FLDS Prophet Warren Jeffs may be serving life in prison, but his followers continue with their work on the YFZ Ranch near Eldorado, Texas where the group's white limestone Temple towers over the town they are building. Polygamy, the practice of plural marriage, appears to be alive and well in the Lone Star State, despite laws to the contrary.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Homosexuals Championing Polygamy for Own Cause?
This is a fascinating subject. It started as an argument about the HBO series Big Love. Here is a little place just for the continuation of this debate. Blog it on!
The Gay directors are obvisously just using polygamy"Big Love" for their unknown agenda.I have nothing against plural life so long as it is practiced by consenting adults,without welfare fraud,and without child abuse.But honestly,bbgae,How many plural familes that you have known are like the ridiculous stereotypes on Big Love?When for example have you seen an apostate Flds man married to an A.U.B.woman,a leaders daughter,and a gentile girl?Never!
The series was amusing, and we enjoyed watching it - it had shades of believability at times - connecting small stitches of reality. The rest was just entertainment (that other 99%).
I think the show is fun to watch... I don't really know very much about the religious side of polygamy... I wish the show would expand on that a little. Instead it seems to focus on the secracy of the lifestyle and the sex... but I guess that should be expected. Afterall, its HBO.
11:24- Whether the directors have ulterior motives for Big Love, I cannot say. Anything is possible. If they really are 'championing' polygamy by this tv series, I think it is rather generous of them, because I don't know of any polygamous people who, although they might be gratefull for the assistance, would return the favor.
As for myself, I will not share my husband with anybody. But I am all for those people who want to (without coersion or abuse or fraud as you said above), and I'm all for homosexual rights. I don't care how divers or lasting any relationship is as long as they are consenting adults and no serious harm is done. (And, this is for all you 'Christians' who fight gays so strongly- they aren't hurting you or anybody. The only thing that is hurt is YOUR OWN sense of right and wrong which you should NOT be trying to force on anybody!)
Yes, HBO takes the basic facts, embelishes them and adds a few things they think will be points of intrest for their audience. It's called FICTION, and it's for ENTERTAINMENT. They do the same thing with Rome and Deadwood. If you want documentaries on the FLDS there are a few available.
We all know the fictional families in Big Love are supposed to be FLDS, and those of us who were once FLDS know there are many inaccuracies. No, there is not one family in the FLDS that is like Mr. Henrickson's. But anything is possible. Do we HAVE to have a list of the things they got wrong vs. the REAL FLDS lifestyle?
All in all, I think the show casts a positive light on polygamy in general. (You ex-FLDS get over it, it's not all about you.) They portray the main family as regular people trying to live their lives and find a balance between their religion and thier government. I cannot say that that is a bad thing.
What I have heard from men with 3 wives, is that the woman in Big Love are wayyy to forgiving of there husband. I reality he would not get away with half of what he did.
bbgae I would love to see you right in the middle of a gay march in your white t-shirt with a sign, you would be the only "normal" sight.
I really don't think you would have the stomach for it.
Just think of man like Warren in drag, with pink spiked hair, blue eyelashes and eyeliner,painted face, glossy red lips, pink ballet slippers, a white tight jumpsuit with red and blue sequins and a pink boa.
Qbert- I think the fraud that is commonly referred to here is where the plural wives apply for assistance and tell the government that they are single mothers. This is a white lie, because technically they aren't legally married to their husbands (I think the law changed on that, though) but they are by no means supporting the children alone because they live in a house with their husband and all his other wives and partake in the community provisions of the household.
8:59- Oh! I am still snickering over your colorful description. (Forgive me, I know this is a serious issue.) Maybe I am messed up, but I am not that disgusted by it. And, ya, I just might join the drag queens next time, because I think they deserve the same rights we do. And polygamous people, too, for that matter. My t-shirt will say x-plyg. :)
9:33- I don't think they can do that. They could get arrested. It's called indecent exposure.
8.59: Now that really IS a stereotype. If you were actually to set foot in a gay bar, I think you'd find all the customers were wearing T shirts and jeans, same as men everywhere do. Gays enjoy putting out for a march, where they're trying to make a point and have a bit of outrageous fun, but you'd probably still find the vast majority of them were dressed relatively soberly.
What does annoy me about a lot of gay people is the way they make sex their entire "raison d'etre". Most people would say that who they choose to sleep with is nobody else's business. For myself, I really don't want to know about your bedroom antics. But a large proportion of the gay community not only expects you to be fascinated by their sex lives, but also make it their whole purpose of existence -- as if their lives will be of no point or value unless they are having sex with other men.
The other thing I find irritating is the way it's impossible to make a frank if general observation about the gay community without somebody sermonizing. So before that inevitable somebody starts climbing onto their soapbox, let me add that I'm aware that not all gay men are like this, there are plenty of gay men living in committed relationships, plenty of gay men live perfectly normal lives and are indistinguishable from anybody else, and so on, and so on, ad tedium.
Christian: God made right and wrong take it up with Him Although I agree with you in principle, what I do find very hypocritical about the religious right (and I have to include huge numbers of Mormons in this criticism) is that they have such an issue with it. Yes, I believe homosexuality is wrong, but so is telling a white lie -- and we've all done that! One impurity is no better than any other in the sight of God. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" as the Bible puts it. "God cannot look upon sin with the least degree of tolerance" as the Book of Mormon puts it.
I don't believe that homosexuals are the anti-Christ so many try to pretend they are. Nor do I believe that a homosexual's actions will bring God's condemnation upon me. That I will do all by myself if I forget that a gay man is my brother in Christ, and treat him in something other than a Christ-like way.
bbgae said... 9:33- I don't think they can do that. They could get arrested. It's called indecent exposure.
bbgae, In San Fran it's not... I had a buddy who went to school in SF and his appartment was next to where they have the carnival/parade and you wouldn't believe the pictures that he sent me. I coulden't look at them twice. He also said that during the San Francisco Marathon many men chose to run the marathon completely nude and it's accepted.
Inside-Out - Ok. Now I'm really glad I don't live in San Francisco. :)
8:59 & 9:33- It doesn't matter how disgusting and unnatural we find gay behavior to be. That is not the point. The point is, they are God's children, too. The point is, underneath the costume beats the heart and soul of a fellow human being. Who are we to judge them? Who are we to say they do not deserve the same rights we ourselves enjoy just becasue they are different? What makes us so special? We aren't, and it is sheer pride if we assume we are. It is hyproctitical. I hate to quote scripture, but I will in this instance. "Judgment is mine sayeth the Lord," "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," and "Judge not, that ye be not judged." It doesn't say "except for the sodomites" after any one of those. Go ahead. Call homosexual behavior immoral. Call it a sin. Be disgusted. You may very well be right. But even if you believe God Himself will not forgive them, it is still up to us to fovgive them, because He asks us to love our fellow human beings and leave judgment to Him.
We have no right to deny them the same priveleges we enjoy. None.
TBM is right about that discription being a stereotype. I know a few gay men, too. Not very well, but I do. And if my friends had not told me they were gay, I would have never known. They are buff and tanned and toned and wear active wear clothing. (I could totally see what they saw in each other.) And they are kind and polite and respectful individuals. Hard workers, too. How can you possibly dislike someone like that?! Half the straight people I know aren't THAT good! But, then again, they aren't that bad, either. :)
There will be a day when the homosexual idealogy will fully infiltrated our society in America because of folks like you.
Your children or grandchildren will be taught it is normal.
Your childen or grandchildren will be sought out by these perverted men and women for their own gratification.
God fully destroyed Sodom and Gomorah for this "SIN' with fire and brimstone.
And I love to quote scripture. God's Word will be the only thing to survive this world in the end.
Leviticus 20:6 And the soul that turneth unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto the wizards, to play the harlot after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people. 20:7 Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy; for I am Jehovah your God. 20:8 And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am Jehovah who sanctifieth you. 20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall surely be put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father’s wife hath uncovered his father’s nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. 20:12 And if a man lie with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them. 20:13 And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. 20:14 And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you. 20:15 And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. 20:16 And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
12:44- Thankyou for your kind consideration of my children. I believe you mean well. :)
No, I do not home school my children, and no one can convince me to do otherwise. I have seen first hand the devistating effects home schooling has had on the lives of children as they grew into adults and found their education was less than adequate to ensure their survival in the real world. No, this does not mean all home schooling is insufficient and less reliable than the degree of education provided by public schools, because it is not. There are instances of good and bad on both sides. I, for one, do not have the time to put eight hours a day into my children's education because I am too buisy providing for them and catching up on my own education (another product of home schooling). For those of you who Do have the time and CAN provide a proper education for your children from your own homes, more power to you!
I certainly hope my children and grandchildren DO go to school in a society where EVERY person, nationality, and creed is treated equally and with respect. If I can help to bring it about, that would be wonderful. Thankyou!
And, I really, really, don't think gays are lying in wait to prey upon the innocent. If any of my children grow up to be gay, I am still going to love them and treat them the same way I treat the others. My own parents will not so much as speak to me because they think I am wicked, and I am not going to do that to my children. I will show my children love. Real love. The all encompassing kind.
