Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Legalizing Polygamy Would Recognize Culture, History

Whether we like it or not, polygamy is an undeniable part of Utah's past, present and future. An enlightened public policy should accept and live with that simple fact. The people who believe polygamy to be an essential part of their religion should not, for that reason, be penalized or denied any of their civil rights.
With the spirit of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as a guide ("Congress shall make no law respecting instabilities of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . . . "), it is easy to recognize that "perfect toleration of religious sentiment" requires the majority of Utahns, who reject polygamy as a way of life, to be tolerant of the small minority of Utahns who believe, as part of their religion, that plural marriage is the key to their eternal salvation. If the threat of legal sanctions against polygamists in Utah were removed, and if (as guaranteed by the first paragraph of Article III in the Utah StateConstitution) the religious sentiment of a relatively small minority regarding polygamy were tolerated by the majority, then polygamists inUtah could be publicly open and honest about their families.

28 comments:

fundy said...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Ottawa — A new study for the federal Justice Department says Canada should get rid of its law banning polygamy, and change other legislation to help women and children living in such multiple-spouse relationships.

"Criminalization does not address the harms associated with valid foreign polygamous marriages and plural unions, in particular the harms to women," says the report, obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act. "The report therefore recommends that this provision be repealed."

The research paper is part of a controversial $150,000 polygamy project, launched a year ago and paid for by the Justice Department and Status of Women Canada.

The paper by three law professors at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont., argues that Sec. 293 of the Criminal Code banning polygamy serves no useful purpose and in any case is rarely prosecuted.

muggsey said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TBM said...

Well, fundy, personally, I think it should be de-criminalized. People adopt all manner of partnerships these days, and if there's nothing illegal with for example, homosexuality or adultery, I don't see why polygamy should be marked out for special treatment. Apart from anything else, there's a lot of muslims, who also have polygamist traditions, living in the US these days.

But the legal threats against the FLDS are not based on their co-habitation, but their refusal to co-operate with charges of child abuse.

Anonymous said...

You polygamists should get together with the gays, NAMBLA, the American Goat Husbandry Association, NORML, and the Free Brothel Society and appoint one spokesperson, so that you don't have to waste your efforts on duplicate arguments.

desert darling said...

It would never happen. The people wouldn't be able to get along, they can't stand each other.

Anonymous said...

Dont post on a Fundy thread!

muggsey said...

My only comment is: "If you insist on practicing polygamy quit "bleeding the beast", give your children an education, stop child abuse, allow everyone in the community the right to think for themselves and make choices accordingly.

If you want to be a polygamist, do so at your own expense. Don't depend upon your "celestial"
'spiritual' wife's welfare check to serve as the funding for Warren Jeffs & Co. Claim responsibility for fathering children. Your name should be listed under 'father' on the birth certificate. If not, the child's a bastard. If he is a bastard, that puts it's mother to shame for something that you caused. If polygamy is so great it ought to be self sustaining. Governmental supplimental income should not be an option.

Axiom said...

Good thoughts, muggsy, for those who fall into that category but remember those aren't the ones who represent most of us.

There is not one person in the area where I live who is Govt. assissted. All the children receive good education. As far as I know there is no child abuse, children do carry their father's name and we do make our own choices.

Anonymous said...

I don't know what utopian society Axion is from but Axion must not be from Centennial Park, Arizona because only part of those comments would be true.

There IS child abuse in Centennial Park (although they adamantly deny this) and the community members are NOT allowed to make their own choices (unless you count being threatened with eternal damnation if you leave as being a free choice). If you do count the last one, then I guess it is a choice of stay in the church or leave and be damned. Boy, what kind of choice is that ?!?!

Axiom said...

Sorry anonymous--I can't comment on the people from Centennial Park. I doubt that I even know anyone from there.

I am accountable to only God for my actions. Only He can totally be trusted to always be there to give help and strengthen us.

Anonymous said...

I think it is interesting that people feel threatened by someone telling them they will be damned if they leave. Why would that be a threat?
If you dont believe the doctrine taught, why would you feel damned if you dont believe it and leave?

ANYONE?

CTR

Anonymous said...

CTR,

I know from my own experience of getting out how the religion teaches one thing and my conscience another. I spent many hours studying scriptures trying to justify what Warren was doing because I felt I had nowhere to turn. I know about the internal war between conscience and religion where I felt inside "this is wrong. This isn't the religion of Christ. But is it a test? Am I to endure this? Or is it wrong? If Warren isn't the prophet, who is? Will I be damned for saying no to Warren, or will I be damned if I go along with what he is doing" The mixed emotions are indescribable. Even after getting out, it was over a year before I was totally conviced it was all hogwash. The psychological influece is indeed powerful. Until you get sufficient courage to break the bands of priestcraft, you don't even recognize them.

