Polygamy Predictions.

[Fiannan]

<div class='quotemain'>

I'd say within 10 years of the Supreme Court declaring that all states must recognize any gay unions performed in other states--or even that all states must legalize them.

I agree; same-sex marriage is the first step, as it has been in Europe.

As for the Church, I have no reason to believe that they will reinstate polygamy.

Why not? The document suspending polygamy reads like a teenager writing a contract blaming his parents for making him do something he would rather not. So I'd say it might take a few years after polygamy was recognized by the state but it would be re-instated.

And why the heck not? Is polygamy immoral if our moral compass is the Bible and not ancient Roman/Greek society? Absolutely not. Would it benefit women? Yeah, if those women wanted good men to marry.

[Outshined]

If God really wanted us to have it, we would, regardless of law. I've seen no indication that it is needed.

[Fiannan]

This imam makes an excellent case for polygamy today:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X65F9w0Neo

[JcDean78]

The idea makes me sick to my core. I feel it is wrong and unless the Lord directs us otherwise, I will continue to hold that position.

And if directed, it would be a difficult thing to do. Some of the thoughts expressed in this thread that trouble me is that they come off as gleefully hoping for its return which IMO is extremly disrespectful to ones wife and ones family.

My wife is the ONLY one I will EVER be with and I would never dishonor her with a second wife even if it were legal or even encouraged.

1 man for 1 woman. There was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve or Adam and Eve and Mary and Sara and Tina and Liz and etc.

If Adam and Eve were able to replenish the entire earth from just those 2, then that is good enough for me.

[the_jason]

If God really wanted us to have it, we would, regardless of law. I've seen no indication that it is needed.

Not true, for we believe "in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." (Article of Faith 12)

[Outshined]

Yes, it is a current practice of Islam. It had its day in the LDS Church, as did the law of consecration, and now they are gone. When I hear the prophet speaking about it, I'll give some weight to the idea. Until then it's just member speculation...

Mike Wallace: “As you know, some skeptics say that major changes in Church policy have come from political pressures, not necessarily as revelations from God. For example, the business of ending polygamy, say the skeptics, wasn’t because it was revelation but because Utah wanted to become a state.”

President Hinckley: “One of the purposes of a prophet is to seek the wisdom and the will of the Lord and to teach his people accordingly. It was the case with Moses when he led the children of Israel out of Egypt. It was the case for the Old Testament prophets when people were faced with oppression and trouble and difficulty. That is the purpose of a prophet, to give answers to people for the dilemmas in which they find themselves. That is what happens. That is what we see happen. Is it a matter of expediency, political expediency? No! Inspired guidance? Yes!”

Good enough for me.

[the_jason]

I agree with you completely. All I'm saying is that if polygamy were to be practiced again by the church, it wouldn't be "regardless of law." It would only happen if the law allowed it.

[begood2]

The idea makes me sick to my core. I feel it is wrong and unless the Lord directs us otherwise, I will continue to hold that position.

And if directed, it would be a difficult thing to do. Some of the thoughts expressed in this thread that trouble me is that they come off as gleefully hoping for its return which IMO is extremly disrespectful to ones wife and ones family.

My wife is the ONLY one I will EVER be with and I would never dishonor her with a second wife even if it were legal or even encouraged.

1 man for 1 woman. There was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve or Adam and Eve and Mary and Sara and Tina and Liz and etc.

If Adam and Eve were able to replenish the entire earth from just those 2, then that is good enough for me.

I agree with your position!

[Fiannan]

<div class='quotemain'>

The idea makes me sick to my core. I feel it is wrong and unless the Lord directs us otherwise, I will continue to hold that position.

And if directed, it would be a difficult thing to do. Some of the thoughts expressed in this thread that trouble me is that they come off as gleefully hoping for its return which IMO is extremly disrespectful to ones wife and ones family.

My wife is the ONLY one I will EVER be with and I would never dishonor her with a second wife even if it were legal or even encouraged.

1 man for 1 woman. There was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve or Adam and Eve and Mary and Sara and Tina and Liz and etc.

If Adam and Eve were able to replenish the entire earth from just those 2, then that is good enough for me.

I agree with your position!

Some women would enjoy built-in company. Also, according to Jewish folklore (not scripture) Adam had lots of wives.

In fact if you are into vampirism look up Lillith -- one of Adam's wives that refused to submit to him in total.

[CrimsonKairos]

If someone doesn't want more than one wife, fine.

If someone wouldn't have a problem with it if it were legal and reinstated by the Lord, fine.

To say that anyone who practiced or would practice polygamy is dishonoring their first wife seems a bit extreme to me.

Polygamy ideally only occurs with the consent of the current wife/wives.

What's with all the hysteria in this thread about how evil or wrong or hard polygamy was/would be? It's a celestial principle we aren't currently living. You don't have to have more than one wife to inherit the Celestial Kingdom, but polygamy is nonetheless a celestial principle.