Oh, and in a few billion years when the earth is swallowed up by the sun because it is changing to a red giant, NOTHING will be left. NOTHING will survive. Not even the Word of God. The Bible is written on paper. Paper burns.
Homosexuality is part of humanity. It IS normal. It has been there from the begining of time as it is here with us today. And all the name calling in the world, and all the predjudices, and ostracizing and judgments will not change it, or make it go away. It is a fact of life. I really think the only reason the old prophets (the ones who wrote the Bible) had such a problem with it in the first place was because two men or two women together cannot reproduce and thus secure the survival of the species. And that was a very importnant thing back then when the species of man was in it's childhood and reproduction was essential. But none of that really matters, because I cannot convince you of it, I know, and you will not convince me, no matter how many passages you quote.
You have proved by your post above that homosexuality is a sin. You have proved that God punishes sin. I acually enjoyed reading those passages again. (Wierd, huh?) Yes, I know you love to quote the scriptures. That is why I did, so I could speak in a language you would understand. Didn't Christ say in the new testimen that he had come, not to do away with the old laws, but to replace them with something better? Isn't that WHY it is called the new testiment? Didn't he also say, "As I have loved you, love one another...by this shall men know ye are my diciples?"
All the gay community is asking for is a piece of paper that says they have a legal right to be together. Does it REALLY HURT us to give it to them?
Wouldn't it be easier to get all the accusers together and allow the one who can prove him/herself to be without sin to be allowed to become the first one to cast a stone. Anyone else willing to join the party should have to meet all the same qualifications. Something tells me that not a person present at such a gathering will qualify. Not even any so-named prophet, elder, deacon etc.
Uncaduff- Since we started on the subject of Big Love, I wanted to ask you a question. I noticed on the Plygabuse blog you sign "When you go to Zion, don't drink the coolaid" at the bottom of your posts. Is the reason for that because of the woman in Big Love who puts anti-freeze in the coolaid of the people she doesn't like?
LOL!! TBM you rock!!! Thanks for the best laugh of the week!
bbgae; I believe Uncaduff is actually making a humorous reference to the Jonestown Massacre that happened in 1978. If you Google it in, you will find the story of a wacko "Prophet" very similar to Warren, who instructed his followers to drink cyanide-laced kool-aid to commit suicide. They were so converted to this man, that most of them drank it, enmass, and died. The scary part of it is, while I know this is extremist and radical, I feel that a lot of the FLDS would do the same if their wacko leader told them to. I know there was a point that I would have done it if I would have been told to. And I wasn't even that converted!!
If Shirley Phleps Roper found this site, maybe someone could offer her some kool-aid? (Just joking...)
Black Sheep: There was once a time when I would have drank the kool-aid if Warren said to, also. And I was converted and faithful. My big problem was I got sick of following the rules when nothing good came of it.
I cannot say what or who God is. I did agree with an anonymous poster on another thread that it was logical to assume sin is what keeps us from God, but I did not say I believed that was the definition of sin. The definition of sin in the dictionary is when a person breaks a religious rule. Aren't we all sinners?
I personally believe sin to be only when one person seriously and purposly and knowingly hurts another person. since gays and lesbians aren't hurting anyone, (they just do things differently) then, ya, I am going to say live and let live.
Just to make you feel better, please re-read the first sentance in the second to last paragraph in my 3/22 3:41 post. Gasp! I think I might have agreed with you!
SIN IS NOT THE ISSUE!!! It is a human rights issue. I say, they are human, they have the right.
TBM also agreed with you that it was a sin in the second sentance of the fourth paragraph of his 3/22 4:28 post.
Allowing our fellow human beings the same rights we enjoy is in no way condoning sin. Sin is personal. Their sin is between them and their God. My sins are between me and my God. Your sins are between you and your God. It is not important that every person on the planet behaves the way YOU think they should to avoid sin. The only person who should be worried about following what YOU believe is right and wrong is you. The same goes for me and for everybody.
And, yes. While I am at it, I think polygamy should be legalized, too.
I think it would help to eliminate alot of the problems that arise IF/ WHEN laws are broken, crimes are committed and innocent suffer.
It will let the polygamous people feel a little more accepted, and I think be more helpful to the prosecutting attorneys when those problems go to the courts.
Unlike bbgae, I'm a True Believing Mormon. I believe a sin involves acting contrary to the will of God. That could be a man sleeping with another man, or not being entirely honest, or failing to pull up at a "Stop" sign. Or people who single out one specific class of society for special treatment, and justify it by pulling a single verse out of the Bible.
I also fully agree with bbgae's final paragraph at 9.23. I believe in worrying about my own salvation, rather than everyone else's. That means treating my gay brothers and sisters in Christ with the same respect and love that I try to show any human being.
Well TBM I am not a True Believing Mormon, but I probably come closer to believing like you except for one thing.
As a believer that Jesus, who is God in Flesh, died for my sins and your sins I am commanded by Christ to tell people of what he has done for me. God does not see my sins, for my sins are covered by Jesus blood, because I believe He died for me and was resurrected.
Did I mention to treat gay men and women different? No,I just said their sex lifestyle is wrong, because God said it is wrong.
As for singling out one specific class of people, well this class of people will bring judgement on our country, just like abortion and gluttony will pour out judgement and turning our backs on Israel will pour out a final judgement.
And Bggae you need to check into the gay revolution in our county. It is not about two loving couples, keeping a home and raising children. They want our children to perform sex acts on at an early age. Not only gay movement after our children, the sex offenders of all types which I think Warren is one. Just listen to the news. It is only going to get worse.
TBM and Bggae do you know any gay men. Well I have, they were kind and intellengent and dead. Their life style killed them. Their lifestyle turned their families upside down. Both were married and had children.
Thanks for answering honestly and Bggae I am sorry about how your parents treated you. It was wrong. But I hope you can forgive them.
As for polymany who is going to write the laws. How many wives are enough? How many children are enough?
As is adultry, promiscuity, prostitution, abortion, homosexuality, and idolatry, (all abominations according the Bible)
What is at issue here is that people want to move homosexuality out of this group into acceptable mainstream behavior, and on the other hand put polygamy into it and define right and wrong to be more politcally correct. Vote on it.
I don't believe that people should be persecuted for any of these things. I'm willing to let God be the judge.
11:20- If God cannot see your sins becasue they are covered in Jesus' blood, he cannot see the sins of the gays, either, becasue they are ALSO covered in Jesus' blood. What maked YOU so G-d d--med special??!! Jesus didn't die for you alone.
Show me absolute tangable proof that gays are lying in wait for the innocent, and I will believe that some of them are. The news is not always 100% right. Don't beleive everything you read or hear.
By saying that one group of people will bring judjments upon the nation for their "sins" IS treating them different!
Yes, I personally know some gay men, and a few lesbians, too. THEY ARE NOT DIRTY OR DISEASED. I believe the ones you knew died of whatever it was they died of. I am saddened that their families' lives suffered. But you cannot judge all gay men by the actions of a few.
Is all your enegry on this subject because one of those men were close to you? Your father, or brother or something? If that is true, my heart aches for your pain. And I will inderstand your reasons for your beliefs. My first reaction when I am hurt is to be angry first and cry later. That is why I have such a temper. More often than not, the reason I am angry is becasue I am hurt or becasue someone I love is hurt. It's ok to hurt. But don't let that hurt inside of you hurt others, no matter what your reservations toward them are.
Thankyou, for your consideration of my realtionship with my parents. I forgave them a long time ago. It doesn't matter if their religion keeps them from talking to me. I know why. I understand their reasons. I don't have to believe it is right, just understand. I KNOW they still love me. We don't have to believe the same thing to show our love. Real love is unconditional.
Who says there has to be limits on the laws of polygamy? The FLDS are not going to go carzy and have mass marriges if the laws were to change. I do not think the other polygamous peoples will, either. It would be the same as it is now. The FLDS will still marry WHO they are TOLD to WHEN they are TOLD to.
I think there would be pros and cons if the laws on polygamy were to change. Pros: 1- it would stop the fraud when they apply for state and government assistance. I think this becasue I think the reason they lie is to aviod persecution and scorn for their 'illegal' lifestyle. 2- The men will have to pay child support just like everybody else does. ok. Maybe I am vengful on this one, but there it is. 3-I think it will be easier to prosecute harm if there are legal boundaries in the relationships. 4-Don't you think some of the secracy in polygamous groups would stop if they felt like they were accepted by other societies?
Cons: 1- It will make it alot harder for abused women to leave their husbands, becasue instead of just walking away, they will have to get a divorce. I really don't like that one. It was hard enough for me to leave my first husband with all the religious pressure. I am so gald all it took was walking to my father's house and talking to Warren. 2-The FLDS think they are above the law now. Changing it will make no difference in their level of respect to the law. There are those who do as much as they can to uphold the law (and there of more of them than you might like to think) and there are self-riteous bastards who think their interpretation of upholding God's Law is all that matters.
