Is homosexuality or monogamy ruining America? What Mormon leaders say!!!

[Exmo-Robertson]

This was just sent to me by another Exmormon who does a lot of research on that topic. I may be adding this to may web site. Your thoughts please.

Is homosexuality or monogomy ruining America?

We've all heard today's Mormon leaders blaming the fall of the Roman empire and the decline of civilization on Homosexuality. Here's just a sampling of Mormon Prophets making this claim:

"This heinous homosexual sin is of the ages. Many cities and civilizations have gone out of existence because of it. It was present in Israel’s wandering days, tolerated by the Greeks, and found in the baths of corrupt Rome."
- Prophet Spencer W. Kimball, "President Kimball Speaks Out on Morality," LDS New Era, Nov. 1980, Page 39

"Alternatives to the legal and loving marriage between a man and a woman are helping to unravel the fabric of human society. I am sure this is pleasing to the devil. The fabric I refer to is the family. These so-called alternative life-styles must not be accepted as right, because they frustrate God’s commandment for a life-giving union of male and female within a legal marriage as stated in Genesis. If practiced by all adults, these life-styles would mean the end of the human family."
- Apostle James E. Faust, "Serving the Lord and Resisting the Devil," Liahona, Nov. 1995, Page 3.

But this is the very SAME argument that Mormon Prophets have used against good-old heterosexual monogomy! See here other inspired words from Mormon Prophets:

"It is a fact worthy of note that the shortest lived nations of which we have record have been monogamic. Rome...was a monogamic nation and the numerous evils attending that system early laid the foundation for that ruin which eventually overtook her."
- Apostle George Q. Cannon, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 202

"Since the founding of the Roman empire monogamy has prevailed more extensively than in times previous to that. The founders of that ancient empire were robbers and women stealers, and made laws favoring monogamy in consequence of the scarcity of women among them, and hence this monogamic system which now prevails throughout Christendom, and which had been so fruitful a source of prostitution and whoredom throughout all the Christian monogamic cities of the Old and New World, until rottenness and decay are at the root of their institutions both national and religious."
- Prophet Brigham Young Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 128

"... the one-wife system not only degenerates the human family, both physically and intellectually, but it is entirely incompatible with philosophical notions of immortality; it is a lure to temptation, and has always proved a curse to a people."
- Prophet John Taylor, Millennial Star, Vol. 15, p. 227

"Monogamy, or restrictions by law to one wife, is no part of the economy of heaven among men. Such a system was commenced by the founders of the Roman empire....Rome became the mistress of the world, and introduced this order of monogamy wherever her sway was acknowledged. Thus this monogamic order of marriage, so esteemed by modern Christians as a holy sacrament and divine institution, is nothing but a system established by a set of robbers.... Why do we believe in and practice polygamy? Because the Lord introduced it to his servants in a revelation given to Joseph Smith, and the Lord's servants have always practised it. 'And is that religion popular in heaven?' it is the only popular religion there,..."
- Prophet Brigham Young, The Deseret News, August 6, 1862

"This law of monogamy, or the monogamic system, laid the foundation for prostitution and the evils and diseases of the most revolting nature and character under which modern Christendom groans,..."
- Apostle Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, page 195

"We breathe the free air, we have the best looking men and handsomest women, and if they (Non-Mormons) envy us our position, well they may, for they are a poor, narrow-minded, pinch-backed race of men, who chain themselves down to the law of monogamy, and live all their days under the dominion of one wife. They ought to be ashamed of such conduct, and the still fouler channel which flows from their practices; and it is not to be wondered at that they should envy those who so much better understand the social relations."
- Apostle George A Smith, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, page 291

"Just ask yourselves, historians, when was monogamy introduced on to the face of the earth? When those buccaneers, who settled on the peninsula where Rome now stands, could not steal women enough to have two or three apiece, they passed a law that a man should have but one woman. And this started monogamy and the downfall of the plurality system. In the days of Jesus, Rome, having dominion over Jerusalem, they carried out the doctrine more or less. This was the rise, start and foundation of the doctrine of monogamy; and never till then was there a law passed, that we have any knowledge of, that a man should have but one wife."
- Prophet Birgham Young, Journal of Discourses Vol. 12, page 262

History will look back and correctly see today's Mormon leaders to be just as ignorant, bigoted and self-serving as Mormon leaders of the 19th Century. These men are not inspired representatives of God, but petty tyrants. And all those who follow them are on the wrong side of history.

[Sher]

This belongs more in Theology 201 ... so I am moving it there.

[geebob]

err... no it doesn't.

