Originally Posted By Labuda So, this could go in Gen: Ent, but I have a feeling it would quickly get moved here to WE, so that's why I'm putting it here. This is a show that aired recently on NatGeo that I've almost finished season one of now. (This was its first season, I think.) Anyhow, I found something that REALLY surprised me in this: turns out I don't think all Mormons are inherently loons after all. There's a gentlemen on the show named Arthur who's in his mid-60s and in charge of the young men who are out of school but not yet married. From what I've seen in the show, this community (Centennial Park, AZ) is mostly made of good people and it's nice to see that not all polygamist Mormons are screwing little girls. Also, at least this Arthur seems to have a good head on his shoulders, aside from the whole religion thing. He teaches these young guys to work hard and help each other out, which I think would be great for everyone instead of just this fringe group. Anyhow, I think I'm actually not AS anti-polygamist after having seen these 6 or 7 hours of tv than I was before. Am I ever going to be part of a situation like that? Not a chance. Am I ever going to think they're not crazy for some of their beliefs (like that God tells you who you're supposed to marry)? Not a chance, but I really liked that this put a human face on polygamists and let me see that some people actually CAN make it work. One question, though, if Josh maybe wants to answer - I know you're not a polygamist, but maybe yo can answer this as a Mormon. So, turns out that when a girl in this community is inspired (via a direct line from God) to marry a man, why do the town elders have anything to say about whether or not it's approved and the marriage will take place? Also, is it common across Mormonism for kids to be discouraged from dating in general, or from interacting on a regular basis with the opposite gender?
Originally Posted By ecdc Keep in mind that most Mormons have little to nothing to do with polygamists. The mainstream LDS church is downright resentful of these groups for continuing to link them to polygamy. The irony is the average Mormon probably dislikes polygamy more than the average American. Most polygamous communities are not participating in underage marriages like Warren Jeffs. I have a couple of friends and acquaintances who are Mormon fundamentalists and they are down to earth and normal. As for your question about the elders approving it, Mormons have a long tradition of encouraging personal revelation, but this leads to tension when individual inspiration conflicts with church teachings. Joseph Smith was adept and shutting down members of his faith who claimed prophetic revelations he didn't like. So Mormons, mainstream and fundamentalist, have created an environment of acceptable inspiration, if you will. There are unspoken cultural boundaries, in other words. If I were to get up in a worship meeting and share a story about how the spirit moved me to, say, donate food to a family and it turned out the bread winner had just been laid off, that would be very well received, but if I said I was in the temple and I had a vision of Jesus, people would glance awkwardly around. They like some spirituality and personal revelation, just make it respectable. In this specific instance, the elders need to approve it because you'd end up with an environment where individuals would claim conflicting revelations.
Originally Posted By Labuda "Keep in mind that most Mormons have little to nothing to do with polygamists. " Oh, yes... sorry if that didn't come across in my post, but, yeah, I know that the Mormon Chucrh does not approve of polygamy. (Snarky comment: After all, if you approve of gay marriage, what's next? Polygamy, bestiality, or worse?!?!) "As for your question about the elders approving it, Mormons have a long tradition of encouraging personal revelation, but this leads to tension when individual inspiration conflicts with church teachings. Joseph Smith was adept and shutting down members of his faith who claimed prophetic revelations he didn't like." Yep, I got a bit of that from the Jon Krakauer book Under the Banner of Heaven; have you read it, ecdc? It's a fascinating study of a case that involved murder within the Mormon community and actually gave me some Mormon history that I, as an athiest-leaning agnostic who was raised Roman Catholic, had no clue about. Oh, and in case I haven't pointed it out to anyone on here yet (I don't think I have), I'm coming closer and closer to declaring myself a dyed-in-the-wool athiest, but my love of music is the one thing that makes me think there might indeed be a God in charge of all this. If there's a musical religion, I need to find it and join. Otherwise, I am getting closer and closer to athiest as the years pass.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <<So, turns out that when a girl in this community is inspired (via a direct line from God) to marry a man, why do the town elders have anything to say about whether or not it's approved and the marriage will take place?>> I don't know how it works in these communities and in that religion. In the LDS church, no local authorities have any say about who you choose to marry. They only "say" they have, is to determine who may enter the Temple and be married there. <<Also, is it common across Mormonism for kids to be discouraged from dating in general, or from interacting on a regular basis with the opposite gender?>> Nope, we strongly encourage dating (after age 16) with a guideline to group date at first, and then as you mature and are ready, to pair up and date as usual.