As for Warren Jeffs, do you know him personally? Have you ever talked to him? I don't think so. I HAVE. I do not know if he is guilty or not of assulting his nephews. I am willing to believe both sides may be right. I want to listen to the trail before I decide on that one. I completely side with "Jane Doe" one her case. Warren should not have forced her to marry her cousin. But I think the cousin should ALSO be prosecuted. It was my personal experience that Warren was NICE and KIND and UNDERSTANDING when I was in the worst of my problems. There is good in him in there somewhere.(Take that all you people who say I am a bitter apostate!)There are less than twenty people who know the real and true story of what happened with me.
Anon- I apologize for the harshness in that first paragraph in the above post. I did not read your last post until after I had allready posted. I think you logged in and posted while I was composing my epistle. Sorry. :)
Seems to me that BBGAE wants to turn this into her own blog. Did someone hit a nerve BBGAE? Could it be that your fervent defense of the gay and lesbian lifestyle reveals an agenda of your own.
Admin, if BBGAE wants to dominate this blog, tell her to get her own or kick her off. She's more obnoxious than Muggsy and more frustrating that OTS. Besides, her posts are too long and she likes to preach too much. Strange trait for an agnostic.
You are the only one complaining. bbgae has NOT been obnoxious. bbgae has NOT been frustrating. (maybe she is to you because you cannot refute her points?)
I have been too busy to post here much lately and I appreciate that she has time to do so. YOU need to post something profound that will turn the conversation to less 'obnoxious' topics or go elsewhere. I do not agree with all of what bbgae posts but she states her points very well.
2.04: Could it be that your fervent defense of the gay and lesbian lifestyle reveals an agenda of your own.
Yes! Absolutely! I'm gay, and so's my wife. Our children are a bit too young to decide yet, but we're preying on them.
But what of it? At risk of sounding gay, a contributor's sexuality doesn't matter. The point under discussion doesn't become more or less true because of what someone gets up to in the bedroom.
You're just arguing at the man. And who was it who said, "Argument at the man is the last refuge of the defeated"?
Homosexuality seems to raise heated debate here. Most of us either grew up conservative, with definate ideas about what was sin, what was wrong, and an accompanying attitude of disdain for the lifestyle.
While I have stated homosexual acts are distasteful to me, and I believe the Bible specifically addresses male homosexual behavior as a sin, I have learned that the attitude of superiority and disdain for the soul underneath was unwarranted.
As many posters above have so eloquently stated, it is not for me to judge, or pronounce, or treat unkindly those whose sin is different from my own.
I think I hear most of the posters above stating that while they do not participate in the lifestyle, it is not their place to be G-d on this earth, rather his humble servant.
I also hear posters who correlate a lack of judgement towards homosexuality, as an advocacy or participation in the lifestyle.
I think the latter position is disengenuous, as it attempts to portray those whose attitude of love is hypocritically attributed as a 'sinful' advocacy if not participation in homosexual behavior. I think that correlation is a passive aggressive attempt to invalidate a theologically valid argument.
I hope that makes sense.
I'm on the love side. And I think it's ok to think of a behavior as sinful, and still love the person (otherwise, we'd all be in deep 'doo doo').
tbm: Now I know why you stay in England. Your posts on the subject above make too much sense to live in Utah. I tend to shut down while reading your posts about the BOM and LDS Church, but I stayed completely awake through these posts. Not that I agree with homosexuality, I don't, but if they are constenting adults then they can do as they please.
bbgae: for a while you seemed to be alone on the gay subject, but there are several people who are with you
It's true that I'm quite possibly the only Idahoan ever to have voted for Bill Clinton. But if you're thinking that I'm some great gay-friendly liberal, I'm really not. I just don't think that divisive and demonstrably absurd demonisations of mass pedophilia are helpful!
7:51- Acually, I take it back. You are completely right. ALL mormons, FLDS, Catholics, and MANY Christians have been to brain washing facilities. We were either force, coereced, or decieved into entering.
In fact, once we leave, we usually return for another round. We even own and/or operation our own. Just like Xeno and the Thetans. (Acually, we sent a spy to steal the plans for his, and ours are nearly identical, except for a few improvements here and there.)
No bbgae, I have not been arguing about any of this. This is the 1st time I have posted anything. I couldn't care less whether people are homosexual or not. I say "to each his/her own".
I don't like peodophiles, but I have not problem with gays or lesbians. Honestly!
9:01- Well that is certainly no way for me to treat a new blogger! Hello, and welcome! :)
BTW- I don't care which side of the issue you are on. It really doesn't matter to me. If you had been on anon.'s side, maybe you could have provided more logical reasons than he/she could?
My personal belief, which follows that of the Bible, indicates plainly that perversion is a sin qualifying you as a candidate for death, provided that you are a slave to the law. If you die in that perverted condition, hell is where you are headed. There are no other options available.
Jesus came to make right your sin. He died in order that your sin of homosexual behavior is (I didn't say may be) forgiven, provided you accept the free gift of forgivness and accept the Grace of God, as IT has been presented to you as a gift. Are your worthy of such a gift? No, and you never will be. The price for your sin has been paid, and the gift is yours if you simply claim it.
Others will see a change in your lifestyle and your attitude toward life and then you will find a true and lasting peace for which you are trying to justify yourself daily. You will never find that peace outside of forgivness promised by GOD in allowing Jesus' shed blood, the price of forgivness of YOUR sin. The debt IS paid. Will you accept the gift?
Thanks to all for your comments, pro or con. I've got a thick skin, as most of you know full well.
tbm: Good, I'd feel disappointed if someone didn't disagree. That doesn't mean that I agree with your opposite view point but, as I have said many times before, I'll go down swinging defending your right to an opposing opinion. How can we ever come to an intelligent decision about anything without being exposed to different viewpoints. I don't believe in a rubber-stamped society.
Muggsy provides a clearly black and white conservative viewpoint, and is the only regular contributor who espouses this view as clearly and passionately as he does.
At one season of my life I might have spoken with that degree of color distinction, however upon relfection, I don't believe I know God and see clearly enough to be quite so clear on all things.
I do have strong feelings, thoughts, and theological foundations, but express a sense of not knowing in many of my postings.
So, Muggsy makes unique intelligent, conservative arguments that show a window into a way of thinking many might not otherwise be privy to.
I hope you can appreciate his unique perspective on this board.
Mugsey states his "personal belief" very forcefully, as if its something that we should all bow down to and believe in, when in fact it is only "stuff he believes". He does not make "unique, intelligent, conservative arguments" about anything. He basically states 'if you do something bad, no matter what it is, just accept Jesus as your savior and you'll be saved'. If Mugsey was born a couple of states to the West he would be one of warren's most staunchest supporters.
For someone who came out of the crick, the last thing I need is to hear someone tell me who or what I need to believe in to get to heaven. I've been listening to someone's opinion on this subject since the day I was born.
To make the transition out of the crick, I really had to take a good look at the basis of my belief. I was raised to believe in the teachings of joseph smith. When I left I had to completely change the way I viewed history and theology because I had always believed from a mormon perspective, i.e., "joseph smith said it, so it must be true". Try to imagine, although you most likely cannot, my surprise and reaction to the discovery that js didn’t know sh_t from shinola.
I view anyone spouting any religion with a healthy dose of skepticism, and I put them in the same category as js or wj; they don’t know sh_t from shinola either. They are guessing, just like mornons, jews, christians, muslims, catholics, and LFDS.
Of course Muggsey thinks "that we should all bow down to and believe in" what he believes. It wouldn't be much of a belief if he didn't think everyone who disagreed was misguided!
For that matter, how can you say that you know "sh_t from shinola"? You state your opinion, Muggsey states his. Atar states hers and I state mine. And we all agree to disagree. Welcome to the wonderful world of blogging!
I had always believed from a mormon perspective, i.e., "joseph smith said it, so it must be true" I don't mean to be rude, but this and other posts don't give me the impression that you ever had much of a testimony. I'm led to think that you were going along with it simply because that's what everyone else did there -- that you were Mormon in about the same way Mexicans are Catholic.
If that's so, I'm not surprised you assume that everyone does it simply because Joseph Smith said to, and for no other reason. But you're quite wrong. Most Mormons watch the news, read the science books, and seek to understand how Mormonism fits into the universe. Speaking for myself, I find it generally works pretty well. But you do need to be doing it because you have that witness of the truth, not because you were brought up that way.
I can completely understand what you are saying. What I was saying is that his perspective is 'unique' on this board. Meaning, he's not FLDS, but he is very conservative.
I wasn't defending his presentation, or his content - I just don't want to go there.
I just wanted to point that out - and hope that we can realize it is just a different perspective.
You just don't get it do you? LTG is the only one that knows all the truth. His perspective is the only one that is right. Can't you see? All religions just want to convert people to their own way of thinking. LTG wants to free the world from these shackles and just let everyone believe like himself.
