Did mormons really believe that...

So, by distinct "entities" I mean to say that they're not 3 distinct "deities." The mormon framework is a little more like "god's in charge and those other guys help out around the shop." They even take a step or two toward recognizing the problems between "trinity" and "monotheism."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Kelly @ Feb 19 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]392704[/snapback]</div>

As far as I know, that STILL goes on, especially in the more strict mormon families. And if the girl tries to get any silly ideas in her head, like oh ... deciding on her own who to marry, there goes the Temple Recommend.

When I was a kid in Utah, living as a heathen filthy non-mormon among mormons, even very close to a small polygamist colony, the obvious hypocrisy and outright weirdness was pretty apparent to me.

And by the time I was 15, so were the blatant phallic symbols.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Feb 19 2007, 03:14 PM) [snapback]392878[/snapback]</div>

Did you ever hear them use the phrase "fetch" or "fetcher?" I remember one time in Heber City I had stopped for gas. I was just pulling into the pumps when a younger guy and his woman went RIGHT in front of me, almost hit me. I slammed the brakes and honked the horn.

I pulled up on his rear bumper and got out to start gassing up. He couldn't get to his fuel fill because I was right on his bumper, so he got back into his car, and yelled at me "You flipping fetcher!"

Did I mention I'm built like a nightclub bouncer??

So I slowly marched over to his open window, and really barked at him for driving like a mormon, cutting me off, etc etc etc. His woman turned white, and so did he.

I bet they had a good story for everybody that Sunday, after sacrement.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Kelly @ Feb 19 2007, 03:41 PM) [snapback]392897[/snapback]</div>

Geez I wonder if we ever passed each other on the street, or at the U? I left in '97

Yeah for some reason the local missionaries used to always knock on my door. I'd answer with a beer in one hand and glare at them, they usually got the message right there!

 

I bet they were pretty white to begin with!

Yes I've heard that one a few too many times. "Flipping Fetcher"... HA! that brings back the good ol' days.

As for Mitt Romney I'd worry about him being president not because of the religion, but because of what a slimy creep he is. Every time I see him I think "used car salesman."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Feb 19 2007, 03:51 PM) [snapback]392905[/snapback]</div>

Yeah as a teenager I never had any problems laying a molly mormon!

:lol:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Feb 19 2007, 04:42 PM) [snapback]392923[/snapback]</div>

When I was still going to the U, it never ceased to amaze me how in the pool locker room, so many guys had on their Temple clothes. I guess to protect them from evil filthy heathens like Yours Truly. Sure used to freak some of them out when I started to change and didn't have any underwear on

:blink:

Though I *really* had to wonder about the ones who kept peeking after I had my pants off. I'm a strictly "live and let live" sort of guy, but that really used to creep me out. As far as I could tell, my equipment was strictly "average" in every sense of the word, nothing unusual or special about the "configuration."



One time I felt so creepy with this guy in his Temple underwear staring at me, I just walked right up to him and said "thanks for the interest, but I'm currently seeing somebody." I guess word got around, the staring stopped soon after.

Ok guess I'm done with this Trip Down Memory Lane. The creepy memories are returning ...

 

Ah the memories are flooding back. Another thing that they did when I was a kid in church was on "fast Sunday" (the one Sunday per month that mormons are required to fast until after church... big sacrifice to skip breakfast I guess ), they'd send some of us young boys around the neighborhood to lapsed church members to ask for tithes.

So they accomplish 2 things with that strategy:
1. adorable young kids asking for your money are harder to resist than some crusty old jerk.
2. the impressionable young kids learn exactly who in their neighborhood is a bad enough person that they stopped going to church.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Kelly @ Feb 18 2007, 09:48 PM) [snapback]392704[/snapback]</div>

You do realize that the LDS church outlawed polygyny over 100 years ago? They repudiated it in 1890, and have actively acted against members who insist on the practice, ex-communicating them. There is no current member of the LDS church who practices plural marriage today, or has practiced it in their lifetimes.

I know many Mormon women, and not one of them feels brainwashed, forced, threatened or otherwise any different from women of other faiths. The husbands on the other hand ...

