Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

From the article: There are other surprises. The affidavits clearly indicate that these groups believe that if the anti-polygamy section of the Criminal Code is struck down in B.C. Supreme Court, they will get all of the benefits of Canadian society and more. They believe it would mean an unfettered guarantee of religious freedom. And, unlike polyamorists who also want the section struck down, breakaway Mormons want as little as possible to do with secular Canadian society.

Uh, let's set the record straight:
(1) There are very few fundamentalist Mormons alive today who were ever mainstream Mormons...so they are not "breakaway Mormons."
(2) That's even almost completely the case of their parents. So their parents weren't "breakaway Mormons," either.
(3) The fundamentalist Mormons never left their "scriptural authority" -- Joseph Smith and his Doctrine & Covenants 132 revelation -- to practice polygamy. The mainstream Mormons -- despite never sidelining D&C 132 -- are the ones who "broke away" from their founder.

1 posted on 10/22/2010 5:54:07 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Colofornian
I have a question. If as taught lds believe Jesus was crucified because He was a polygamist, even though lds will tell you polygamy was a common practice at the time and a major tenant of their “new” faith - why did their god change his mind on the issue? So wouldn't the lds who still practice polygamy actually be the true lds?
2 posted on 10/22/2010 6:04:59 AM PDT by svcw (Legalism is enforced revelation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
What is surprising is that the affidavits are steeped in the myth of persecution. Filed in advance of the constitutional reference case, which is scheduled to be heard starting Nov. 22 in B.C. Supreme Court, they reveal that almost all of the breakaway Mormons say they live in fear of being jailed or having their children taken away from them.

Yep, "fear of my family life being interrupted", is one of the things that keeps me from committing crimes too.

Poor persecuted Mormons should be above the law, kind of like democrats, they are "victims" too.

3 posted on 10/22/2010 6:08:14 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (Mark Kirk "republican" Illinois, not no but HELL NO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
From the article: It's not surprising that breakaway Mormons say they love their polygamous lives in the affidavits they've sworn to support their position that practising it is their constitutional right. What is surprising is that the affidavits are steeped in the myth of persecution. Filed in advance of the constitutional reference case, which is scheduled to be heard starting Nov. 22 in B.C. Supreme Court, they reveal that almost all of the breakaway Mormons say they live in fear of being jailed or having their children taken away from them. Yet, the first time such men were charged in Canada with polygamy was two years ago. The case against prominent polygamists James Oler and Winston Blackmore - leaders of the Bountiful community near Creston, B.C. - was thrown out of court in September 2009.

It's not surprising to me. They've learned well from their American cousins -- both the fundamentalist Mormons and mainstream Mormons -- and how they portray their own polygamous past...as one of "persecution"...when the federal marshals would track down polygamists in the 1880s and put them in jail.

And even during the Joseph Smith era -- the era before most outsiders learned of Mormonism's early polygamist roots, Mormons still love to play up a history of persecution myths:
(1): See, for example, the first entry at: Setting the record straight on the 'Hawn's' Mill Massacre In the article, it explains how the Mormons love to cite Jacob Haun (real name was spelled Jacob Hawn with a "w"), who was the owner of the Hawn's Mill. But Jacob Hawn was never a Mormon...(In that article, a historian discusses why Jacob and Harriet Hawn were never Mormons. "I like many other historians mainly assumed they were Mormons." But among other proofs, Baugh explained that they arrived earlier to Caldwell County before the Mormons, and no family records report that they were Mormons. So the mill that was attacked wasn't even a Mormon mill, after all. [Rewrite the history books]
(2) From the above-linked article: With 17 Mormons killed and 14 Mormons injured, the historian explained that the massacre on October 30, 1838 was the "singular most tragic event in terms of loss of life and injury enacted by an anti-Mormon element against the Latter-day Saints in our entire church's history." Well, I would hope that historians would present history in a more balanced way. What's NOT mentioned in that article is that 12 days before this attack:
On October 18, 1838, Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, Lyman Wight, D. W. Patten at the head of 40 men made a descent on Gallatin, the county seat of Daviess, and they burned the only store and stole their goods. Previous to the 25th of October a great part of the Mormons residing in Caldwell County had returned home with their dividend of plunder.
* 6 days before this attack: • On October 25, 1838, the Battle of Crooked River: Mormon forces attacked (unknowingly?) the Missouri state militia under the command of Samuel Bogart. This incident became one of the principal points of conflicts in 1838 Missouri. The battle resulted in the death of three militia and the LDS leader, David Patten. One of the militia was taken prisoner by the Mormons. Source: http://www.carm.org/religious-movements/mormonism/are-christians-persecuting-mormons

(3) Beyond that, Mormons overdramatize how long the persecution lasted in Missouri:
* It was about 100 days in Jackson Co late spring/early Summer & early fall of '33;
* Another month or so-- maybe 40-45 days in Sept/Oct 1838 -- violence all occurring in Oct.
* Less than 5 months actual real time, all told.

In the first 100 of those days by less than 50 people in 1 county (400-500 did attend a council in mid-July but we have no record of how many in attendance of a meeting acted upon it...showing up at an event doesn't make you an oppressor or persecutor)
...and the committee who then attempted to foist themselves upon the Mormons were only 12 men...(Joseph Fielding Smith, Essentials in Church History, p. 133-134) --- out of a state-wide/county-wide pop of how many?