You folks must undertand something. My posts have nothing to do with philosophy. They are made in qn effort to be philosophical nor in debate. They are totally dedicated to a statement I have heard all my life as referred to as "the plan of salvation."
My views strictly echo the teaching of the message of Jesus Christ and Him crucified, dead, buried, resurected, accended to the Righ Hand of God the Father, thus giving me and the blessed hope. I believe that Jesus, Himself will imminently return to rule this planet for a period of 1000 years. Why? In order to satisfy the prophesies made through Daniel et.al. Hebrew prophets concerning them (the Hebrews) as an individual and distinct people. This same doctrine is endorsed by many of his diciples. I don't know about "all" the diciples but, those whom expressed themselves in gospels and epistles express this view.
According to my understanding of the Bible these things can not occur until a series of events comes to pass. A time "referred to as Jacob's trouble" must be completed before regenerated mankind may enter heavenly places as their permenant abode.
My position represents perhaps the most conservative doctrine being taught and believed today. But, a search of Biblical History reveals that there have been individuals and groups of individuals, who were never a part of the catholic church and that this doctrine, not of born of catholicism, has endured for over 2000 years.
Do these people carry a denominational name? Many evangical congregations would like to make this claim, and many of those same people do. The true name of "The Church" will be revealed in the Lord's Own Time But, I clearly believe that there are peoples in many congregations who trust in the saving blood of Jesus and and that trust, in Him and Him alone to save us, lies eternal salvation. These constitute the true church. It's name, as such, is known to God, not to me nor to any Biblical Scholar with whom it has been my priviledge to know through these many years. I don't worry about what the sign in front of the building where I worship says as long as I am a participating, believing, working, having been baptized into HIS likness, and an awaiting the final heavenly trumpet call endng this age and allowing for God's children to continue on forever, in eternity, in the very presece of the Lord.
I cannot even dream of a higher reward than to stand before my Savior, with him ,fully knowing my sin, but saying, "you are forgiven, enter into the joy of your reward."
May you begin a systematic study of the Bible. I believe that you will find that you agree with most of the what I have shared today. May God bless your efforts.
"My Hope Is Built On Nothing Less Than Jesus'Blood and Righteousness; I dare no trust the sweetest frame, but wholly lean on Jesus' name.
On Christ the solid Rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand."
Words: Edward Mote, 1797-1874 Music: William Bradbury, 1816-1868
fttc- I didn't think LTG was tryin to convince anybody of anything. You came from where he came from once; can't you understand his trust issue with this?
I think you stated your point well. I think it is interesting how many absolutely different points of view we have on this blog. I think the unique nuances to our thoughts and perspectives, is one of the reasons this blog is so interesting.
I like to think that we have shied away from blasting those who have different viewpoints, however this blog does tend to lean towards a more conservative outlook. If you've ever been on the polygabuse blog, they tend to be more towards a liberal viewpoint.
Clearly I feel more at home here, and others feel more at home there - and some feel quite comfy both or neither place.
Atar- Agreement is always nice. It's not nearly as challenging.
bbgae- I meant that post in total sarcasm which I suppose you picked up on. Perhaps I came from the same place that LTG and yourself did, but as you saw with the surprise I gave you on the Aunt Leona thread (may it rest in peace) I have not gone to the same place.
I was taught by my parents growing up to put my trust in G*d not a man. So I did. I could never quite trust a man to be perfect as we were taught the 'prophet' was. So as I have stated long ago on this blog, I never felt like I left my religion. I have always felt like it left me. JS never told the people to trust him. In fact he said just the opposite. Unlike you, LTG and others this whole experience has strengthened my belief in JS and the fundamentals of Mormonism. It has in no way weakened them. I am not now and don't expect to be looking for another religion. The one I grew up with suits me fine. (Of course this must be qualified with the statement below about the changes the FLDS has created.)
I really can understand your point about the trust issue. I know there were many men that taught their families that the 'prophet' was perfect. Those that believed it and found out what I already knew are understandably having a big problem with it. This teaching was one of many that made me feel like my religion left me, it changed in that the laeaders changed the meaning of many of the fundamentals- The principles that make Mormonism agree with the teachings of Christ. The principles that would make believers a city on a hill. It was these that were turned on their head.
I think TBM is very close to the truth with his response to LTG. My heart goes out to him/her when I can see the hurt that must have occurred. There should be a trust issue. I hope that it can be resolved, but a pity party helps no one. I hope I was not offensive to LTG or anyone with my sarcasm above.
Fttc- I think you are awesome. I think you do understand where people like LTG and I are comming from. I think I can see things your way, too. And... I think my view is more of a half way point between yours and LTG's.
I envy you just a bit, for your unshakeable faith, and I am happy for you. I don't think things were more easy for you than they were for anyone, but maybe the differenc with you, and me, and LTG, is the difference in our perception of the prophet being perfect. Like you mentioned. That was true with me. I DID have a perfect perception of the prophet; it made it so much easier to excuse away the things I saw happening that didn't seem right. Maybe, the difference in our paths of faith was the degree we were hurt. And, maybe you are just a little more forgiving than I am?
And, I agree about the pity party. I do not pity myself, nor do I want pity from anyone. I thought that was clear in my "I am not a victim" speach. Anon on the other thread said the truth hurts. And I agree. But the truth will also set you free. I have found from hard expierence that it is better to look a thing squarely in the face- even if it hurts your to your very core - and admit it to be true and admit what you need to do, or will have to pay, because of that truth. It might hurt at first, but it is much, much better than trying to hide from the truth. Becasue no matter how far you run, or how well you hide, the truth will catch up with you eventually, becasue that truth lives within you. And the longer you wait to face it, the more it will hurt, if it is going to hurt.
And, no, I am not saying your view of the truth is not right. I think it is right for you because you believe it to be right.
Thanks for a great reply. The introspection that dialogue here causes is amazing.
I should not have assumed that you and LTG were in the same 'place'. From all of LTG's posts it seems he is close to atheist. I know better than to think you were. Your posts have not reflected that view at all.
LTG has always been respectful of the opinions of others from what I have seen and I have enjoyed his contributions. By my sarcasm I was only trying to make the point that we all see 'reallity' on a different plane- according to our own experience and knowledge. I really meant no malice toward LTG although in review it does kind of look that way. :)
10.27, we don't know who you are or where you're coming from. We can't hear your tone of voice or observe your body language. If you signed your posts like LTG does, we would recognize you, gradually learn your personality, and understand you better.
The Gay directors are obvisously just using polygamy"Big Love" for their unknown agenda.I have nothing against plural life so long as it is practiced
ReplyDeleteby consenting adults,without welfare fraud,and without child abuse.But honestly,bbgae,How many plural familes
that you have known are like the ridiculous
stereotypes on Big Love?When for example have you seen an apostate Flds man married to an A.U.B.woman,a leaders daughter,and a gentile girl?Never!
The series was amusing, and we enjoyed watching it - it had shades of believability at times - connecting small stitches of reality. The rest was just entertainment (that other 99%).
ReplyDeleteI think the show is fun to watch... I don't really know very much about the religious side of polygamy... I wish the show would expand on that a little. Instead it seems to focus on the secracy of the lifestyle and the sex... but I guess that should be expected. Afterall, its HBO.
ReplyDelete11:24-
ReplyDeleteWhether the directors have ulterior motives for Big Love, I cannot say. Anything is possible. If they really are 'championing' polygamy by this tv series, I think it is rather generous of them, because I don't know of any polygamous people who, although they might be gratefull for the assistance, would return the favor.
As for myself, I will not share my husband with anybody. But I am all for those people who want to (without coersion or abuse or fraud as you said above), and I'm all for homosexual rights. I don't care how divers or lasting any relationship is as long as they are consenting adults and no serious harm is done. (And, this is for all you 'Christians' who fight gays so strongly- they aren't hurting you or anybody. The only thing that is hurt is YOUR OWN sense of right and wrong which you should NOT be trying to force on anybody!)
Yes, HBO takes the basic facts, embelishes them and adds a few things they think will be points of intrest for their audience. It's called FICTION, and it's for ENTERTAINMENT. They do the same thing with Rome and Deadwood. If you want documentaries on the FLDS there are a few available.
We all know the fictional families in Big Love are supposed to be FLDS, and those of us who were once FLDS know there are many inaccuracies. No, there is not one family in the FLDS that is like Mr. Henrickson's. But anything is possible. Do we HAVE to have a list of the things they got wrong vs. the REAL FLDS lifestyle?
All in all, I think the show casts a positive light on polygamy in general. (You ex-FLDS get over it, it's not all about you.) They portray the main family as regular people trying to live their lives and find a balance between their religion and thier government. I cannot say that that is a bad thing.
What I have heard from men with 3 wives, is that the woman in Big Love are wayyy to forgiving of there husband. I reality he would not get away with half of what he did.
ReplyDeleteBlast from the Past
Kinda new to the site but Welfare Fraud gets thrown around in here alot? How are FLDS practicing Welfare Fraud?