You have to be careful to separate out the anti-Mormon bigotry from the facts. It is our duty to do so, because prejudice and bigotry are ugly no matter who they are about.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Kelly @ Feb 18 2007, 09:59 PM) [snapback]392709[/snapback]</div>

Simply not true ... or at least not complete. Mormon theology does not incorporate the concept of hell in the same way that conservative Christian theology does. They do believe in different levels of heaven for humans, with members of the LDS church that are found worthy to occupy the top level. The act of baptism for the dead is based on NT scripture, and is a necessary component for a religion founded in the 1800s, some 1850 years after Jesus lived (has to be a way for all those believers in the past to qualify for the top floor). So they research their families, and stand in in a rite of baptism for those that have passed on before us. They get criticized a lot for this, but this isn't some kind of evil act ... their intentions are certainly good, and there's no negative impact to society.

They do believe in an "outer darkness" that is reserved for Satan, his demons and the "truly evil". I presume that folks like Hitler go into the "outer darkness", but I've never had that discussion with a knowldgable member of the LDS church.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Feb 18 2007, 11:45 PM) [snapback]392746[/snapback]</div>

What? Were you paying attention during his first election?

Don't you remember the flap during the primary when he said his favorite philosopher was "The Lord. Christ"? He was extremely open about his conservative Christian faith.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Feb 19 2007, 08:22 PM) [snapback]393042[/snapback]</div>

As someone who lives in the state he ran, I can say right here you just insulted used car salesmen.

 

I know, I'm sorry. I wanted to say how I really feel about him, but then I'd have to **** a lot of the adjectives I'd use. I live in MA too, and I also lived in Salt Lake. Just seeing the guy's face makes my skin crawl.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Feb 20 2007, 12:37 AM) [snapback]393110[/snapback]</div>

My folks moved to Utah when I was a little kid. We lived near St G, right next to a small polygamist compound. As heathen filthy non-mormons, we were treated way worse than the inbred Lolita-screwing polygamists. Mainstream mormons will actually excommunicate any current lds member who professes a desire for polygamy.

But at the same time, they nudge and wink when they see a polygamist. Explain why the state gov, or for that matter the Fed, hasn't shut down these polygamist compounds in Utah and Arizona? Hmmm? There's even a polygamist compound in Bountiful, British Columbia and the provincial and Fed have done only very little in the way of looking into it:

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/bustupinbountiful/index.html

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Feb 20 2007, 12:37 AM) [snapback]393110[/snapback]</div>

I don't seem to recall giving any specific permission for any departed family member of mine, including my mother who died in Dec of 2005, to perform this "baptism for the dead." It's creepy, weird, and I'm put off by it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Feb 20 2007, 12:37 AM) [snapback]393110[/snapback]</div>

That's the thing, I lived in Utah almost half my life, knew a lot of mormons. In their little world, even really bad people are not actually going to the classic "hellfire and brimstone" hell. They actually believe that even the lowest place they go will still be many times better than our world.

With that knowledge in mind, perhaps that is why there is so much white-collar crime in Utah. Invest $5,000 in my scheme at once, don't ask any details, I'm a bishop/council and your Temple Recommend is in my hands, here drink the coolaid

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Feb 20 2007, 02:09 AM) [snapback]393142[/snapback]</div>

:lol:

It's always bad when you end up "insulting" used car salesmen!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman @ Feb 20 2007, 07:32 PM) [snapback]393672[/snapback]</div>

You have to differentiate between the mainstream LDS church and its actions, and the splinter groups, which you did (and then undid with your "wink, wink" statement). Excommunication is the strongest punishment the church can legally take against a member.

The reason the state can't arrest the off-shoot polygandists and make it stick is that the splinter groups have structured it so they are legal. It is OK to have a marriage, and then have 2 or 3 live - in girlfriends. Its not polygamy unless you marry them in a civil ceremony and defraud the state. So they have a primary wife (the state recognizes her as a spouse) and the extra "wives" are live-in girlfriends. In order to make that illegal, well, you would have to reinstate all those laws we used to have about allowed sexual practices.

