Amy's Robot

You obviously don't know any Mormons.

Posted by: mormon at November 26, 2008 11:33 AM

I do know several Mormons, actually. I also know bigotry when I see it.

Posted by: amy at November 26, 2008 12:02 PM

People like to always play the mormons contradicting themselves almost as much conservatives hating black people or black people playing the race card when they don't qualify for something just cause their black. I don't see the contradiction. I'm lds and I'm always open to a point or argument from anybody. Homosexuality was banned in the bible from the beginning and plural marriage or polygamy was practiced just as early as gay marriage was apparent in some of the worst cities. And may I remind you polygamy was practiced by abraham, isaac, jacob, moses, david, soloman, I can't get his name spelled right. Anyway, they were very prominent men of faith. Talked about in new testament scriptures for their faith and greatness. So plural marriage must have some signifcance that we tend to over look for it's potential perversion. For a positive example, my wife would not be in this world if it wasn't for polygamy and in hindsight her great grandmother would not have married and had kids for the fact the she was "homely" according to my father in law. And think comprehensivly, if I spelled that right, sorry!:( Think about the prominent mormons just in the political spotlight. Romney and huntsman. Romney I know is a product of polygamy. Huntsman may have been. I don't know how far their family goes but I would put my money, so to speak, on the fact that his progenitors were practicing it back in the day. Also, Steve young, being the two time great grandson of Brigham young is a obvious benefactor of polygamy. But anyway, think about the amount of people still Coming into this world that otherwise would have come if it wasn't for polygamy. Weather you share even a small speck of our premortal theology, which leaves hints and evidences all over the bible, or not think about the number of spirit children of god that would come now that would have come before. The reason given in the book of mormon for plural marriage because in the day of jacob the prophet early in the book, they were having multiple wives when not given to them by the lord. And he mentioned if the lord would have children brought into the world he would have it. So I am convinced if that was the case for joseph instituting it as I've heard and also that their were many men who left their women widows and many single women due to many men being killed as the were illegally kicked out of their properties they owned. If that was the case I believe bringing in children was not just for their generation and not for the next. I believe it was for the current generation we live in now and those before recently before us. I can go on for awhile on this point alone so I'll move onto my other point that you mentioned but was not sure why they discontinued the practice. My major observation is that the consequence of them continuing the practice as the laws were being instituted was more threatening to the growth of the church than following it. For instance they were imprisoning many prominent members and seizing their properties. So as the current church president and prophet was praying over the subject he was eventually given the commands to stop the practice and shown a vision of what would have happened if they continued. And may I bring to your knowledge that the laws they passed against the mormons in missouri and through the federal government was illegal. The law to shoot a mormon on site was a law in the books in missouri for a long time and not removed till recently, like 3 or 4 years ago, I think. And the laws against plural marriage was a blatant and clear encroachment on the lds communities rights of religous practice as obscure and odd as the practice may appear. Let me also bring to light, in this century we see churches practicing praying in the spirit and speaking tongues and other manifestations of the gifts of the spirit one being bit by a snake and not feeling the poisonous effect through their faith as mentioned in the bible. It was stated to me while I was serving my lds mission in virginia from people who either witnessed it or heard it from others who attended that church while they attended it. And that is a excercise of their religous rights and the pastors could not be prosecuted for such a dangerous act because of their religous practice. The first ammendmant uses language to protect even the foulest practices in our eyes as long as within the bounds of religion. I think I've given you alot to think about. An please think about your actions and others when we make opinions about some things of high interest in the country cause I beleve you can agree when I say that we don't want nor need this kind of division nor this kind of here say bringing down our religions and our society. I believe gay couples should have the equal rights to those who would rather prefer "traditional" marriage. But I'm sorry to say just giving marriage to gay couples to be equal is just not that easy. Marriage as seen in all religions in some way or another, is sacred, special, and otherwise not just some simple right of passage for those not of a nnon-spritual nature, i.e: ahteaists, or non-spiritual types of any kind.

Posted by: scr8up at May 20, 2011 5:03 PM