ReplyDeleteQbert
My dear bbgae defender of gay rights.
ReplyDeleteYou need to visit San Fransico or New York City during one of their marches.
The major media will not show this, because it is horrid.
God made right and wrong take it up with Him.
Christian
5:23-
ReplyDeleteLOL. Maybe I do. Anyone up for a trip to NY? I'll be the one in the white t-shirt with the sign.
bbgae I would love to see you right in the middle of a gay march in your white t-shirt with a sign, you would be the only "normal" sight.
ReplyDeleteI really don't think you would have the stomach for it.
Just think of man like Warren in drag, with pink spiked hair, blue eyelashes and eyeliner,painted face, glossy red lips, pink ballet slippers, a white tight jumpsuit with red and blue sequins and a pink boa.
And then mulitply the weirdness.
Oh, I forgot the nipples area would be cut out of the jumpsuit and probably the backside.
ReplyDeletewell, if the back side is cut off the front side would be too.....ewww!
ReplyDeleteQbert- I think the fraud that is commonly referred to here is where the plural wives apply for assistance and tell the government that they are single mothers. This is a white lie, because technically they aren't legally married to their husbands (I think the law changed on that, though) but they are by no means supporting the children alone because they live in a house with their husband and all his other wives and partake in the community provisions of the household.
ReplyDelete8:59-
Oh!
I am still snickering over your colorful description. (Forgive me, I know this is a serious issue.) Maybe I am messed up, but I am not that disgusted by it. And, ya, I just might join the drag queens next time, because I think they deserve the same rights we do. And polygamous people, too, for that matter.
My t-shirt will say x-plyg. :)
9:33- I don't think they can do that. They could get arrested. It's called indecent exposure.
I don't think I could stomach it, I don't find heterosexual pornish behavior something i want to witness either.
ReplyDelete8.59: Now that really IS a stereotype. If you were actually to set foot in a gay bar, I think you'd find all the customers were wearing T shirts and jeans, same as men everywhere do. Gays enjoy putting out for a march, where they're trying to make a point and have a bit of outrageous fun, but you'd probably still find the vast majority of them were dressed relatively soberly.
ReplyDeleteWhat does annoy me about a lot of gay people is the way they make sex their entire "raison d'etre". Most people would say that who they choose to sleep with is nobody else's business. For myself, I really don't want to know about your bedroom antics. But a large proportion of the gay community not only expects you to be fascinated by their sex lives, but also make it their whole purpose of existence -- as if their lives will be of no point or value unless they are having sex with other men.
The other thing I find irritating is the way it's impossible to make a frank if general observation about the gay community without somebody sermonizing. So before that inevitable somebody starts climbing onto their soapbox, let me add that I'm aware that not all gay men are like this, there are plenty of gay men living in committed relationships, plenty of gay men live perfectly normal lives and are indistinguishable from anybody else, and so on, and so on, ad tedium.
Christian: God made right and wrong take it up with Him
Although I agree with you in principle, what I do find very hypocritical about the religious right (and I have to include huge numbers of Mormons in this criticism) is that they have such an issue with it. Yes, I believe homosexuality is wrong, but so is telling a white lie -- and we've all done that! One impurity is no better than any other in the sight of God. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" as the Bible puts it. "God cannot look upon sin with the least degree of tolerance" as the Book of Mormon puts it.
I don't believe that homosexuals are the anti-Christ so many try to pretend they are. Nor do I believe that a homosexual's actions will bring God's condemnation upon me. That I will do all by myself if I forget that a gay man is my brother in Christ, and treat him in something other than a Christ-like way.
bbgae said...
ReplyDelete9:33- I don't think they can do that. They could get arrested. It's called indecent exposure.
bbgae, In San Fran it's not... I had a buddy who went to school in SF and his appartment was next to where they have the carnival/parade and you wouldn't believe the pictures that he sent me. I coulden't look at them twice. He also said that during the San Francisco Marathon many men chose to run the marathon completely nude and it's accepted.
Inside-Out
Inside-Out -
ReplyDeleteOk. Now I'm really glad I don't live in San Francisco. :)
8:59 & 9:33-
It doesn't matter how disgusting and unnatural we find gay behavior to be. That is not the point. The point is, they are God's children, too. The point is, underneath the costume beats the heart and soul of a fellow human being. Who are we to judge them? Who are we to say they do not deserve the same rights we ourselves enjoy just becasue they are different? What makes us so special? We aren't, and it is sheer pride if we assume we are. It is hyproctitical.
I hate to quote scripture, but I will in this instance. "Judgment is mine sayeth the Lord," "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," and "Judge not, that ye be not judged." It doesn't say "except for the sodomites" after any one of those.
Go ahead. Call homosexual behavior immoral. Call it a sin. Be disgusted. You may very well be right. But even if you believe God Himself will not forgive them, it is still up to us to fovgive them, because He asks us to love our fellow human beings and leave judgment to Him.
We have no right to deny them the same priveleges we enjoy. None.
TBM is right about that discription being a stereotype. I know a few gay men, too. Not very well, but I do. And if my friends had not told me they were gay, I would have never known. They are buff and tanned and toned and wear active wear clothing. (I could totally see what they saw in each other.) And they are kind and polite and respectful individuals. Hard workers, too. How can you possibly dislike someone like that?!
Half the straight people I know aren't THAT good! But, then again, they aren't that bad, either. :)
bbgae
ReplyDeleteI hope you are home schooling your children.
There will be a day when the homosexual idealogy will fully infiltrated our society in America because of folks like you.
Your children or grandchildren will be taught it is normal.
Your childen or grandchildren will be sought out by these perverted men and women for their own gratification.
God fully destroyed Sodom and Gomorah for this "SIN'
with fire and brimstone.
And I love to quote scripture.
God's Word will be the only thing to survive this world in the end.
Leviticus 20:6 And the soul that turneth unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto the wizards, to play the harlot after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people. 20:7 Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy; for I am Jehovah your God. 20:8 And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am Jehovah who sanctifieth you. 20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall surely be put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father’s wife hath uncovered his father’s nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. 20:12 And if a man lie with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them. 20:13 And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. 20:14 And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you. 20:15 And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. 20:16 And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
12:44-
ReplyDeleteThankyou for your kind consideration of my children. I believe you mean well. :)
No, I do not home school my children, and no one can convince me to do otherwise. I have seen first hand the devistating effects home schooling has had on the lives of children as they grew into adults and found their education was less than adequate to ensure their survival in the real world. No, this does not mean all home schooling is insufficient and less reliable than the degree of education provided by public schools, because it is not. There are instances of good and bad on both sides.
I, for one, do not have the time to put eight hours a day into my children's education because I am too buisy providing for them and catching up on my own education (another product of home schooling). For those of you who Do have the time and CAN provide a proper education for your children from your own homes, more power to you!
I certainly hope my children and grandchildren DO go to school in a society where EVERY person, nationality, and creed is treated equally and with respect. If I can help to bring it about, that would be wonderful. Thankyou!
And, I really, really, don't think gays are lying in wait to prey upon the innocent. If any of my children grow up to be gay, I am still going to love them and treat them the same way I treat the others. My own parents will not so much as speak to me because they think I am wicked, and I am not going to do that to my children. I will show my children love. Real love. The all encompassing kind.
Oh, and in a few billion years when the earth is swallowed up by the sun because it is changing to a red giant, NOTHING will be left. NOTHING will survive. Not even the Word of God. The Bible is written on paper. Paper burns.
Homosexuality is part of humanity. It IS normal. It has been there from the begining of time as it is here with us today. And all the name calling in the world, and all the predjudices, and ostracizing and judgments will not change it, or make it go away. It is a fact of life. I really think the only reason the old prophets (the ones who wrote the Bible) had such a problem with it in the first place was because two men or two women together cannot reproduce and thus secure the survival of the species. And that was a very importnant thing back then when the species of man was in it's childhood and reproduction was essential.
But none of that really matters, because I cannot convince you of it, I know, and you will not convince me, no matter how many passages you quote.
You have proved by your post above that homosexuality is a sin. You have proved that God punishes sin. I acually enjoyed reading those passages again. (Wierd, huh?) Yes, I know you love to quote the scriptures. That is why I did, so I could speak in a language you would understand. Didn't Christ say in the new testimen that he had come, not to do away with the old laws, but to replace them with something better? Isn't that WHY it is called the new testiment? Didn't he also say, "As I have loved you, love one another...by this shall men know ye are my diciples?"
All the gay community is asking for is a piece of paper that says they have a legal right to be together. Does it REALLY HURT us to give it to them?
tbm
ReplyDeleteWouldn't it be easier to get all the accusers together and allow the one who can prove him/herself to be without sin to be allowed to become the first one to cast a stone. Anyone else willing to join the party should have to meet all the same qualifications. Something tells me that not a person present at such a gathering will qualify. Not even any so-named prophet, elder, deacon etc.
I think Shirley Phelps Roper discovered the Texas Polyg blog - ack
ReplyDeleteAtar-
ReplyDeleteforgive me for asking, but who is SPR?