You can't be celestial while clinging to the telestial. Period.

[sixpacktr]

CK,

Amen.

[Dr T]

This might be a silly question but I wonder what you all think. Would it be viewed the same or different if a wife had multiple husbands?

[a-train]

That would be gay dude.

-a-train

[begood2]

From Wikipedia Polyandry:

Polyandry has occurred in Tibet (see Polyandry in Tibet), the Canadian Arctic, Zanskar, Nepal, Ladakh,Jaunsar region in Uttarakhand, India, Toda of South India,the Nymba, Nishi and Sri Lanka. It is also encountered in some regions of Mongolia, China (especially Yunnan- the Mosuo people), and in some Subsaharan African and American indigenous communities . The Guanches, the first known inhabitants of the Canary Islands, also practiced it until their disappearance. In other societies, there are people who live in de facto polyandrous arrangements that are not recognized by the law[citation needed].

I've noticed that about every 6 months or so on this site there is a reoccurring almost lustful sounding flurry of posts on the advantages of a polygamy Utopian world that both men and women would love. But it makes about as much sense to me as a polyandry does. For every advantage that one could think up for polygamy.......another could be raised for polyandry. Just think if 8 males were all married to the same woman.......you guys could learn team work and share in taking care of the kids. That "honey do list" that some guys always complain about could be divided among all of you and you'd all have time left over to watch the game on the big screen with your snack eating male buddies! Hey, you wouldn't need a night out with the boys........because they would be there every night! Boy, wouldn't that be fun!

I personally don't want polygamy or polyandry. Thank you very much!

[Outshined]

I think most women would be horrified at the thought of several husbands...the messes, the snoring, belching and gas-passing...

We men are a challenge to live with, and I say that even though I are one myself.

[JcDean78]

There are many things that were done in the past that we no longer do. Such as we no longer sacrifice livestock and we no longer have more than one wife. I do think it is dishonoring ones wife to do so.

"Hey honey, I am home! Look what I picked up in town today, she is just hot is she not? What you say? Can I marry her too?"

"Honey, can you watch the kids tonight? I am going to go have relations with my other wife, you do not mind do you?"

... yea right, not at all disrespectful.

I think the Church has taken a clear stand on this issue. If that position changes in the future then I can only imagin it would be out of need... and not lust.

[Dr T]

Thank you for that Begood.

[CrimsonKairos]

JcDean, you seem unable to separate sex and marriage.

Marriage is not just about sex, nor is it just a synonym for sex.

Dude, of course the example sentences from your post are disrespectful. I don't know any priesthood holder that I've ever met that would talk to his wife/wives that way. Straw man arguments are so lame. Form without substance.

Let's leave it at this: polygamy can be heaven on earth or hell at home. Depends on those involved. B)

[a-train]

That would certainly be disrespectful to speak to your wife that way. Do you think that is how Brigham Young who wouldn't even wear pants with a fly in the front because he thought that was disrespectful spoke to his wives in that manner?

What about father Israel? Did he speak that way to Leah or Rachel? How about Moses to his wives? Lamech? David? Solomon? Nahor, Abraham's brother? Abraham himself to his wives? How about the other score and a half of polygamously married men in the Old Testament?

Perhaps I'll admit Zedekiah could have been so disrespectful to his wives. Perhaps some of the others. But I don't see how a man could hate his own wife and receive the Spirit, and receive revelation.

A tough pill to swallow for many is the fact that the Holy Pentateuch was first written by a polygamous man who had once murdered. But millions have lived and died believing the words and works of Moses. At least Joseph Smith never killed a man.

All who believe the Old Testament whether Jew or Gentile, must come to grips with the polygamous marriage of our prophets.

-a-train

[CrimsonKairos]

Booyah. B)

[shanstress70]

Some women would enjoy built-in company. Also, according to Jewish folklore (not scripture) Adam had lots of wives.

And some men would apparently enjoy more company too! There are churches that still practice this, you know.

... just messin' around with you Fiannan!

I've noticed that about every 6 months or so on this site there is a reoccurring almost lustful sounding flurry of posts on the advantages of a polygamy Utopian world that both men and women would love. But it makes about as much sense to me as a polyandry does. For every advantage that one could think up for polygamy.......another could be raised for polyandry. Just think if 8 males were all married to the same woman.......you guys could learn team work and share in taking care of the kids. That "honey do list" that some guys always complain about could be divided among all of you and you'd all have time left over to watch the game on the big screen with your snack eating male buddies! Hey, you wouldn't need a night out with the boys........because they would be there every night! Boy, wouldn't that be fun!

Amen, BeGood... that's hilarious!

I think most women would be horrified at the thought of several husbands...the messes, the snoring, belching and gas-passing...

