A Ruling for Polygamy -- and Freedom

RealClearPolitics ^ | January 5, 2014 | Steve Chapman

[2ndDivisionVet]

In modern America, sex is increasingly where it should be: outside the reach of government. Anti-sodomy statutes have been tossed by the Supreme Court. Contraception is widely accessible. Anyone with a computer can gorge on pornography without fear of prosecution.

Same-sex marriage has been legalized in 18 states and the District of Columbia. Now another step has been taken to expel police and legislators from the bedrooms of consenting adults: a federal court decision striking down a key element of Utah's ban on polygamy.

Last month, District Judge Clark Waddoups ruled that the law infringes not only on constitutionally protected sexual privacy but on the free exercise of religion. Utah, he concluded, doesn't have to issue multiple marriage licenses to Kody Brown and his consorts, who appear in the reality TV show "Sister Wives." But it can't dictate their living arrangements.

The group belongs to a renegade Mormon sect that regards polygamy as sanctioned by God. Brown is legally married to one of the women and "spiritually married" to the other three. Together, at last count, they have 17 children.

If a man and a woman want to live together and call themselves partners, buddies, teammates, friends with benefits or Bonnie and Clyde, the government will leave them alone. Ditto if a guy can entice several fertile females to shack up with him and spawn a noisy horde of offspring.

But in Utah, it matters what the man calls the women living with him. If he refers to them as wives, he can go to prison. The law covers not only formal polygamous marriage but any relationships in which a married person "purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person." That was the provision ruled unconstitutional....

[2ndDivisionVet]

Wasn't that law a trade-off put there so that Utah could gain statehood? Do they now lose that status? LOL

[Lurker]

How consenting adults choose to order their private lives is none of the States business. None whatsoever.

[Lurker]

It was a trade off. The Federal government blackmailed the Utah territory in blatant violation of the First Amenedment.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Back when they only did that every blue moon. Now it’s pretty much on a daily basis, no?

[CIB-173RDABN]

Those that think this is all good do not understand the foundations of civilizations.

The most basic building block of any civilization is the family which for thousands of year has been one man and one woman, having and raising children.

What happens once a man no longer knows if a child is his or not? We really don’t have wonder, the experimenter that began in this nation with the Great Society has done a good job of creating generations without fathers.

All these changes with what makes a family does nothing but weakens our society.

[BenLurkin]

There is a huge difference between the fit enjoyment of Liberty — and being a libertine.

[Tennessee Nana]

Now the Mormons can could out of the closet and live their so called “first principle” out in the open...

[2ndDivisionVet]

In the Bible we can count 15 examples of polygamy from the time of Lamech to 931 A.D. 13 of these men had enough power that no one could call into question their practice, they were unaccountable or no one dared approach them. Lamech Genesis 4:19; Abraham Genesis 16; Esau Genesis 26:34; 28:9; Jacob Genesis 29:30; Ashur 1 Chronicles 4:5; Gideon Judges 8:30; Elkanah 1 Samuel 1:2; David 1 Samuel 25:39-44; 2 Samuel 3:2-5; 5:13; 1 Chronicles 14:3; Solomon 1 Kings 11:1-8; Rehoboam 2 Chronicles 11:18-23; Abijah 2 Chronicles 13:21; Jehoram 2 Chronicles 21:14; Joash 2 Chronicles 24:3; Ahab 2 Kings 10; Jehoiachin 2 Kings 24:15; Belshazzar Daniel 5:2; 1 Chronicles 2:8; Hosea in Hosea 3:1,2. Polygamy is mentioned in the Mosaic law and made inclusive on the basis of legislation, and continued to be practiced all down through the period of Jewish history to the Captivity, after which there is no instance of it on record (Gen.29:15-30, Jacob and his wives.)

[2ndDivisionVet]

No, the ruling does not allow polygamy or bigamy, it only keeps the state from prosecuting someone for mere cohabitation, like the other 49 states.

[Regulator]

Free societies are free because they have a right to order their societies as they see fit, not according to the wishes of a tyrant.

It doesn’t mean anybody can do anything. If a murder cult claims religious freedom to kill anyone they feel like, are we bound to respect that?

Monogamy and marriage are social institutions arrived at because they create stable societies that are durable. All the other “-amys” - bigamy, polygamy, whatever - have been tried and lead to ugly, dysfunctional societies.

Conservatism supposedly recognizes this. And only fools tread where disaster has gone before.

The Mormons were going to end up being slaughtered by angry armies of men deprived of their wives and families when Mormon missionaries showed up in their towns 150 years ago. That’s why they had to stay on the move. Young could run around with his 56 wives but he had damn well better trained them to shoot, because there that many men and more who could shoot and would to get at a guy who tried to take us back to barbarian tribalism with the Big Man having all the women.

Polygamy is barbarian. Try it again and civil strife will be the result.

[rcofdayton]

Please explain how the Bible discusses polygamy in 931 A.D.

[mrsmith]

Just what has changed in the nature of mankind, in the last 5,000 years, to make you think that?
Heck, a third of Hammurabi’s Code is devoted to matters of relationships.

