygamy and the split-off groups (FLDS, AUB, Kingston, LeBarons, Centennial Park, etc).

And when it does, the church will say that we “abandoned the practice” (someone really loves that phrase) x-many years ago. And then a reporter worth his/her salt will ask the next question, about there being any circumstances in which the church would practice it again. That’s the moment of truth. Is the church really going to say to outsiders what it’s willing to say to every member without apparent concern for its impact? That we practice polygamy when we believe God tells us to, and that no determination has been made by the male leaders of this church to rule it out.

I pray that someone asks, and I pray for the person who answers.

[Anonymous]

My first question would be, how does legalized polygamy factor into the standard deduction for income tax and my second question would be, how many people can I marry?

[Anonymous]

Still perusing Carol Lynn Pearson’s new book….

Would the church and/or the Supreme Court relish going against certain public opinions:

Quote:

Polygamy in all its forms is a recipe for social structures that inhibit and ultimately undermine social freedom and democracy. A hard-won lesson in Western history is that genuine democratic self-rule begins at the hearth of the monogamous family. – Ethics and Public Policy Center

Don’t know what they would say about the genders of that monogamous marriage….

Quote:

Polygamy violates the dignity of women. It is an inadmissible discrimination against women. Consequently, it should be definitely abolished wherever it continues to exist. – United Nations Human Rights Committee

I haven’t researched it, but her book says that upper courts in Canada have recently upheld their ban on polygamy. I think it’s being challenged again by Canadian Muslims.

[Anonymous]

I haven’t read Pearson’s book yet, but I listened to a podcast where she discussed it, and I’m surprised at how much I agree with her conclusion. If Joseph Smith was wrong about polygamy, it would actually be a kindness to him to stop perpetuating his error and hurting people. I like that.

For me, the ghost of polygamy lingers in the idea that women are fundamentally interchangeable. I was told by the stake patriarch, shortly before receiving my PB, that my father (who is still LDS) would be handed a replacement for my mother (who left the church when I was a teen), and I would call his new wife ‘Mother.’ As a 20-year-old, I found that comforting. As a 30-[mumble]-year old, I find it horrifying.

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

I haven’t read Pearson’s book yet, but I listened to a podcast where she discussed it, and I’m surprised at how much I agree with her conclusion. If Joseph Smith was wrong about polygamy, it would actually be a kindness to him to stop perpetuating his error and hurting people. I like that.

I don’t have the quote handy, but I liked that, too. When she says she holds his teachings in her hand, and with “the breath of kindness,” blows away the chaff.

Quote:

For me, the ghost of polygamy lingers in the idea that women are fundamentally interchangeable. I was told by the stake patriarch, shortly before receiving my PB, that my father (who is still LDS) would be handed a replacement for my mother (who left the church when I was a teen), and I would call his new wife ‘Mother.’ As a 20-year-old, I found that comforting. As a 30-[mumble]-year old, I find it horrifying.

For me, polygamy goes beyond even interchangeability. Because your stake patriarch could have said you’d call a new man “father” if your mother had been the one to stay in. That interchangeability is the same for men and women in a church that prizes loyalty to the institution above all else and says it knows how God will deal with us hereafter. I could see the Catholic church, for instance, saying something similar in certain times and places.

But polygamy goes beyond that in reducing women to faceless, powerless flowerpots for reproduction. We’re not just interchangeable, we’re stackable for easy storage.

[Author]

Posts