We men are a challenge to live with, and I say that even though I are one myself.

I SO would not want more than one husband... the biggest reason being one that wasn't mentioned. But I won't get into that on such a PG site. You guys know what it is though. We women would be pestered beyond belief.

[Serg]

If a constitutional amendment recognizing gay marriages was adopted (heaven forbid), there'd be no real case to forbid polygamy.-crimsonkairos

We are right now in Puerto Rico reviewing our civil code, and it is very debated becausesome want civil marriages to be extended to homosexuals and others do not. I for one have said that i agree, but, well, I will never become an activist for it!

I wonder what the term would be for three or more gays who want to share one civil union? Polyunity?-crimsonkairos

I dont know, what about naming the wholespectrum of lesbianism that surrounded the Relief Society in periods between 1870-1900, sexual dynamics that were fursnished through polygamy!!

Uh, I littlehistorical apreciation would take away all seeming 'fun'from that last statement.

[JcDean78]

JcDean, you seem unable to separate sex and marriage.

Marriage is not just about sex, nor is it just a synonym for sex.

Dude, of course the example sentences from your post are disrespectful. I don't know any priesthood holder that I've ever met that would talk to his wife/wives that way. Straw man arguments are so lame. Form without substance.

Let's leave it at this: polygamy can be heaven on earth or hell at home. Depends on those involved. B)

Not about sex, but that is a part of it and there is no way around that. I just feel strongly that this is now History and something that the Church no longer supports and reafirms in the Proclimation to the World. As time has gone by, we have been given more and more of the truth through revelation and scripture. I think this is one of those things.

[Aphrodite]

Polygamy ideally only occurs with the consent of the current wife/wives.

What's with all the hysteria in this thread about how evil or wrong or hard polygamy was/would be? It's a celestial principle we aren't currently living. You don't have to have more than one wife to inherit the Celestial Kingdom, but polygamy is nonetheless a celestial principle.

You can't be celestial while clinging to the telestial. Period

.

I would NEVER give my consent. My husband and I have talked about this and he hates the idea even more than I do. We would never live it, celestial law or not. Hopefully, we would not be considered righteous enough to do it lol. JCDean78, I have the same opinion as you. We've discussed what to do if the other dies at a young age. I want my organs donated, he doesnt, but neither of us will ever get married to anyone else. Even if he died tomorrow I would never ever marry again. I could never love anyone like I love him. I would live so I could see him again one day. I really have a hard time with polygamy and hate it when people bring it up who aren't church members. Its an embarrassment as far as Im concerned. I understand why we had it, but that doesnt mean I have to like it!

I doubt that the English government would ever legalise it anyway. Anything remotely religious (unless its Islam of course) is viewed suspiciously and mocked. Tony Blair once made a comment that he prayed. It was all over the papers, the news, interviews-he had to retract the statement, he said, well of course I dont mean literally, just in my heart or something like that. And the nation breathed a sigh of relief. Thats the way it is over here.

Gay marriages, or 'civil partnerships' were made legal here last December. Gays can adopt. Its all ok. Anything religious, isnt. I dont have a problem with gay people as such, obviously it is wrong, but we need to show love to all as the Saviour would. I have a few gay friends. I do not believe in gay adoption or marriage though. It makes a mockery of the sanctity and unity of marriage and ruins kids who need a male and female role model.

[Gwen]

not to go to far off topic, but something that seems to be missing from the discussion of remarriage after death is that of what kind of marriage. i know several who have been to the temple for a civil marriage. both ppl were married and sealed in the temple, both spouses had died, they enjoyed eachother's company so they went and were married till death do you part, yes that can be done in the temple for such situations. they are some of the neatest couples i know. they refered to eachother as husband and wife and the person they were sealed to as their eternal companion. they talk about their eternal companions regularly to others and with eachother, they respect the love and connection there, couple picts of them and their eternal companions were on the walls, family picts with them and their children with their eternal companions. the understanding in the marriage is that you will never love me like you did your eternal companion nor will i ever love you that much, this will be over at death. there was a feeling of love and respect and just fun with these ppl that i see in very few eternal marriages. if my husband died while i was still young enough to want company i would definatly consider this kind of marriage. why not, life isn't meant to be for mourning forever. there should be joy in life, hubby will be waiting for me on the other side. there is also some practicality in it, the couples i know were all 70 and over, but if hubby died tomorrow, i've got young boys that need a male rolemodel. this kind of union could be functional, i would need some support. not that i would get married for that purpose, but that it would be something i'd consider.

however, i must say that i have joked to hubby that he can't remarry after i die, definatly not a sealing (he can wait till i can give my consent or not lol) but not civil either. see he has been married before, he had his "earthly fling", you should only get one, i have yet to have mine so i get to remarry, it's only fair........right?....lol. of course that is all in jest.