Uncaduff-
Since we started on the subject of Big Love, I wanted to ask you a question. I noticed on the Plygabuse blog you sign "When you go to Zion, don't drink the coolaid" at the bottom of your posts. Is the reason for that because of the woman in Big Love who puts anti-freeze in the coolaid of the people she doesn't like?
Ooohhhh...
ReplyDeleteI remember your fiml clip, Atar. I know who she is.
LOL!! TBM you rock!!! Thanks for the best laugh of the week!
ReplyDeletebbgae; I believe Uncaduff is actually making a humorous reference to the Jonestown Massacre that happened in 1978. If you Google it in, you will find the story of a wacko "Prophet" very similar to Warren, who instructed his followers to drink cyanide-laced kool-aid to commit suicide. They were so converted to this man, that most of them drank it, enmass, and died. The scary part of it is, while I know this is extremist and radical, I feel that a lot of the FLDS would do the same if their wacko leader told them to. I know there was a point that I would have done it if I would have been told to. And I wasn't even that converted!!
If Shirley Phleps Roper found this site, maybe someone could offer her some kool-aid? (Just joking...)
Black Sheep
Black Sheep:
ReplyDeleteThere was once a time when I would have drank the kool-aid if Warren said to, also. And I was converted and faithful. My big problem was I got sick of following the rules when nothing good came of it.
Warren's rules= heartache & suffering
TBM and bbgae what is your definition of SIN?
ReplyDeleteObviously you don't think men sleeping with men, or men having more than one woman or women cohabiting one with another a sin.
What sin would separate you from your god?
4:53-
ReplyDeleteYou are aware that I am agnostic, right?
I cannot say what or who God is. I did agree with an anonymous poster on another thread that it was logical to assume sin is what keeps us from God, but I did not say I believed that was the definition of sin. The definition of sin in the dictionary is when a person breaks a religious rule. Aren't we all sinners?
I personally believe sin to be only when one person seriously and purposly and knowingly hurts another person. since gays and lesbians aren't hurting anyone, (they just do things differently) then, ya, I am going to say live and let live.
Just to make you feel better, please re-read the first sentance in the second to last paragraph in my 3/22 3:41 post. Gasp! I think I might have agreed with you!
SIN IS NOT THE ISSUE!!!
It is a human rights issue. I say, they are human, they have the right.
TBM also agreed with you that it was a sin in the second sentance of the fourth paragraph of his 3/22 4:28 post.
Allowing our fellow human beings the same rights we enjoy is in no way condoning sin. Sin is personal. Their sin is between them and their God. My sins are between me and my God. Your sins are between you and your God. It is not important that every person on the planet behaves the way YOU think they should to avoid sin. The only person who should be worried about following what YOU believe is right and wrong is you. The same goes for me and for everybody.
And, yes.
ReplyDeleteWhile I am at it, I think polygamy should be legalized, too.
I think it would help to eliminate alot of the problems that arise IF/ WHEN laws are broken, crimes are committed and innocent suffer.
It will let the polygamous people feel a little more accepted, and I think be more helpful to the prosecutting attorneys when those problems go to the courts.
4:53 -
ReplyDeleteUnlike bbgae, I'm a True Believing Mormon. I believe a sin involves acting contrary to the will of God. That could be a man sleeping with another man, or not being entirely honest, or failing to pull up at a "Stop" sign. Or people who single out one specific class of society for special treatment, and justify it by pulling a single verse out of the Bible.
I also fully agree with bbgae's final paragraph at 9.23. I believe in worrying about my own salvation, rather than everyone else's. That means treating my gay brothers and sisters in Christ with the same respect and love that I try to show any human being.
What constitutes sin is going against knowledge. In this case the choice is between sin and ignorance.
ReplyDeleteIt is especially problematic for people who were once "true believers" to go there, or give it a pass.
gay Mormon,(or, Jew, Christian, Catholic,Muslim) for example, is a complete dichotomy.
Well TBM I am not a True Believing Mormon, but I probably come closer to believing like you except for one thing.
ReplyDeleteAs a believer that Jesus, who is God in Flesh, died for my sins and your sins I am commanded by Christ to tell people of what he has done for me. God does not see my sins, for my sins are covered by Jesus blood, because I believe He died for me and was resurrected.
Did I mention to treat gay men and women different? No,I just said their sex lifestyle is wrong, because God said it is wrong.
As for singling out one specific class of people, well this class of people will bring judgement on our country, just like abortion and gluttony will pour out judgement and turning our backs on Israel will pour out a final judgement.
And Bggae you need to check into the gay revolution in our county. It is not about two loving couples, keeping a home and raising children. They want our children to perform sex acts on at an early age. Not only gay movement after our children, the sex offenders of all types which I think Warren is one. Just listen to the news. It is only going to get worse.
TBM and Bggae do you know any gay men. Well I have, they were kind and intellengent and dead. Their life style killed them. Their lifestyle turned their families upside down. Both were married and had children.
Thanks for answering honestly and Bggae I am sorry about how your parents treated you. It was wrong. But I hope you can forgive them.
As for polymany who is going to write the laws. How many wives are enough? How many children are enough?
Yes bigotry destructive.
ReplyDeleteAs is adultry, promiscuity, prostitution, abortion, homosexuality, and idolatry, (all abominations according the Bible)
What is at issue here is that people want to move homosexuality out of this group into acceptable mainstream behavior, and on the other hand put polygamy into it and define right and wrong to be more politcally correct. Vote on it.
I don't believe that people should be persecuted for any of these things. I'm willing to let God be the judge.
@bbgae The greys are aliens... if they exist?
11:20-
ReplyDeleteIf God cannot see your sins becasue they are covered in Jesus' blood, he cannot see the sins of the gays, either, becasue they are ALSO covered in Jesus' blood. What maked YOU so G-d d--med special??!! Jesus didn't die for you alone.
Show me absolute tangable proof that gays are lying in wait for the innocent, and I will believe that some of them are. The news is not always 100% right. Don't beleive everything you read or hear.
By saying that one group of people will bring judjments upon the nation for their "sins" IS treating them different!
Yes, I personally know some gay men, and a few lesbians, too. THEY ARE NOT DIRTY OR DISEASED. I believe the ones you knew died of whatever it was they died of. I am saddened that their families' lives suffered. But you cannot judge all gay men by the actions of a few.
Is all your enegry on this subject because one of those men were close to you? Your father, or brother or something? If that is true, my heart aches for your pain. And I will inderstand your reasons for your beliefs. My first reaction when I am hurt is to be angry first and cry later. That is why I have such a temper. More often than not, the reason I am angry is becasue I am hurt or becasue someone I love is hurt. It's ok to hurt. But don't let that hurt inside of you hurt others, no matter what your reservations toward them are.
Thankyou, for your consideration of my realtionship with my parents. I forgave them a long time ago. It doesn't matter if their religion keeps them from talking to me. I know why. I understand their reasons. I don't have to believe it is right, just understand. I KNOW they still love me. We don't have to believe the same thing to show our love. Real love is unconditional.
Who says there has to be limits on the laws of polygamy? The FLDS are not going to go carzy and have mass marriges if the laws were to change. I do not think the other polygamous peoples will, either. It would be the same as it is now. The FLDS will still marry WHO they are TOLD to WHEN they are TOLD to.
I think there would be pros and cons if the laws on polygamy were to change.
Pros:
1- it would stop the fraud when they apply for state and government assistance. I think this becasue I think the reason they lie is to aviod persecution and scorn for their 'illegal' lifestyle.
2- The men will have to pay child support just like everybody else does. ok. Maybe I am vengful on this one, but there it is.
3-I think it will be easier to prosecute harm if there are legal boundaries in the relationships.
4-Don't you think some of the secracy in polygamous groups would stop if they felt like they were accepted by other societies?
Cons:
1- It will make it alot harder for abused women to leave their husbands, becasue instead of just walking away, they will have to get a divorce. I really don't like that one. It was hard enough for me to leave my first husband with all the religious pressure. I am so gald all it took was walking to my father's house and talking to Warren.
2-The FLDS think they are above the law now. Changing it will make no difference in their level of respect to the law. There are those who do as much as they can to uphold the law (and there of more of them than you might like to think) and there are self-riteous bastards who think their interpretation of upholding God's Law is all that matters.
As for Warren Jeffs, do you know him personally? Have you ever talked to him? I don't think so.
I HAVE.
I do not know if he is guilty or not of assulting his nephews. I am willing to believe both sides may be right. I want to listen to the trail before I decide on that one. I completely side with "Jane Doe" one her case. Warren should not have forced her to marry her cousin. But I think the cousin should ALSO be prosecuted.
It was my personal experience that Warren was NICE and KIND and UNDERSTANDING when I was in the worst of my problems. There is good in him in there somewhere.(Take that all you people who say I am a bitter apostate!)There are less than twenty people who know the real and true story of what happened with me.
Anon- I apologize for the harshness in that first paragraph in the above post. I did not read your last post until after I had allready posted. I think you logged in and posted while I was composing my epistle.