In one of your posts, you mention people studying cults becoming atheists. The thought of "will I become an atheist if I say no to Warren" is why I stayed in the religion as long as I did. I felt I had nowhere to turn, yet my conscience didn't agree with what was happening.

muggsey said...

Legalizing murder, theft, telling lies, etc. would eliminate a lot of court costs and put a lot of lawyers out of business. That in and of itself might not be such a bad idea (putting lawyers out of business) The preceeding logic makes just as much sense as does legalizing polygamy.

Why not sell everything, prohibit private ownership of anything, including your family and turn the proceeds over to a mad man who's sole purpose is to exercise power?

Isn't that what has happened to FLDS? Boy, wouldn't that make this a great country, one man rule?

Kinda' like Hitler or Saddam or Warren Jeffs.

Anonymous said...

Folks turn your eyes toward Jesus.

You don't need no stinking Priesthood Prophet!

onthestreet said...

Anonymous said (8/22/2006 10:51 PM):
Folks turn your eyes toward Jesus.
You don't need no stinking Priesthood Prophet!


Rev. 11:
3. And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred [and] threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

4. These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.


Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Mat 7:1. Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Mat 23:31. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.

Luk 1:70. As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began.

Luk 11:49. Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:

Jhn 8:53. Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead, and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?

Rom 3:21. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets.

1Cr 12:28. And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Eph 2:20. And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.

muggsey said...

You quote from Ephesians 2:20

Yes, Jesus is the cornerstone not Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Warren Jeffs or any other human. These men were nor are Apostles or Prophets. They are apostate imposters, claiming to have received of God, but deny the power thereof. FRAUDS!!!!

onthestreet said...

You seem ravaging MAD MUGG. Peace, my boy. Jesus called Peter, not the cornerstone, but the rock on which I will build my church". NOT JESUS, but His Anointed Prophet was THE ROCK in his day, as is His anointed in every age of the world, if Christ is a consistent being, which He is.

Now, down doggie, and roll over. Then, I shall give you a biscuit.

muggsey said...

I wouldn't take your biscuit if I was starving to death.

Are you FOR Christ or Against Him.

A person could never make a conclusion based upon your testimony. You are all over the chart. I'll bet you set new records in strange behavior if you ever took the "Minnesota Multi-phasic Personality Inventory." Vain, proud, without personal constraint, vasalating, manic-depressed, schizophrenic with homosexual preferences and suffering from delusions of grandeur.

onthestreet said...

UNIFICATION: Four “beasts” before the throne of God (Rev. 4:6). Bind or unite the four:

V.Adam: Blessed Holy One (Male): RUACH (Spirit, World of Formation): Michael Arched (Archangel)

H.Joseph (successor Prophets): His Divine Presence (Female): NEFESH (flesh, World of Making)

Y.Through Love (Christ): CHAI (Living Essence, Nearness, World of Emanation), Through Love AND:

H.Reverence (Michael): NESHEMAH (Pneuma, World of Creation).


There it is: The Gospel of Preparation (Physical Sacrifice), Purification (Moral Purity), Sanctification (Joyful Service at the Veil), and Unification (Solemn Assembly in the Holy Sanctuary). The Blessed Holy one (Groom), comes down to His lover (the Church), through the Love of Christ (all of His Laws), and the Reverence of Michael the Archangel, thus uniting the four worlds and the four parts of the Most Holy name together in one (YHVH or Jehovah), in their foreheads. Without it, ye are forever lost.

These “beasts” in Hebrew are “Zerach”: “The rising of light, shooting forth beams, tightly girt”. The Greek is “Zoe”: Life, purse, gird, rescue, vitalize, quicken”.

muggsey said...

NOw, go back and read the first chapter of the Hebrews. This little book firmly and completely expresses the fact that Jesus was with God at the creation. Jesus was in the creation. Nothing was made without His Holy hand involved. He is proclaimed not as an equal to angels but above them. He is a person, angels are spirits only, used to fulfill the will of God. Jesus, coming to earth fulfilled the law and removed the need for prophets for purpose of instruction. The full and complete gospel was presented to mankind through Him.

This being the case, where is Joseph Smith's authority? It is unnecessary and totally irrelevant to the salvation of mankind.

Joseph Smith did not have a prophesy. He had an ispiration to dupe as many people as would follow his (new, but unnecessary teachings). His is a myth written to be a hoax for the purpose of extracting money from those who are gullible to follow his false religion.

onthestreet said...

MUK Said (9/02/2006 11:15 AM):

Jesus, coming to earth fulfilled the law and REMOVED THE NEED FOR PROPHETS for purpose of instruction. The full and complete gospel was presented to mankind through Him. This being the case, where is Joseph Smith's authority? It is unnecessary and totally irrelevant to the salvation of mankind.