When they do bust the splinter groups, its for things like child abuse, welfare fraud, etc. But in the absence of those criminal activities, one guy sleeping with a different woman every night of the week might be immoral, but its not illegal. Even adultery isn't illegal in most areas anymore; its grounds for a civil action by the spouse, but its not a legal offense.

Perhaps you'd like the cops to start enforcing the old moral standards against sex before marriage and certain sexual practices even within marriage? That would get all 400 or so polygamists in the country! (Plus the graduating class of nearly every high school in America).

 

fshagan, your facts are a little fuzzy. The polygamists actually do defraud the states via welfare and other means, and in spite of excommunication there honestly, truly, and in my own first-hand experience is a "wink-wink" attitude toward polygamists.

There really has to be since a very large number of mormons in the state are first, second or third generation descended from polygamists who fled persecution to settle in the desert, my own family included. A rough (very rough) analogy would be how people on the east coast perceive the Amish: They're a quaint throw-back to a simpler time.

Also, the sad truth is that young girls (like 13 years old) are forced into marriages, so even if they weren't committing welfare fraud or other crimes, and even if the young girls weren't "technically" wives, that part is still both immoral and illegal.

Also, although my mormon scripture knowledge is a little rusty, I believe the lowest kingdom of heaven is the "Telestial Kingdom," which is reserved for murderers, liars, and the like, but still "surpasses all understanding." The Outer Darkness, on the other hand, is reserved for those who commit the unpardonable sin... which is apparently blasphemy. So blasphemy is worse than all of the horrid things you could think to do, and if you live a despicable life without repenting, you'll still end up pretty good as long as you don't actively denounce God. You'll end up basically servant to all the inhabitants of the higher kingdoms, but that's as bad as it gets.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman @ Feb 18 2007, 08:04 PM) [snapback]392599[/snapback]</div>

Me, too...

in 6th grade

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Feb 21 2007, 07:44 AM) [snapback]393918[/snapback]</div>

I think that's what I said! You didn't address the way they get around the marriage laws, by having only one legal wife, and then "spiritual" wives. If you can't arrest them for the immorality of sleeping with women they are not married to (which would open the floodgates to arrests for a lot of the rest of us), then you have to find what other laws they are breaking. That's not "wink, wink" but simply how our system works. You are innocent until proven guilty, no ex-post-facto enforcement of laws, etc.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Feb 21 2007, 07:44 AM) [snapback]393918[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, three levels ... not sure what they are named, but they are all pretty good, with the highest being the best. I thought murder was an unpardonable sin in Mormon theology, but its been quite a few years since I engaged any knowledgeable Mormons on their theology.

The "unpardonable sin" is from one of the Gospels, Matthew, I think ... and is "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit". That specific blasphemy is not otherwise defined, so there are several theories about what it is among Christians. Most evangelical Christians believe it is to deny or rebuff the work of the Holy Spirit, which is defined as "drawing people to Christ". For the folks who believe in free will, and that only non-belief will cause you to go to hell, this is one of the proof texts.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Feb 21 2007, 12:14 PM) [snapback]393981[/snapback]</div>

There is a "blasphemy challenge" on youtube trying to get people to deny the holy spirit. The first 1000 win something. Probably not a good seat in heaven.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Feb 21 2007, 12:14 PM) [snapback]393981[/snapback]</div>

Sorry, I combined 2 thoughts into one sentence there. First thought being, they do still commit fraud in order to collect welfare, food stamps, etc. by doing creative things like using different names for the man and claiming one family with 4 wives as 4 distinct families. They regularly commit more crimes than just welfare fraud though, including, but not limited to kidnapping and statutory rape.

The second thought was, In spite of excommunication, polygamists are not so much frowned upon by their mormon-in-good-standing neighbors as you would expect of people who commit the kind of (moral and legal) crimes that polygamists typically commit.

So, the social attitude is where most of the "wink-wink" comes into play. The legal attitude is that there have been relatively few attempts to crack down on known polygamist colonies, and it's almost a don't ask/don't tell policy with lawmakers. One of the things that makes it difficult is, as you said, the ambiguous line between religious persecution and going after them for actual crimes.

