Fiannan

Sounds pretty reasonable.:)

Maybe not the arranged part.

I have a son who is 20. He seems all bent out of shape over one of his friends getting engaged to a man in his mid-30s (and previously divorced). I just asked him why he was concerned -- since he has a stunning girlfriend anyway. Anyway, I think, correct me if I am wrong, that many guys in their early 20s see older men as a big threat. These guys may be more mature, more stable, and to many women, more desirable physically. Yes, if I was a guy in my early 20s I might not appreciate the competition. Yet there are many young women attracted to older guys. How many 18 - 22 year olds would turn down a date with David Ducovney, Brad Pitt, Jonney Depp or Tom Cruz if these men were single and available? I think many guys in their 30s or 40s or even 50s can attest that they have had younger women attracted to them -- even to the point of stalking. I have encountered this personally a few times (and I am married with 8 kids!!!).

At least now the US government admits to spiking unsuspecting people's food or drinks with LSD and seeing what the reactions would be (it was all part of a program to see if there were means to brainwash large segments of a population). Strange, the government still refuses to admit that the reason St. George has a really high cancer rate (as opposed to the rest of the state of Utah) is due to all the radioactive fallout from nuke tests in the Nevada desert. If the winds were towards California, tests were called off, if they were towards Utah, full speed ahead. I am not implying an anti-Mormon motive here -- just one based on pragmatism (big population centers v. smaller ones) but still, no admissions and no compensations for the victims.

You may find this article interesting about an 8 year old filing for divorce in a Muslim land: Yemeni girl, 8, gets divorce after forced marriage Now, back to the point, would you be happy if we merely legalized polygamy and mandated that marriages only occur when a woman is at least 18? Yes, 12 is really young but I think most women married at an older age. What, by the way, was unhealthy about it in the old days of let's say a 28 year old male marrying a 14 yera old female? Are you discussing modern social norms or public health issues?

Actually, I think God knows which frozen embryos will be taken to term and those souls just wiat for that to occur. As for quickening, that's an old-fashioned concept for telling if the baby located in the womb is an individual or not. As for generation gaps, that may be totally artificial. I know guys in their 20s who act middle age or older and guys in their 40s or 50s who run marathons, go to rave parties and are into younger music, TV, etc. Same is true of women. I think a young 20-something would be happier with a middle aged man who shared her sporting or cultural interests than she would marrying a guy her age who was a couch potato who liked opera and British detective shows on PBS. I worked with a woman who was 30 years younger than her husband. They had 4 great kids and a happy marriage. Again, if one of my duaghters gets interested in a guy who is older then as long as they share the same interests (including the Gospel) and he wants to raise more kids then that's fine by me.

The definging variable in this whole debate is polygamy. Can you be specific in what the differences are/were? Yes, throughout Brigham Young's life, for instance, he only took brides who volunteered to be his brides at the age of 18 or above. but there were other marriages between men who were 30 or 40 something and young teenagers. On a related topic let me ask, do you think there are some Muslims out there in the US who are teaching their children these lessons: YouTube - Muslim Sesame Street V: Pepsi Cola, the Apes, Pigs and Jews Wonder if the US government will go after them for child abuse?

That would kinda shoot down the entire romance in the Book of Ruth, souldn't it? Besides, with modern technology you can freeze embryos for decades and then implant them in a woman -- theoretically giving birth to you the same time other children conceived on the same day as you are dying of old age. That seems to support what my stake's patrirach was saying. Human time is nothing -- the eternal clock is all that counts. Your last statement reminds me of a joke I heard on TV a long time ago. An old man is getting ready to be married to a young bride...his friend asks him "Aren't you worried about the longevity issue at your age?" to which the old man answers "Hey, if she dies before me I guess I'll have to find another one to marry". On a serious note though, if a man is ready and willing to give his wife a family then I see no problems with 20 or even 30 year age differences. The only thing that irks me is when a guy who is 50 marries a 21 year old and refuses to let her get pregnant since he's already raised a family.

Sorry to hear that.

Well, not officially but...Scott Stapp, 08/04 - Interviews - Christian Music Today

a-train, be careful, when you point facts out to people you may get branded a heritic. Also, it is quite uncomfortable to many people when they find out their government does the same type of stuff that we grew up thinking only evil nations did. Now as for Mormons attacking the FLDS and polygamy as strange or perverse, in psychology there is term called "identification with the agressor" -- it's very much akin to the more pop phrase "Stockholm Syndrome". For years the LDS Church was persecuted for supporting and promoting polygamy. Men were arrested under the Edmund Tucker's Act and the Church darn near went to war with the US government. Stckholm Syndrome refers to becoming like the agressor and adopting his ideals in order to survive or to feel whole. Perhaps all this history has served to cause Mormons (not all, not even a majority, but a substantial minority) to identify so much with the anti-polygamy (a catch phrase in the 19th. Century for anti Mormon) that they now feel that a practice which is still part of the Church, although temporarily suspended, is horrid and people who actually practice it are vile, corrupt people who may deserve to have their kids tken away (something the government did not do in the 19th. Century). If you may fall into the "Let's stick it to the FLDS" flock then please, the next time in Gospel Doctrine class that Governor Bogg's name comes up could you raise your hand and please defend him? If you judge against the FLDS for practicing what Mormons did in the past then maybe you may be in philosophical partnership with the anti-Mormons who drove the Mormons out of the east and midwest in the first place.

Again, I hope the legal team representing the polygamists sues Texas big time and wins.

They burned the village to save it then?

Creed is a Christian band. Check out the lyrics for "With Arms Wide Open". Also check out the video (probably at youtube) -- a lot of Christian metaphore.