Originally Posted By Labuda Thanks, Josh. As you may have guessed, I am FLOORED that these polygamists actively discourage dating, even after getting inspiration from God. As for the age 16 thing, that's about how my parents were with us, but change it to 14 for group dates and 16 for one-on-one dates after we'd prove we were responsible enough for that. Oh, and one character ont he show makes me wonder - how do polygamists deal with homosexuality? I doubt this young lady is a lesbian, but an 18 year-old named Rose Marie on the show has been preying for inspiration for about 2 years and at age 18 said she's never been interested in any boys. Which just SHOCKED me. I had my first crush in preschool and the first time I said yes to being a boy's girlfriend was when Doug Fiefield asked me to go steady when we were in first grade! lol
Originally Posted By ecdc >>have you read it, ecdc?<< I have. It was interesting enough, but a highly selective history focused almost solely on violence. Well written and entertaining to be sure.
Originally Posted By Labuda Agreed about the well-written and entertaining part. My friend Sara recommended it to me and I bought it IMMEDIATELY, then didn't read it for a couple of years. Glad I finally did!
Originally Posted By TomSawyer The shifting Mormon views on marriage, or the changes in God's prophetic messages about marriage since Joseph Smith's promotion of polygamy as God's will, makes me think that it is inevitable that gay marriage will be accepted in the LDS in a generation or two.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>You're comparing apples and oranges.<< No, we're not. You just think they are because you're looking at it with the perspective of a 21st century Mormon, not a 19th century polygamist. The parallels are far more similar than you care to admit.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer I'm comparing "apples and apples" to "apples and oranges and oranges and oranges." God revealed that multiple wives as young as 13 or 14 were okay. Then he revealed that multiple wives weren't okay. He must have revealed that marrying girls as young as 14 was not okay at some point. He revealed that mixed-race marriages were not okay before he revealed that they actually were. So it really wouldn't take much for him to change his mind on this, either.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <The parallels are far more similar than you care to admit.> And you are failing to see the huge leap from polygamy to gay marriage.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>And you are failing to see the huge leap from polygamy to gay marriage.<< No, I understand your perspective about the Law of Chastity, which you insist will never change. It's apples and apples in the sense of religious people believing god will never, ever change something, then when he does, retroactively explaining why what was changed was either really not a big deal, (hey, the priesthood ban was just a policy!) or why it wasn't really changed at all (polygamy is still practiced in heaven!)
Originally Posted By ecdc For a less flip, more historical response: Josh, you look at polygamy through the lens of a 21st century Mormon who already knows it changed, ergo, you see it in lesser status to the law of chastity. But a 19th century Mormon would see polygamy is just as important as the law of chastity. They would be just as shocked at polygamy being eliminated (and so many were when it happened that you had huge splinter groups break away from the church) as 21st century Mormons would be at the law of chastity being altered. In fact, I would argue that 19th century polygamists were *more* shocked than Mormons will be if the LDS church says that married gay couples can enjoy the full fellowship of the church. The thinking will be that if a gay couple is married, they aren't breaking the law of chastity. Such an adjustment isn't that extreme - it just eliminates homosexuality from the law, but keeps the importance of marriage intact.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer It wouldn't take much for the LDS policy surrounding the Law of Chastity to include gay marriages if gay marriages are legal. The legality of the marriage seems to be a key component of the current policy, and if a Mormon couple lives in a state in which they can be legally married then it wouldn't take much to say that the policy never changed - sex is permissible only within a marriage. The LDS doesn't have to change their official policy or doctrine and they get to follow the winds of change as they have so often in their short history.
Originally Posted By utahjosh The law of chastity states that sexual relations are only lawful before God between husband and wife, not "married people." It's not just semantics, either.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 It's remarkable how creative religions can be with language, though. It would hardly be the first time that a "never changing" religious tenet got changed, and not just in Mormonism, either.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>If that happens, I'll say I was wrong.<< The fact that you wouldn't leave the church and start your own (or join one) where gay marriage was not recognized should tip you off that polygamy was more important to those people than the law of chastity is to you. Meaning, there's still wiggle room, despite your certitude.