[Elsie]

Wasn't that law a trade-off put there so that Utah could gain statehood? Do they now lose that status?

Glad you asked!!

Read the following and see if YOU can find where the Mormon god told them to STOP polygamy.

Good luck...

 

    OFFICIAL DECLARATION—1

To Whom It May Concern:

Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy—

I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.

Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.

WILFORD WOODRUFF
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

---

---

---

President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:

“I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.”

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.

Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.

---

---

---

 

EXCERPTS FROM THREE ADDRESSES BY
PRESIDENT WILFORD WOODRUFF
REGARDING THE MANIFESTO

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty. (Sixty-first Semiannual General Conference of the Church, Monday, October 6, 1890, Salt Lake City, Utah. Reported in Deseret Evening News, October 11, 1890, p. 2.)

It matters not who lives or who dies, or who is called to lead this Church, they have got to lead it by the inspiration of Almighty God. If they do not do it that way, they cannot do it at all. . . .

I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. . . .

The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.

The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?

The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for . . . any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.

. . . I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. . . .

I leave this with you, for you to contemplate and consider. The Lord is at work with us.

(Cache Stake Conference, Logan, Utah, Sunday, November 1, 1891. Reported in Deseret Weekly, November 14, 1891.)

 

 

 

Now I will tell you what was manifested to me and what the Son of God performed in this thing. . . . All these things would have come to pass, as God Almighty lives, had not that Manifesto been given. Therefore, the Son of God felt disposed to have that thing presented to the Church and to the world for purposes in his own mind. The Lord had decreed the establishment of Zion. He had decreed the finishing of this temple. He had decreed that the salvation of the living and the dead should be given in these valleys of the mountains. And Almighty God decreed that the Devil should not thwart it. If you can understand that, that is a key to it.

 

(From a discourse at the sixth session of the dedication of the Salt Lake Temple, April 1893. Typescript of Dedicatory Services, Archives, Church Historical Department, Salt Lake City, Utah.)

 

---

 

 

 

 

What kind of  'Leadership' is THIS???

 

compared to...

 

 

 

 

Hebrews 11:35-40
 35.  Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.
 36.  Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison.
 37.  They were stoned ; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated--
 38.  the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. 
 

 

or compared to...

 

Acts 4:19.  But Peter and John replied, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God.

 

---

---

 

So much for an 'Everlasting Covenant' that thundered out of Heaven!!!

 

Well; it DID last about 47 years!

 

---

---

---

 

Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriage...

I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws..."

~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President

 

[Elsie]

But wait!!!

There's MORE....

---

"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;

and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,

and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.

Brigham Young - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)

It must be rough; being a MORMON, and trying to hold all the differing positions in their heads that their chosen religion has taken, and then trying to make sense of it all...

[Elsie]

What happens once a man no longer knows if a child is his or not?

Then the Rich Uncle pays for it's maintenance...

AnOTHER little bastard??

[Elsie]

Polygamy is barbarian.

Decisions decisions!

Emma Hale only!!

Fanny Alger Lucinda Morgan Harris Louisa Beaman Zina Huntington Jacobs Presendia Huntington Buell Agnes Coolbrith Sylvia Sessions Lyon Mary Rollins Lightner Patty Bartlett Sessions Marinda Johnson Hyde Elizabeth Davis Durfee Sarah Kingsley Cleveland Delcena Johnson Eliza R. Snow Sarah Ann Whitney Martha McBride Knight Ruth Vose Sayers Flora Ann Woodworth Emily Dow Partridge Eliza Maria Partridge Almera Johnson Lucy Walker Sarah Lawrence Maria Lawrence Helen Mar Kimball Hanna Ells Elvira Cowles Holmes Rhoda Richards Desdemona Fullmer Olive Frost Melissa Lott Nancy Winchester Fanny Young

[Fee]

The world has accepted polygamy more then sodomy. If the US makes sodomy legal then it has no grounds to say no to polygamy. If Americans are smart men should have more then one wife. Think of the combined incomes and exemptions. Our tax laws are not geared for polygamy. Do the math. If a man has one wife and two kids making 250 000 annually vs a man who has five wives and ten kids making 500 000 annually. I think the guy with five wives and ten kids make out tax wise. Another point is if man and wife both work can barely afford two kids, will a man and five wives working do better? I think financially yes. Big gov will not be able to collect much taxes from a man with five wives and ten kids (fifteen exemptions plus self) compared to a man with one wife and two kids (three exemptions plus self). There is only one catch to this arrangement - old Chinese saying, two women under roof can mean trouble.

[ansel12]

This isn’t about privacy, it is about marriage law.

Yours is one of those new, stylish, lefty trends, when was America free of marriage law?

[Elsie]

“You have not converted a man because you have silenced him”

- John Morley

[Talisker]

Just what has changed in the nature of mankind, in the last 5,000 years, to make you think that? Heck, a third of Hammurabi’s Code is devoted to matters of relationships.

What does Hammurabi's Code say about We the People?