The issue of age differences in marriage has come up in regards to the FLDS Church traditions. So let's examine this issue a bit. In my opinion, unless a pregnancy exists or something like that, a person should not get married prior to 18. I have no scriptures to back that up, just my personal opinion. That being said, once a person is an adult, does anyone see a problem with major age differences in a marriage? And then, what is too much a difference...10 years, 15...20...30...? I talked with a patriarch once and his opinion was that age in this life was not so important -- a person who is younger here might actually be older in an eternal perspective. So what are other people's opinions?

Already Guilty at 6 | The New York Sun This whole zero tolerance thing is totally absurd. The only thing that schools do not seem to have a zero tolerance for is for bullies beating up on kids. I suppose if a bully were to beat your kid up you could complain to the school administrator -- use both a verbal and written complaint but do be careful not to use really big words -- and say you were filing suit for the bully subjecting your kid to sado masochistic abuse. That might get something done.

Just remember, there are people out there who believe that the best thing the US government could do is confiscate mainstream LDS kids and raise them in goo, fundamentalist Christian backgrounds. Careful with what powers you want to give the state -- many German Jews (note German, not Jews from eastern Europe) supported Hitler (they thought his attacks on Jews was directed at immigrants, not them). Look what happened to them. On a side note, no matter what the outcome of this fascist action is, it's a pretty good guess that a few of these children may grow up with such hatred towards what the state has done that they will see Timothy McVie as an ideal role model.

An official with the Soviet government was visiting the United States in the 1970s and commented on propaganda. He said that in the USSR the effectiveness of propaganda was minor since people knew they were being brainwashed yet gave the underhanded compliment to American society that the propaganda machine was so extensive, and so unrecognized by the people, that society was kept within acceptable bounds without the turning to force. Yes, American society prides itself on individuality yet where do we truly teach our young people to apply critical thinking skills? Well, not in government schools. Check out waht Shell72 states about the FLDS TEMPLE. The media also calls this a compound. Frank Luntz is an expert on language and politics. He's the one who urged conservatives to use the work "global climate change" rather than "global warming" because the subtle subconscious associations would cause peopel to react to policy suggestions quite differently. Here we even have people on an LDS forum calling a temple that is held in as high regard to these people as LDS hold their own temples a compound -- which gives people an image of hostile people holding off the world. I guess that might apply to "The Alamo" from Santa Anna's perspective -- notice if our history books called The Alamo a compound (that would certainly apply) but how it changes the context -- a group of men illegally holding off the enforcement of law from the legal government of Mexico (at the time)? And PC again seems to defend the actions of the US government at Waco. Note, why was the US government at Waco in the first place? Koresh may have had some weapons? Yeah, how many illegal weapons are in any crack house in our large cities? Come on -- the growth of the militia movement had been on the news for the last year. The decision to go after Koresh was probably an attempt to find the most controversial person who could be associated with militias (although he was not officially connected the public mind is not all that analytical, now is it?) an attack on Koresh would show that the government was fully in charge. When the government sent in law enforcement and more armored vehecles than were protecting our forces in the capital city of Somolia (did you see "Blackhawk Down?) the stage was set for a showdown that any psychologist could have told Fieldmarshal Reno would end in disaster. Then when the government DID wipe out the people the powers that be made sure the story put all the blame on Koresh. I did note the irony that the Chinese government did accuse the US of hypocracy for attacking China on human rights but undertaking such policies in regards to Waco. Make no mistake about it, unless the FLDS win out in court (they do have a really brilliant and dedicated legal expert taking their case) this sets a really bad precedent in the use and abuse of power. I do hope and pray that the children of the FLDS are returned to their families and that the legal team can sue the state of Texas and any other government agencies for tens of millions of dollars.

Agreed, polygamist marriages should be recognized but only people 18 and over should be allowed to be married into these unions.

I will note, here is a quote from a polygamist (on the run from the law for a while) demonstrating a desire to uphold the Constitution urging people in his particular organization to not follow laws that prohibited the free exercise of religion -- including polygamy. Opinions? I mean, doesn't he have a point?

Amazon.com: The Tyranny of Good Intentions: How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice: Paul Craig Roberts,Lawrence M. Stratton: Books I think it was President Ronald Reagan who made a point about excessive government intervention in people's lives by joking that the time to panic is when the government says not to worry, the government is here to save you.

And thank goodness the Chinese military has stepped into Lhasa, Tibet and restored order.

Did anyone even make this contention? I sure didn't. My point is that it's pretty darn dangerous if the state decides that these children need to be taken from their families and then "deprogramed". Like I said, hard cases make for bad laws. What's next, some polygamist group that actually has a sane leader? Shall we take their kids away? How about if we discover some Muslims who are practicing polygamy -- heck, steal their kids too? Maybe we could get some Jewish foster parents! And you think this government can be trusted with this sort of power? Maybe next they can take kids away from some Pentecostals who belong to a militia or maybe some Catholics who are teaching their kids that abortion and homosexuality are sins. You may think this slippery slope won't occur here but maybe you should look across the pond to Europe -- look how homeschoolers in Belgium, Germany and Sweden are persecuted. It can happen here.

The Associated Press: Polygamist Sect Encouraged Fear Just out of curiousity, what is the rate of abuse in foster homes nowadays? Any statisitics would be appreciated. Also, what would be said if a group of fundamentalist Muslims had their kids rounded up, shipped to a state agency by busses owned by a local Jewish organization (these kids were hauled away on busses with the local Baptist Church logo on them) and then placed in homes of Catholics?