And for the record, the kingdoms of heaven are (best to worst):

Celestial Kingdom
Terrestrial Kingdom
Telestial Kingdom
---
Outer Darkness

And even as a kid in Sunday school I kept expecting to hear announced one day that there was an "Extra-Terrestrial Kingdom"

 

They also believe that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri (Gallatin, Missouri to be exact). They buy land there whenever it comes on the market. I live about 40 miles from there. It is OK but it is no Eden. I would rather go to Hawaii.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman @ Feb 19 2007, 05:30 PM) [snapback]393044[/snapback]</div>

TMI, Jayman...WAAAAYYYY TMI!!!! :blink:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Feb 19 2007, 08:37 PM) [snapback]393110[/snapback]</div>

Depends on who you ask about this one. Jews have been trying, not altogether successfully, since about 1995, to have the Mormons stop this with our dead. No, not an "evil" act--certainly, however, exceedingly presumptuous at the very least.

I don't know anybody who doesn't appreciate, on some level, the vast genealogical resources the Mormons have compiled and made available. Their motive for this, however, was not a good one. I'm willing to go with "the ends justifIED the means" here--for a reason that has, in fact, to do with my being Jewish--so many of our genealogical records were destroyed in Hitler's Europe, and some information that had been individually held managed to find its way into the Mormon archives. Yes, I am grateful for that. But, sorry Frank, it is just plain OFFENSIVE to ex-post-facto baptize someone who did not make that choice (nor would they have) themselves. Yes, I do see this as a negative impact.

I cannot accept the insult to how many millions of post-mortem Mormon-baptized Jews who died in the Holocaust because they refused to repudiate their religion while they lived as in any way "positive."

How are offensive and presumptuous NOT negative impacts on society?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Feb 20 2007, 10:38 AM) [snapback]393284[/snapback]</div>

Yeah Mitt is the pits. IIRC, he ran for Governor in MA as a bit left of center candidate, then as he started having aspirations for the Presidency, he veered sharply to the right. I don't care what religion he is - he's too slick for me to have as President.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Feb 19 2007, 08:37 PM) [snapback]393110[/snapback]</div>

There is an interesting AP article published today about the polygamy in the Romney family tree:

WCVB Boston - Polygamy A Feature In Romney Family Tree

The Arizona Daily Star - Polygamy a prominent feature in Romney's family tree

(both links are to the same article)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rufaro @ Feb 25 2007, 07:34 AM) [snapback]396189[/snapback]</div>

Well, I understand how something can be offensive, even patently so, when it deals with your ancestors. So I respect your view, and understand it.

Both of us think it is a fool's errand, as they can't change the past. If we believe in free will, they cannot violate it for our ancestors. If we believe in predestination, they cannot change God's plan, especially after the fact. If we believe in nothing, then their efforts are the same ... an exercise in futility. It is a point that most people in the world will agree with ... they are fools for trying to apply some kind of retroactive fix to a problem that is in their own minds.

Being offensive is not a crime, and understanding why they act that way makes it easier for me to live with their practice. I cannot change their practice without violating their rights. That violation of their rights is worse than them making themselves appear foolish to the rest of the world ... believers and non-believers alike. So I have to live with it.

It would be worse if I thought their practice was not a fool's errand, and didn't recognize it as simply a desparate attempt to validate a late coming sect to the Christian religion. Because their theology has ideas that make all the saved Christians before 1850 consigned to a lower level of heaven, they had to come up with something to remedy that. Baptism for the dead does that, but it also exposes how faulty the intellectual underpinnings of the faith are. My judgement is that it is a religion founded by a fool, but now buttressed and supported by well meaning, intelligent people who are struggling to "work out their own salvation" by addressing these issues. And since that particular practice has no effect, except to expose their own foolishness, I'm certainly not going to get worked up by it.

Theologically, I'm very critical of the LDS, but as people, they are fine, decent human beings who deserve more consideration than being painted with the practice of polygany, a practice they not only no longer support, but extract the maximum penalty for (e.g., excommunication). It isn't fair to try and link Mormons to that practice today. Its religious bigotry, and like all bigotry, its pretty ugly.