Joseph Fielding Smith says mob of 500 (p. 135) but no violence...did threaten it July 23, 1833. Smith says "about 1200 members forced to leave Jackson co." (p. 209). But the committee which forced them out only specified 11 families according to Smith earlier in the book. They forced 9 of 11 families to leave within a few mos. warning -- and the two remaining would finish up their business goods (Smith, p. 135).

Of course, some things happened in Nauvoo in 1844-1845...but not Kirtland, Ohio, which is sometimes included in the Mormon laundry list of persecuted places.

4 posted on 10/22/2010 6:11:24 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian

It won’t be done for Mormons, it will be done for Muslims.


5 posted on 10/22/2010 6:13:04 AM PDT by GeronL (http://libertyfic.proboards.com <--- My Fiction/ Science Fiction Board)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
Legalized polygamy opens the door to theocracy

I tend to think it would simply lead to further errosion of the family.

10 posted on 10/22/2010 6:22:48 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
"Legalized polygamy opens the door to theocracy"

See "If This Goes On..." in Robert A. Heinlein's anthology "The Past Through Tomorrow" for a remarkably similar plot of this hypothesis.

12 posted on 10/22/2010 6:56:58 AM PDT by BlueLancer (I'm getting a fine tootsy-frootsying right here...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian

What is surprising is that the affidavits are steeped in the myth of persecution.
_____________________________________________

What is surprising is that the posts here are steeped in the myth of persecution.


13 posted on 10/22/2010 7:02:59 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian

Witness No. 2 complains that the breakaway Mormons “have an extremely hard time helping women immigrate when they marry as a plural spouse as it is very hard to get medical insurance.”
___________________________________________________

So is this an illegal alien problem or a moral problem ???


14 posted on 10/22/2010 7:07:52 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian

So, if polygamy is legalized, she wants money for education programs for polygamous women “tailored to our needs.”
____________________________________________________

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

the DREAM Act..

It seems their sex crimes reporter was out sick...

and the “immigration” reporter was having a slow day...

He or she just tweeked an old article of his or her own...


16 posted on 10/22/2010 7:18:36 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
The following represents only my own personal opinion and in no way implicates any other FReeper whatsoever. Ahem:

THEOCRACY, baby! YEEEEAAAAHHH!!!!!

19 posted on 10/22/2010 7:28:16 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Vehitbarekhu vezar`akha kol goyey ha'aretz; `eqev 'asher shama`ta beqoli.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
clear the way for them to set up a distinct society - a theocracy within our secular, liberal democracy.

Isn't the state's enforcement of a monogamous, heterosexual marriage already a form of theocracy?

In a true "liberal democarcy" the people could vote for whatever they want, and the majority would rule. E.g., they would have the power to authorize polygamous zones within the state if they so wished.

Perhaps the claim of "secular, liberal democracy" by the paper is simply overblown rhetoric.

20 posted on 10/22/2010 7:38:45 AM PDT by topcat54 ("Don't whine to me. It's all Darby's fault.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
What is surprising is that the affidavits are steeped in the myth of persecution.
27 posted on 10/22/2010 9:59:00 AM PDT by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All

ROFL just when I thought I had read the most over-the-top way to attack the LDS Church I see something even more twisted. The Anti-Mormon gang on FR is just out there... way out there. Obsessed doesn’t truly quite cover it.

Anyone new to this zoo,

If you peruse the Free Republic religion forums you will notice a pattern. There’s an anti-Mormon group of people here that spends a great deal of their time attacking the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. They post regurgitated propaganda on an almost daily basis.

They have a misguided obsession. You can witness many different tactics employed that you might find quite interesting. The straw man argument is a big favorite and is frequently preceded by cherry-picking quotes or other material. After the “quotation” the attacker will misrepresent what has been said or what was meant and then attack their own interpretation.

Another favorite is posting scripture or statements which on their own really present no dilemma. They make something out of nothing while never bringing up a single objection that hasn’t been addressed a hundred times before.

Sometimes they cruise the headlines of the day seeking any story that might be twisted into making the Church look bad. Anything will do, just watch the progression of posts following it and see what I mean.

After reading their posts, I invite you to seek the truth about whatever “issue” they seem to be “revealing” or “exposing”. I promise that if you do so with honest intent, the “ahah” moments you will have will be many and frequent. You will start to recognize the tactics employed to cleverly twist and attack and will likely chuckle the more you see. In actuality, there’s nothing new here. It’s all been addressed many times before.

Here’s a few links to get your started from a different viewpoint. I have found that the vast majority of the “issues” brought up can be found and addressed at http://www.fairlds.org/ but here’s more:

http://scriptures.lds.org/
http://www.lds.org
http://www.fairlds.org/
http://www.mormonapologetics.org/
http://www.mormonwiki.com/Main_Page
http://www.lightplanet.com/response/index.html
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDS_Intro.shtml
http://www.answeringantimormons.com/index.htm
http://promormon.blogspot.com/


31 posted on 10/22/2010 10:35:57 AM PDT by Paragon Defender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson