lostinwater

Members
  • Posts

    646
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lostinwater

  1. Thank-you. i've said my piece (probably a few pieces too many). But i need to respond because i don't think i phrased that last sentence of mine very well. It doesn't come down to the men. What i meant to convey is that It comes down to whether or not one believes God commanded it. i don't, others do. i respect if others believe God did. That said, that respect does not extend to the utilization of coercive or manipulative tactics - however well meaning - to get people to participate in the practice.
  2. Thank-you. To be honest, my issues do not stem from the concept of polygamy in it's strictest sense. There are plenty of terrible things people choose (i mean, even really irredeemable ones, like, say, anchovies on pizza ) that i just cringe at and move on. If Brother so-and-so wants to go to Sister so-and-so and ask her out on a date, court her, and then say, "Will you be my ump-teenth wife at age 19, and help my other wives take care of all the 36 children....but if you don't, that's entirely fine". i mean, i can't imagine what's going through her mind if she said yes, but it would be her decision. However, this is not at all how it was practiced. You had religious authorities telling women on the basis of their priesthood authority (using implicit or explicit threats of consequences should they disobey) whom God wanted them to marry. Very young girls/women marrying much older men, and everything in between. HUGE difference. i'm quite convinced that the practice would disappear completely if things were allowed to run their course. And i'm not so sure about other less-complicated ways. Or maybe less complicated, but with far more severe social and religious repercussions. Anyways, in the end, it all comes back to what one believes the men who practiced it were. Either a awful trial that's beyond a person's understanding or a debauched and unnecessary travesty that God weeps to see. And i don't know that that point can be argued - at least not with positive effect.
  3. Thanks. i guess i've given up on the all-or-nothing paradigm in general. i find that most things in the world are neither as bad as their detractors want us to believe, nor as good as their promoters want us to believe. And i know that at least when i operate in the world in a way that doesn't keep that in mind, i become either very mean, or very vulnerable. i don't think Joseph Smith was a liar or a conman either. i operate among many ex-members. They *hate* Joseph Smith. To them, he's a scummy lying pedophilic conman - and they'll tell everyone who will listen (and even those who won't ). But having read a bunch of his history - trying to keep my sources varied - i can't agree with that. He suffered tremendously, and did a lot of good, not the least of which is creating something which i consider as being objectively good in so many ways. And at least from what i've observed, organizations generally reflect the motives of the person who put them in motion. So even though i disagree with polygamy completely, and honestly, don't believe a lot of the things he said, i don't think he was a liar (in the sense you mean) or a conman either. Not at all.
  4. Thank-you @Vort Good point. Well, in fairness, i'm a liar, if the definition is someone who has lied. Beyond that, i'm probably speaking things that aren't true even though i think they are. So sometimes i lie and know it but do it anyways because of whatever reason, sometimes i say things that aren't true without knowing it (which i guess is sort of lying too), and hopefully most of the time, say things as the are. Anyways, i don't want this to become about me. But i only mention all that because as you said, a lot of my "no, that's not right" only makes sense with the additional context.
  5. Thank-you. So i'm all for sacrifices - for good things. But there's an awful lot of people asking you to sacrifice for terrible things. And to the extent that they can convince you that what they are requesting is God-sanctioned, they gain a tremendous amount of leverage to get people to violate their consciences. And that leverage is often, and even usually, exercised at some point - with catastrophic consequences. And polygamy is one of those things that burns like battery acid on the consciences of most of the people i know. Really, polygamy was one of the things that sat heavy on my shelf. And learning *how* it was practiced snapped it in two. i only say that to provide some context for my next statement, which is that i don't believe that God wants (or ever wanted) polygamy. Not in the time of Joseph Smith, and not in the bible either. And that it is one of the things that people said God said because they wanted it. But that's just my opinion - and i don't claim that it is anything more than that. If any mod needs to delete this comment, feel free - definitely understand.
  6. So this is just a question. i'm not looking for a fight. But have you ever directly observed any of the people in these households? Or talked with and asked the people how they, themselves, having had first hand experiences, feel about their situation?
  7. Thank-you. So my hands are largely tied when it comes to posting sources outside of the ones i did. If anyone wants to message me for recommended reading material about experiences inside the mainstream membership, feel free to. But how anyone could read most accounts and say it didn't hurt, damage, and destroy just about everyone it touched is difficult for me to comprehend. That is, however, just my opinion.
  8. If someone wants to break the law by practicing polygamy, that is their business. It's illegal, but at least it's them making the choice. But polygamy, when controlled and imposed upon people by religious leaders under the pretext of it being God-ordained, has a remarkably consistent record. It leaves a wake of pain, suffering, abuse, jealousy, and manipulative favoritism a mile wide. Pretty close to 100% of the time. Recommended Reading (note the titles) Breaking Free by Rachel Jeffs The Polygamist's Daughter by Anna LeBaron Escape by Ann Marie Lee The Witness Wore Red by Rebecca Musser Those books are about the FLDS, but you pick up on a lot of the dynamics in polygamist relationships in them. i'd share ones about early Church polygamist experiences, but i those would not be approved sources, so i will refrain.
  9. Well, partially because i would want to give someone options to choose from if i were forcing them to do something, and mostly because i can't give just one and citing the former gives me an excuse.... 1. Anna Karenina. i love just about all things Tolstoy. But the way this one is narrated - it provides such an honest look into the complex and mixed nature of all of us. 2. Behind the Beautiful Forevers by Katherine Boo. It's such a brutally honest look at the horrific senselessness experienced by so many in extreme poverty. 3. Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson. It changed how i view our system of justice, and those who find themselves within it. If they refused to select one from those three, have them read Endurance - Shackleton's Incredible Voyage. And if they didn't like that, we'd need to consider evaluation by a competent psychiatrist. Ugh - i've left so many good ones out.
  10. Thank-you. So not sure i can say much that is honest in response that wouldn't be likely to trigger a spiraling down into the hurling of dictionary definitions and ill will. Though in retrospect, i probably shouldn't have quoted you in my response. Doing that kind of thing is more or less asking for it. So my apologies there.
  11. The trouble is that nobody who does hateful things sees them as hateful. People defend the faith, or silence the bigots, or decry the madness, or say things like they are. But almost nobody sees what they do as hateful. Like others, i think it will not be the different ideologies that destroy us. It will be that we quit being able to listen and discourse civilly with one another. That we really begin to believe that the "other" is evil. That they have no point, and so must be doing what they do, and saying what they say, and believing what they believe out of malice or willful ignorance. Then a disruption to the social/economic order comes along, an enterprising madman stokes the coals of anger and indignation into a blaze to further their personal power, and the whole society gets burned right down to the ground - either all by themselves or with a little help with another country's military. It's like the really bad song that plays on loop through your head. Except it's a tragedy that is stuck on loop throughout history. Divide and conquer is a very tired truism, but it really is true.
  12. One thing you might consider is finding a really fun and fulfilling volunteer opportunity. And when i say fun, i really mean it. Don't go do something that doesn't seem like fun to you. But just about any hobby, and there's a way to volunteer doing it. The poet help kids with writing in a school, working at a animal rescue facility, the equestrian helping kids at a therapeutic riding facility, and on, and on. volunteermatch.org is a good website for this. It's really nice to be wanted and valued and needed. And that's the only reason i say to do things like that. Not because of "forgetting one's self". To be honest, i think that's horrible advice - especially for someone who has suffered abuse. It's because often the people will show you in ways that can't be misconstrued, that you are not a burden. And they often do that in such genuine ways that you can believe it about yourself too. You're definitely not a burden, and i don't think the bishop is bad. But the dynamics almost inherent in an interaction like that - i just don't think it engenders the best feelings in all participants. Really sorry you are feeling like this. btw - i frequently say stuff that is stupid - mainly because i don't understand situations entirely. So if i did in this case, and that's totally obvious to you, please accept my sincere apologies and forget everything i wrote
  13. i try to use the term the person prefers. And to @Sunday21's point. Some words like 'babe' are just loaded to the gills. Good heavens. Don't say this to your female colleagues in the workplace. Though on the broader concept of political correctness, i thought this article was pretty interesting. The people who highlight the extremities of political correctness care far more about getting people to click on their ads/articles/videos than they do about representing anything resembling the realities most people live in. Either that, or they are Russians trying to stir things up . https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/large-majorities-dislike-political-correctness/572581/
  14. Thank-you. Full paragraph. I would like masters to behave well to their servants, and to see that every person in this territory is well used. When a master has a Negro and uses him well, he is much better off than if he was free. As for masters knocking them down and whipping them and breaking the limbs of their servants, I have as little opinion of that as any person can have; but good wholesome servitude, I know there is nothing better than that. Recommend that each person read the whole article and interpret themselves. i can see how you can argue that point though. But regardless, that's just one of a couple dozen similar remarks running through the whole thing (ie preceding sentence). And this speech just one of several. [Please link to a version not hosted by an anti-Mormon site. Thanks. --JAG] Or here is an alternative source with the original journals text was transcribed from. https://archive.org/details/CR100317B0001F0014/page/n1
  15. Thank-you @Scott That is a far more thorough and thoughtful reply than my post deserved. Anyways, not looking to derail this thread, so i'll just say that i respect people who justify such remarks that way. i'm just not one who does. It's either a perfectly reasonable or totally absurd thing to do - and we'll find out which when we die. i know very good and very bad people on both sides.
  16. i don't know. i hear statements like these, and i really don't get it. i mean, i get the occasional slightly off-color remark. But these aren't a little off. These are flat out, blatantly, hatefully wrong remarks that he spewed in the most vocal ways available to him. They aren't just wrong now, and OK then. They were *always* wrong. Like a 3 foot wide crack in the foundation wrong. Death on the spot for interracial marriage, spoken in the Tabernacle? [Linking to the JD is fine in principle, but please find an online version that isn't hosted on an anti-Mormon website. --JAG] No opinion on masters whipping and breaking the bones of their slaves, and saying that he believes the slaves should remain in servitude for now, spoken in front of the Utah Legislature? [Again--please do not link to anti-Mormon websites. --JAG] And @Scott, this is nothing against you - i tend to think you hold some of the most nuanced views here - and i respect that tremendously.
  17. What i do most of the time: Accept it trying to be gracious - but likely coming across as super awkward. Thank them profusely - probably too many times. Try and give them something or do something for them in return. Pray to God that they will understand i don't mean to make them feel awkward. What i should do most of the time: Not sure. Definitely exhibit graciousness and gratitude. There have been a few times where a person did something for me that really made a difference. Most of them probably never realized it because it was just something that may have felt to them like a really inconsequential thing. i'm pretty sure that the times where it just feels like pointless awkwardness where i'm sorry they put themselves through it on my behalf took as much or more on their part as the times someone made a difference without realizing it. So in a way i feel guilty for not feeling the same level of appreciation consistently - though i attempt to show the same level of appreciation always. Probably, though, i am the beneficiary of far more service than i am consciously aware of - and i just take it completely for granted because it is not in short supply. So maybe another observation is that it is good to think about what we take for granted that is already given and show appreciation for that. This is a really good thread, btw.
  18. Just teasing. Yes, agree! And believe me, i will happily (sadly?) commiserate with anyone about just about every city council within 60 miles of Seattle. Heaven help us.
  19. Gotta represent Seattle here. @Vort makes it sound like such a terrible place... This is the mountain that will bury about a quarter of the Seattle MSA in 20 feet of boiling mud when it blows. But for now, it's still really pretty.
  20. So one question i have. Acronyms - like if i use TCOJCOLDS - is that offensive to anyone? i'll do my best to do whatever everyone prefers.
  21. So i have heard - from many accounts of NDEs - that when you die, you review your life. You experience every interaction you ever had - see all the impacts you had on others - directly or indirectly. But you don't just re-experience things from your perspective - you experience it from the perspective of everyone else also. So when you said a mean word, you experience how those words made another person feel. My guess is that the "punishment" will be us having to feel what we made others feel. So the person who caused the most pain will, i guess, feel the most pain. But it won't be a punishment - it will just be something that the person experiences so they learn from it and do better. i've also heard people say that nothing is judging them at all - and that all judgment is withheld, aside from the judgment they make of themselves. Obviously, this is not anything close to the theology of TCOJCOLDS, but a similar idea has been recalled by thousands of people who've had a near death experience. If i had to place things in hierarchy, i'd say that the religious leaders of Jesus' time were way more culpable than the people who killed Joseph. There were a lot of extenuating circumstances around Joseph Smith's death one that are not part of the prevailing narrative of the history of TCOJCOLDS. Bushman's Rough Stone Rolling is one very interesting read. Don't mistake though - this is in no way justifying though what happened in Carthage.
  22. Thanks. That's a fair point. i guess my "person X would never do Y" bridge has been burned - especially when it comes to people who say they are prophets. But i've perhaps been reading too many books on cults recently. But even that being the case, i tried to go out of my way to say something that meant basically nothing. But hearing something neutral said about something that appears obvious probably feels like something that wasn't neutral at all. Definitely understandable. Beyond that, from what i've read - on sources i'm unable to mention here - many people who otherwise have very little kind to say about TCOJCOLDS are saying that this is extremely unlikely - based on their personal interactions with the Miles'. That would be my preferred outcome - and i hope the preferred outcome of everyone.
  23. Not sure what to say about this one. If it happened, it's terrible, if it didn't happen, it's also terrible. https://fox13now.com/2018/10/03/lawsuit-alleging-sex-abuse-cover-up-filed-against-family-of-lds-church-president/
  24. Thanks for providing that context. i try to do that in most threads. You don't feel like this was a go-to for bishops counseling people about sexual sin before it was taken out of print? i know people here don't much like this newspaper, but everything i've heard/read indicates this statement is accurate. "The book, which now has sold at least 1.6 million copies, was routinely distributed to departing Mormon missionaries, engaged LDS couples and members disciplined for "sexual sin."" http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=2762815&itype=CMSID