So...here, an Lds spokesperson -- forced to concede that Lds believes it is practicing polygamy on another planet/colony...
And not just another planet...as Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie taught polygamy would return when Jesus returned:
From the article: According to an article in the April 20, 2008 edition of the Salt Lake Tribune: “Though the LDS Church had disavowed polygamy, it is still enshrined in Mormon scripture (Doctrine & Covenants 132) and some believe it will one day be re-established, if not on Earth, at least in heaven. In his quasi-official 1966 book Mormon Doctrine, which remains in print, the late LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie wrote that ‘the holy practice will commence again after the Second Coming and the ushering in of the millennium.’ And by policy, men can be ‘sealed’ for eternity in LDS temple rites to more than one wife, though women are permitted only a single sealing. Three of the church's current apostles, for example, were widowed and remarried. Each will have two wives in the eternities” (“Modern-day Mormons disavow polygamy”)...The three Mormon Apostles referred to in this article are Dallin Oaks, L. Tom Perry, and Russell M. Nelson. All three men are widowers, and all three men have been “sealed” to a second wife.
And so even three current Lds "apostles" (Oaks, Perry, Nelson) have been sealed "for eternity" in the Mormon temple...and anticipate sleeping with both wives in their "new life" beyond death...
From the article: “Question: Is polygamy gone forever from the Church? We only know what the Lord has revealed through His prophets, that plural marriage has been stopped in the Church. Anything else is speculative and unwarranted.” If it is really speculative and unwarranted, what is the point of Mormon widowers being sealed in Mormon temples? If temple sealings of this nature have significance in the hereafter, how can the LDS Church honestly say “plural marriage has been stopped”?
Here, the Mormon church again speaking out of both sides of its mouth...telling members one thing about so-called "eternal polygamy"...yet conveying a "Oh, it's all speculative" PR press release to the public!
I’m guessing the celestial heavens won’t be democracies...
If it were, the man would be doing all the work and the women would be watching tv and eating bon bons.
I can’t see any way to maintain civil sanctions against polygamy while permitting same sex weddings.. I expect it to be increasingly difficult to draw any lines at all, we are headed for anything goes.
Yeah, when i was young i was thinking of becoming a Mormon, because of my ignorance i thought that Mormon men were required to have more than one wife, but after some time i realized this was not the case and in fact according to the book of Mormon men are actually forbidden to have more than one wife.
So the fact that many of our Christian founding fathers did have more than one wife amazed me, in other words why would the Christians who actually came from plural marriages ( the 12 tribes ) criticize others for wanting the same thing?
If the Mormons are involved in polygamy they are going against their own teaching which according to their accusers come from the book of Mormon which forbids polygamy.
So if other Christians do not believe in the book of Mormon why would they care if the Mormons do not adhere to it?
The marriages sealed in the temple are nothing but a form of religion and since every one seems to love religion i just can,t see it as being such a big deal, this it the kind of stuff that religion is made of.
'True' MORMONs do!
After all; it is SCRIPTURE!!! an it is ETERNAL!!!
58 Now, as touching the law of the apriesthood, there are many things pertaining thereunto.
59 Verily, if a man be called of my Father, as was aAaron, by mine own voice, and by the voice of him that bsent me, and I have endowed him with the ckeys of the power of this priesthood, if he do anything in my name, and according to my law and by my word, he will not commit dsin, and I will justify him.
60 Let no one, therefore, set on my servant Joseph; for I will justify him; for he shall do the sacrifice which I require at his hands for his transgressions, saith the Lord your God.
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse aanother, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have aten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to amultiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be bglorified.
64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.
65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take aHagar to wife.
66 And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present. Behold, I am Alpha and Omega. Amen.
"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)
That Thump-Thump you heard was the BUS running over their 'god'!
~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President
This singular sense also translates directly from the Hebrew where, I believe, that polygyny practiced in Torah was in gross error of that very scripture until the edict of Rabbeinu Gershom in the 11th century banned it's practice altogether.
But, would the rebuilding of The Temple which, by most Orthodox opinion, restore animal sacrifice (which I as an Old Testament believer yet decry as opposed to the Pharisaic evolution of modern prayer), and thus then continue this ancient practice as well? I would pray to God, no.
No. That's simply not true, no matter how many times it's repeated.
First, the 1890 Manifesto only purported to prevent new plural marriages. Read it; it didn't even purport to discontinue existing polygamy, which slowly died out naturally in the 1950s or 1960s (and I don't have a problem with that; it would have been inhumane to break up existing plural marriages).
Second, the LDS Church continued to practice a small number (most LDS historians say about 250, although a very few set the number at closer to 2,000) of secret polygamous marriages after 1890 in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico - even the plural marriage of a member of the Quorum of the Twelve. That's why the U.S. Senate refused to seat Reed Smoot as the Senator from Utah in 1904, and we had four years of the Smoot hearings. It's why there was a Second Manifesto, the 1904 Manifesto, by LDS President Joseph F. Smith. 1904 is by far the better date for the year the LDS Church officially stopped plural marriages.
I am a Christian. If my wife dies and I remarry, will I not have two wives with me in heaven?
Who cares?
That argument seems a little silly.