Polygamists see open door for acceptance

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, July 4, 2003 | Ron Strom

[JohnHuang2]

Friday, July 4, 2003

Quote of the Day by Cicero

[friendly]

The bizarre activist "logic" of the Supreme Court makes a strong case for the polygamists.

And liberals (who will do anything in their evil power to destroy America) will support the polygamists in the strangest political marraige in our history.

[cartoonistx]

Can beastiality, sibling marriage and pedophilic partnerships be far behind?!

[cartoonistx]

Can beastiality, sibling marriage and pedophilic partnerships be far behind?!

[Nightshift]

PING

[yonif]

It means come see this, etc.

[fporretto]

While the mind reels at the idea that a woman of our times would accept being merely one of a number of wives to one man, consider this:

• The man could have many live-in girlfriends.
• All such relationships, whether sexual or not, would be entirely legal in all 50 states. No laws are being broken.
• If one of the women got pregnant, in most states the man's legal obligations to her and the baby would be the same as if he'd married her.
• If one of the women took up with another man, the man would not have any legal recourse, since there's no marital contract to enforce.
• There's now "case law" on the books in most states that has effectively revived the old common-law marital bond; if the man were to cast out one of the women, in any of those states she could sue him for "palimony" -- and if he were wealthy enough to maintain such a harem in the first place, she'd probably get it.

Looks to me as if the man is the crazy one for entertaining this arrangement. More, there is absolutely no way in which it gets worse -- for anyone -- if this one man / many women arrangement is permitted to marry!

There are surely other things that are more worth our time and attention.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason:
http://palaceofreason.com

[Noachian]

How does this SCOTUS ruling effect the Mormons in Utah?

A guy got sent to jail last year (I think it was) because of polygamy laws in Utah. The guy wasn't hurting anyone, and the only mistake the guy made was marrying the women instead of shacking up with them.

I think one of the conditions of statehood for Utah was that they had to drop their religious support for polygamy, which had nothing to do with Constitutional law.

On the other hand can a feminist professional, in a high-rise condo in New York, legally practice polyandry?

[novacation]

I've never understood the anti-poligamy laws. If a man a herd of women are crazy enough to all marry let them have at it. This is a question of seperation of church and state. It is not the governments business.The guy who got thrown in prison last year for polgamy was the sacrifical cow. If he had keep his mouth shut nothing would have happened.I see nothing immoral about it. I'm not Mormon.

[randog]

"Polygamy is the next civil-rights battle."

Take a ticket and get in line.

[tiamat]

Are you referring to the Kingston family in Utah?

If so , that "patriarch" had taken to wife and consumated marriage with a neice of his when she was about 14. The "marriage" had been contracted by her father, the groom's brother.

To me, this sounds like Islam.

Many of the polygamous marriages, particularly if they involve the Kingstons, ( a HUGE family in Utah! ) are simply welfare scams. The wives and kids are all on the dole while "Daddy" lives high and drives a fancy car.

NOT a good deal or right by my lights.

Tia

[Wrigley]

Polygamy ping

[TheDon]

"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

Sen. Rick Santorum

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/900757/posts

[Loyalist]

The family law bar (what an Orwellian Newspeak name, since it profits from the destruction of families) will be salivating at the prospect of legalized polygamy.

Pre-nuptial agreements, co-habitation agreements, divorces, child custody suits, estates, trusts, succession--all of these and more will be even bigger money-makers for lawyers than ever because of the exponential increase of complexities that polygamy brings to marriage.

[friendly]

It is extremely obvious that legalizing pedophilia is next on the Gay Mafia's legal agenda.

Attention: Leave the children alone, you vermin!

[Elsie]

 

Many of the polygamous marriages, particularly if they involve the Kingstons, ( a HUGE family in Utah! ) are simply welfare scams.

---

---

Exactly!!!

 

NONE of this is about "marriage"; it's all about the "benefits" of marriage.

 

If our Nation didn't have such screwed up ways to steal our money from us in the form of 'taxes', there'd be NO clamor for any 'schemes' to get it back 'legally'!

[Elsie]

a question, NOT a command. 

 

So, when the 'Government' decides polygamy is now ok,

then the LDS organization is ready to drop right back into the old way of living.

---

---

 

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.)

 

 

---

The above is Official Declaration #1, taken from the LDS organization's website --> http://scriptures.lds.org/od/1

---

 

Can anyone find, anywhere in these words, a direct command from 'god' to STOP the practice?

 

No, merely a 'submitting to' of USofA 'law'.

 

 

 

[restornu]

THE ARTICLES OF FAITH OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

Happy 4th of July!

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Bestiality was already not prohibited under Texas law.