ReplyDeleteSorry. :)
Hmmm... grey aliens? Interesting. Do tell more.
Seems to me that BBGAE wants to turn this into her own blog. Did someone hit a nerve BBGAE? Could it be that your fervent defense of the gay and lesbian lifestyle reveals an agenda of your own.
ReplyDeleteAdmin, if BBGAE wants to dominate this blog, tell her to get her own or kick her off. She's more obnoxious than Muggsy and more frustrating that OTS. Besides, her posts are too long and she likes to preach too much. Strange trait for an agnostic.
drama queen lol
ReplyDeleteAnon 2:04
ReplyDeleteYou are the only one complaining. bbgae has NOT been obnoxious. bbgae has NOT been frustrating. (maybe she is to you because you cannot refute her points?)
I have been too busy to post here much lately and I appreciate that she has time to do so. YOU need to post something profound that will turn the conversation to less 'obnoxious' topics or go elsewhere. I do not agree with all of what bbgae posts but she states her points very well.
Ah! Once again, fttc, you took the words right out of my mouth... well... yours are perhaps a little better than mine were.
ReplyDelete(I erased mine after previewing it and seeing you already posted my very thoughts.)
Thanks for that.
fttc-
ReplyDeleteThankyou!! You always come to my defense when I need someone to defend me. Thanx to you, too, feralfem.
2:04- Can it be that you are a sore looser? I answered the questions YOU asked me, that is all.
My agenda is to finish my education, be suscessful in my career, and raise good children. Period.
I love a good debate. C'mon! Wasn't that a little fun?
Gasp!
ReplyDeleteTHAT one wasn't an epistle! :)
2.04: Could it be that your fervent defense of the gay and lesbian lifestyle reveals an agenda of your own.
ReplyDeleteYes! Absolutely! I'm gay, and so's my wife. Our children are a bit too young to decide yet, but we're preying on them.
But what of it? At risk of sounding gay, a contributor's sexuality doesn't matter. The point under discussion doesn't become more or less true because of what someone gets up to in the bedroom.
You're just arguing at the man. And who was it who said, "Argument at the man is the last refuge of the defeated"?
It's also rather childish.
tbm... very eloquently put!! ::applause::
ReplyDeleteThank you for iterating my own thoughts on this (ridiculously controversial) subject so well.
Namaste
Homosexuality seems to raise heated debate here. Most of us either grew up conservative, with definate ideas about what was sin, what was wrong, and an accompanying attitude of disdain for the lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteWhile I have stated homosexual acts are distasteful to me, and I believe the Bible specifically addresses male homosexual behavior as a sin, I have learned that the attitude of superiority and disdain for the soul underneath was unwarranted.
As many posters above have so eloquently stated, it is not for me to judge, or pronounce, or treat unkindly those whose sin is different from my own.
I think I hear most of the posters above stating that while they do not participate in the lifestyle, it is not their place to be G-d on this earth, rather his humble servant.
I also hear posters who correlate a lack of judgement towards homosexuality, as an advocacy or participation in the lifestyle.
I think the latter position is disengenuous, as it attempts to portray those whose attitude of love is hypocritically attributed as a 'sinful' advocacy if not participation in homosexual behavior. I think that correlation is a passive aggressive attempt to invalidate a theologically valid argument.
I hope that makes sense.
I'm on the love side. And I think it's ok to think of a behavior as sinful, and still love the person (otherwise, we'd all be in deep 'doo doo').
tbm:
ReplyDeleteNow I know why you stay in England. Your posts on the subject above make too much sense to live in Utah. I tend to shut down while reading your posts about the BOM and LDS Church, but I stayed completely awake through these posts. Not that I agree with homosexuality, I don't, but if they are constenting adults then they can do as they please.
bbgae: for a while you seemed to be alone on the gay subject, but there are several people who are with you
LTG
Well, thank you, LTG ... ummm ... I think ;-)
ReplyDeleteIt's true that I'm quite possibly the only Idahoan ever to have voted for Bill Clinton. But if you're thinking that I'm some great gay-friendly liberal, I'm really not. I just don't think that divisive and demonstrably absurd demonisations of mass pedophilia are helpful!
TBM said...
ReplyDelete4:53 -
Unlike bbgae, I'm a True Believing Mormon.
WOW, I was thinking that TBM stood for Totally Brainwashed Morman.
7:51-
ReplyDeleteAre you the one who has been arguing about this whole thing? Speak for yourself.
7:51-
ReplyDeleteAcually, I take it back. You are completely right. ALL mormons, FLDS, Catholics, and MANY Christians have been to brain washing facilities. We were either force, coereced, or decieved into entering.
In fact, once we leave, we usually return for another round. We even own and/or operation our own. Just like Xeno and the Thetans. (Acually, we sent a spy to steal the plans for his, and ours are nearly identical, except for a few improvements here and there.)
I meant operate.
ReplyDeleteNo bbgae,
ReplyDeleteI have not been arguing about any of this. This is the 1st time I have posted anything. I couldn't care less whether people are homosexual or not. I say "to each his/her own".
I don't like peodophiles, but I have not problem with gays or lesbians. Honestly!
I just didn't understand what TBM stood for.
9:01-
ReplyDeleteWell that is certainly no way for me to treat a new blogger! Hello, and welcome! :)
BTW- I don't care which side of the issue you are on. It really doesn't matter to me. If you had been on anon.'s side, maybe you could have provided more logical reasons than he/she could?
Thankyou, for answereing your position on the issue. Afterall, I DID ask you. :)
ReplyDeletebbgae:
ReplyDeleteMy personal belief, which follows that of the Bible, indicates plainly that perversion is a sin qualifying you as a candidate for death, provided that you are a slave to the law. If you die in that perverted condition, hell is where you are headed. There are no other options available.
Jesus came to make right your sin. He died in order that your sin of homosexual behavior is (I didn't say may be) forgiven, provided you accept the free gift of forgivness and accept the Grace of God, as IT has been presented to you as a gift. Are your worthy of such a gift? No, and you never will be. The price for your sin has been paid, and the gift is yours if you simply claim it.
Others will see a change in your lifestyle and your attitude toward life and then you will find a true and lasting peace for which you are trying to justify yourself daily. You will never find that peace outside of forgivness promised by GOD in allowing Jesus' shed blood, the price of forgivness of YOUR sin. The debt IS paid. Will you accept the gift?
Muggsey-
ReplyDeleteI like you!
I am close to accepting. I just have a few things in my belief of God I need to work out first........
Mugs, ol boy, that was one of the best posts I ever saw you post.
ReplyDeleteYes Mugsy - you still got it!
ReplyDeleteSorry Muggsey, I still disagree! :-)
ReplyDeleteYou disagree with muggsey's mojo or his theology?
ReplyDeleteThanks to all for your comments, pro or con. I've got a thick skin, as most of you know full well.
ReplyDeletetbm: Good, I'd feel disappointed if someone didn't disagree. That doesn't mean that I agree with your opposite view point but, as I have said many times before, I'll go down swinging defending your right to an opposing opinion. How can we ever come to an intelligent decision about anything without being exposed to different viewpoints. I don't believe in a rubber-stamped society.
Mugsey: All your posts sound the same. I feel like I'm getting yelled at by the preacher, and I never did like that feeling.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I hear from your posts is blah-blah, blah, blah, blah. The old Peanuts cartoon comes to mind.
LTG
Muggsy provides a clearly black and white conservative viewpoint, and is the only regular contributor who espouses this view as clearly and passionately as he does.
ReplyDeleteAt one season of my life I might have spoken with that degree of color distinction, however upon relfection, I don't believe I know God and see clearly enough to be quite so clear on all things.
I do have strong feelings, thoughts, and theological foundations, but express a sense of not knowing in many of my postings.
So, Muggsy makes unique intelligent, conservative arguments that show a window into a way of thinking many might not otherwise be privy to.
I hope you can appreciate his unique perspective on this board.
Mugsey states his "personal belief" very forcefully, as if its something that we should all bow down to and believe in, when in fact it is only "stuff he believes". He does not make "unique, intelligent, conservative arguments" about anything. He basically states 'if you do something bad, no matter what it is, just accept Jesus as your savior and you'll be saved'. If Mugsey was born a couple of states to the West he would be one of warren's most staunchest supporters.
ReplyDeleteFor someone who came out of the crick, the last thing I need is to hear someone tell me who or what I need to believe in to get to heaven. I've been listening to someone's opinion on this subject since the day I was born.
To make the transition out of the crick, I really had to take a good look at the basis of my belief. I was raised to believe in the teachings of joseph smith. When I left I had to completely change the way I viewed history and theology because I had always believed from a mormon perspective, i.e., "joseph smith said it, so it must be true". Try to imagine, although you most likely cannot, my surprise and reaction to the discovery that js didn’t know sh_t from shinola.
I view anyone spouting any religion with a healthy dose of skepticism, and I put them in the same category as js or wj; they don’t know sh_t from shinola either. They are guessing, just like mornons, jews, christians, muslims, catholics, and LFDS.