STREET’s REPLY (Rev. 11:3): And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall PROPHECY a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. 4. These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth…After the 1260 days, the two PROPHETS of God will be killed. ...

(Rev. 22:6): And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy PROPHETS sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.

7. Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.

8. And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.

9. Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the PROPHETS, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.

(Romans 10:13): For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent?

(I Cor. 1:17): For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 18. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.


So MUKK, the necessity of Prophets being the case, even AFTER Christ came, and you having rejected that fact, where is your salvation. Merely stuck in the MUK.

muggsey said...

So? I am a disponsational pre-millenalist which means, for those of you who don't understand the term, a believer in the fact that Christ will return for his church prior to the tribulation and the millenial reign (1000 years).

The two prophets who are mentioned in Revelation are not named but, it is most important for you to understand that these two prophets appear to Israel during the tribulation. Christians are not a part of Israel. We never were, we never shall be. Therefore the appearance of the two prophets occurs AFTER the Rapture of the Church. Who is in the rapture? The dead in Christ and those believers who are still alive at the time CHRIST calls HIS OWN out of the earth. It will occur in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the LAST TRUMPET.

The prophets have no message for the church. Their message is to Israel, for them to repent and recognize the Lord Jesus, whom they crucified, as Messiah.

onthestreet said...

Ahh, a church without Israel, Jacob, or the Father of the Faithful. What is a church, or anyone, without a father?

My Lord Jesus Christ says it best, in Paul (Hebrews 12):

7. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?

8. But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

muggsey said...

Nowhere in the Bible is Israel refered to as "the church."

The term "church" or assembly, is strictly a New Testament name and represents only those who are the redeemed by the blood of Jesus.

You probably detest the book of Hebrews because it's teachings absolutely demolish the premise of Joseph Smith & Co. I don't have to argue this point, it is fact. Those of us who have studied both Romans and Hebrews understand both the differences and the likeness of the doctrine of the blood of Christ as it contrasts and duplicates exactly the same doctrine.

All have sinned and come short of the Glory of God. There is not one who is without guilt, no not one. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgivness of sin. Christ died, and by His Blood are we redeemed. Christ died, was buried, and on the third day arose, and now sits at the right hand of God the Father.

And Jesus said: "He who has seen me has seen the FATHER, for I and MY FATHER ARE ONE."

For GOD so loved the world, that HE gave HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, that whosoever believes in HIM shall not perish, but have Life Everlasting.

For by Grace are you saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves: it is a GIFT of GOD: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, GOD did: sending HIS own SON in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, HE condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.

But when Christ appeared as high priest of good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through HIS own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to GOD, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living GOD?

Did Christ die in vain? According to some of Brigham Young's teaching some sin is so great that Jesus shed blood cannot atone. How convenient for Young to have gained such insight.

With what authority does Young dispute the words of Jesus and Paul? How did this uneducated uninspired dolt of a man, who brutally endorsed the death of those individuals at the Mountain Massacre, who was known for his brutality toward his followers, and especially toward his wives become your leader except by subtrifuge? If his actions in these instances were to be forgiven, which according to your own law could not, why did he not submit himself to his own teachings of blood atonement? Did he, like Warren Jeffs live according to a double standard? Just think, Young was one of your greatest Latter Day Saints! He had no part with Jesus or he would have realized that Jesus, through HIS own Blood provided the way. A way that neither He , Joe Smith or any other LDS could meet.

onthestreet said...

Ahh, but brother, the disputations and contradictions are in thine own heart.

muggsey said...

Not being God, or anyone resembling God, how can you know what is in my heart? You can't.

You have no defense against my claim that Israel and the church are two separate entities. So you attempt to sound all knowing when your silence would have been more enlightened.

onthestreet said...

MUKKY (9/09/2006 10:35 AM):

The Spirit of God is God, which any man can possess if he has faith and repents, see? Then, from the words a man speaks, you can read his heart, for "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh". See? Therefore, your err is obvious. One can indeed read your heart. Even the ignorant on this blog can read your heart, from the abundance of pride and warfare being manifest. Being only combative, your pride is your fall.

No defense to your claims? No need. It doesn't threaten me. Yet, Israel is the people or body of Christ, which is precisely the same as the church. Israel is the chosen people of God, and Christ represented "the God of Israel", even before his earthly ministry.

When you receive answers, your combativeness and pride, the demons in you, force you to only complain about one "knowing it all".

And now, as for silence, I will enlighten you and be silent.

muggsey said...

PRIDE??????

A CHANCE REMARK OFFERED BY THE LARGEST EGO ON THE PLANET, with the possible exception of Bill & Hillary Clinton.