LTG
You really have issues over this, don't you LTG?
ReplyDeleteOf course Muggsey thinks "that we should all bow down to and believe in" what he believes. It wouldn't be much of a belief if he didn't think everyone who disagreed was misguided!
For that matter, how can you say that you know "sh_t from shinola"? You state your opinion, Muggsey states his. Atar states hers and I state mine. And we all agree to disagree. Welcome to the wonderful world of blogging!
I had always believed from a mormon perspective, i.e., "joseph smith said it, so it must be true"
I don't mean to be rude, but this and other posts don't give me the impression that you ever had much of a testimony. I'm led to think that you were going along with it simply because that's what everyone else did there -- that you were Mormon in about the same way Mexicans are Catholic.
If that's so, I'm not surprised you assume that everyone does it simply because Joseph Smith said to, and for no other reason. But you're quite wrong. Most Mormons watch the news, read the science books, and seek to understand how Mormonism fits into the universe. Speaking for myself, I find it generally works pretty well. But you do need to be doing it because you have that witness of the truth, not because you were brought up that way.
LTG
ReplyDeleteI can completely understand what you are saying. What I was saying is that his perspective is 'unique' on this board. Meaning, he's not FLDS, but he is very conservative.
I wasn't defending his presentation, or his content - I just don't want to go there.
I just wanted to point that out - and hope that we can realize it is just a different perspective.
Atar-TBM
ReplyDeleteYou just don't get it do you? LTG is the only one that knows all the truth. His perspective is the only one that is right. Can't you see? All religions just want to convert people to their own way of thinking. LTG wants to free the world from these shackles and just let everyone believe like himself.
You folks must undertand something. My posts have nothing to do with philosophy. They are made in qn effort to be philosophical nor in debate. They are totally dedicated to a statement I have heard all my life as referred to as "the plan of salvation."
ReplyDeleteMy views strictly echo the teaching of the message of Jesus Christ and Him crucified, dead, buried, resurected, accended to the Righ Hand of God the Father, thus giving me and the blessed hope. I believe that Jesus, Himself will imminently return to rule this planet for a period of 1000 years. Why? In order to satisfy the prophesies made through Daniel et.al. Hebrew prophets concerning them (the Hebrews) as an individual and distinct people. This same doctrine is endorsed by many of his diciples. I don't know about "all" the diciples but, those whom expressed themselves in gospels and epistles express this view.
According to my understanding of the Bible these things can not occur until a series of events comes to pass. A time "referred to as Jacob's trouble" must be completed before regenerated mankind may enter heavenly places as their permenant abode.
My position represents perhaps the most conservative doctrine being taught and believed today. But, a search of Biblical History reveals that there have been individuals and groups of individuals, who were never a part of the catholic church and that this doctrine, not of born of catholicism, has endured for over 2000 years.
Do these people carry a denominational name? Many evangical congregations would like to make this claim, and many of those same people do. The true name of "The Church" will be revealed in the Lord's Own Time But, I clearly believe that there are peoples in many congregations who trust in the saving blood of Jesus and and that trust, in Him and Him alone to save us, lies eternal salvation. These constitute the true church. It's name, as such, is known to God, not to me nor to any Biblical Scholar with whom it has been my priviledge to know through these many years. I don't worry about what the sign in front of the building where I worship says as long as I am a participating, believing, working, having been baptized into HIS likness, and an awaiting the final heavenly trumpet call endng this age and allowing for God's children to continue on forever, in eternity, in the very presece of the Lord.
I cannot even dream of a higher reward than to stand before my Savior, with him ,fully knowing my sin, but saying, "you are forgiven, enter into the joy of your reward."
May you begin a systematic study of the Bible. I believe that you will find that you agree with most of the what I have shared today. May God bless your efforts.
"My Hope Is Built On Nothing Less Than Jesus'Blood and Righteousness; I dare no trust the sweetest frame, but wholly lean on Jesus' name.
On Christ the solid Rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand."
Words: Edward Mote, 1797-1874
Music: William Bradbury, 1816-1868
fttc-
ReplyDeleteI didn't think LTG was tryin to convince anybody of anything. You came from where he came from once; can't you understand his trust issue with this?
Thanks Muggs -
ReplyDeleteI think you stated your point well. I think it is interesting how many absolutely different points of view we have on this blog. I think the unique nuances to our thoughts and perspectives, is one of the reasons this blog is so interesting.
I like to think that we have shied away from blasting those who have different viewpoints, however this blog does tend to lean towards a more conservative outlook. If you've ever been on the polygabuse blog, they tend to be more towards a liberal viewpoint.
Clearly I feel more at home here, and others feel more at home there - and some feel quite comfy both or neither place.
Sometimes, we agree - I like those times : )
Atar- Agreement is always nice. It's not nearly as challenging.
ReplyDeletebbgae- I meant that post in total sarcasm which I suppose you picked up on. Perhaps I came from the same place that LTG and yourself did, but as you saw with the surprise I gave you on the Aunt Leona thread (may it rest in peace) I have not gone to the same place.
I was taught by my parents growing up to put my trust in G*d not a man. So I did. I could never quite trust a man to be perfect as we were taught the 'prophet' was. So as I have stated long ago on this blog, I never felt like I left my religion. I have always felt like it left me. JS never told the people to trust him. In fact he said just the opposite. Unlike you, LTG and others this whole experience has strengthened my belief in JS and the fundamentals of Mormonism. It has in no way weakened them. I am not now and don't expect to be looking for another religion. The one I grew up with suits me fine. (Of course this must be qualified with the statement below about the changes the FLDS has created.)
I really can understand your point about the trust issue. I know there were many men that taught their families that the 'prophet' was perfect. Those that believed it and found out what I already knew are understandably having a big problem with it. This teaching was one of many that made me feel like my religion left me, it changed in that the laeaders changed the meaning of many of the fundamentals- The principles that make Mormonism agree with the teachings of Christ. The principles that would make believers a city on a hill. It was these that were turned on their head.
I think TBM is very close to the truth with his response to LTG. My heart goes out to him/her when I can see the hurt that must have occurred. There should be a trust issue. I hope that it can be resolved, but a pity party helps no one. I hope I was not offensive to LTG or anyone with my sarcasm above.
Fttc-
ReplyDeleteI think you are awesome.
I think you do understand where people like LTG and I are comming from. I think I can see things your way, too. And... I think my view is more of a half way point between yours and LTG's.
I envy you just a bit, for your unshakeable faith, and I am happy for you. I don't think things were more easy for you than they were for anyone, but maybe the differenc with you, and me, and LTG, is the difference in our perception of the prophet being perfect. Like you mentioned. That was true with me. I DID have a perfect perception of the prophet; it made it so much easier to excuse away the things I saw happening that didn't seem right. Maybe, the difference in our paths of faith was the degree we were hurt. And, maybe you are just a little more forgiving than I am?
And, I agree about the pity party. I do not pity myself, nor do I want pity from anyone. I thought that was clear in my "I am not a victim" speach. Anon on the other thread said the truth hurts. And I agree. But the truth will also set you free. I have found from hard expierence that it is better to look a thing squarely in the face- even if it hurts your to your very core - and admit it to be true and admit what you need to do, or will have to pay, because of that truth. It might hurt at first, but it is much, much better than trying to hide from the truth. Becasue no matter how far you run, or how well you hide, the truth will catch up with you eventually, becasue that truth lives within you. And the longer you wait to face it, the more it will hurt, if it is going to hurt.
And, no, I am not saying your view of the truth is not right. I think it is right for you because you believe it to be right.
The truth is beautiful. I love the truth.
BTW- fttc,
ReplyDeleteI did think you were being sarcastic, I was just checking. You had surprised me before....
Thanks for a great reply. The introspection that dialogue here causes is amazing.
ReplyDeleteI should not have assumed that you and LTG were in the same 'place'. From all of LTG's posts it seems he is close to atheist. I know better than to think you were. Your posts have not reflected that view at all.
LTG has always been respectful of the opinions of others from what I have seen and I have enjoyed his contributions. By my sarcasm I was only trying to make the point that we all see 'reallity' on a different plane- according to our own experience and knowledge. I really meant no malice toward LTG although in review it does kind of look that way. :)
:D
ReplyDeleteSee...? I knew you were a good, kind person.
I like both you and LTG.
So....fttc gets a little sarcastic, but it's ok. Grouchy Anon gets a little sarcastic, and you freak....hmmmm. Interesting.
ReplyDeleteJust an observer.
Maybe mine wasn't so mean? Perhaps I was willing to apologize for the misunderstanding? Maybe I want to get along? What do you think- as an observer?
ReplyDelete10.27, we don't know who you are or where you're coming from. We can't hear your tone of voice or observe your body language. If you signed your posts like LTG does, we would recognize you, gradually learn your personality, and understand you better.
ReplyDeleteSmileys also are helpful to indicate when you're not serious :-)
ReplyDelete