[Exmo-Robertson]

SOMEBODY MAKE UP MY MIND!!!!!:rofl:

[Dee Dee Warren]

I think it found its proper home!!!

[Dee Dee Warren]

Question Exmo... I don't understand your last statement. Many Christians would agree with those Mormon statement on the Roman Empire and homosexuality, are they bigoted as well? I don't know enough about history probably to make a comment based on sociological data but I can say that God does not approve of homosexuality and such things will merit judgment, s will many others thins such as abortion, adultery, etc, and the downfall of civilizations is one such judgment. If I am a bigot for believing such, I have to stand by the Word of God than the opinoin o fman.



I think that term is flung around everywhere on this board way too much. I did find though the quotes on condemnation of monogamy to be very interesting. I found the whole polygamy thing to be a particularly, and dare I say "seedy" side of Mormon history, especially in the accounts of how Smith "introduced" this teaching and at the expense of and apparent deception of his wife Emma. I find the doctrine absolutely revulsive. I also find it "expedient" that this now relegated to the heavenly realms when of course Jesus tells us that there is no marriage in heaven...

If it is a revelation from God and this wonderful thing and so important that an angel would kill Smith over it, how it is it that it could be so easily relegated. Is God conforming to the expediency of American law? Wouldn't the faithful Mormon be better off either disobeying the law or moving to a country where such things were not outlawed? This also smacked of falseness to me. And in not actively protesting the "evil" of monogamy, are they not then aiding and abetting to the downfall of this civilization and assisting evil?

[themuzicman]

THis probably belongs in Comparative theology 101 (or whatever it's called), but... Who am I to argue with the great ones...


Anyway...


I see a major disconnect between the two arguments from the Mormon church, which should expose the problem:

"This heinous homosexual sin is of the ages. Many cities and civilizations have gone out of existence because of it. It was present in Israel’s wandering days, tolerated by the Greeks, and found in the baths of corrupt Rome."
- Prophet Spencer W. Kimball, "President Kimball Speaks Out on Morality," LDS New Era, Nov. 1980, Page 39

and

"It is a fact worthy of note that the shortest lived nations of which we have record have been monogamic. Rome...was a monogamic nation and the numerous evils attending that system early laid the foundation for that ruin which eventually overtook her."
- Apostle George Q. Cannon, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 202

Did the Romans go to the bathe houses to have monogamous homosexual relationships, or what?


Sounds as though the Mormon god(s) is/are confused. Or is it their prophets?

Michael

[Exmo-Robertson]

Today @ 10:44 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135796#post135796)
Dee Dee Warren:

Question Exmo... I don't understand your last statement. Many Christians would agree with those Mormon statement on the Roman Empire and homosexuality, are they bigoted as well? I don't know enough about history probably to make a comment based on sociological data but I can say that God does not approve of homosexuality and such things will merit judgment, s will many others thins such as abortion, adultery, etc, and the downfall of civilizations is one such judgment. If I am a bigot for believing such, I have to stand by the Word of God than the opinoin o fman.

My belief is this. Any sexual contact outside of marriage is considered a sin acording to Paul in the Bible. I get from that is what the real sin is, is the seeking of lustful pursuits without responsiblity. Or the fulfilling of just our own needs. Homosexuals like heterosexuals have and can form lifelong relationships, not legaly married because the law won't let them, but for all pratical purposes a marriage. I don't see those relationships as sinful and here why. If it is true they are born gay just as much as you or I are born straight, then that isn't their fault, no more than the color of our skin is our fault or even a choice, and they are what God made them, certianly NOT a sin. Christ died for them and also loves them and would hope that we would reach out to them to teach them about his love and mercy.



Today @ 10:44 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135796#post135796)
Dee Dee Warren:

I think that term is flung around everywhere on this board way too much. I did find though the quotes on condemnation of monogamy to be very interesting. I found the whole polygamy thing to be a particularly, and dare I say "seedy" side of Mormon history, especially in the accounts of how Smith "introduced" this teaching and at the expense of and apparent deception of his wife Emma. I find the doctrine absolutely revulsive. I also find it "expedient" that this now relegated to the heavenly realms when of course Jesus tells us that there is no marriage in heaven...

It's also is a major contridiction to the Bible when you read from it that it is better to remain single and that the only real reason to marry is to not burn. Let's forget that Paul also made it clear that for a Bishop to be considered righteous he is to be married to only ONE wife.


Today @ 10:44 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135796#post135796)
Dee Dee Warren:

If it is a revelation from God and this wonderful thing and so important that an angel would kill Smith over it, how it is it that it could be so easily relegated. Is God conforming to the expediency of American law? Wouldn't the faithful Mormon be better off either disobeying the law or moving to a country where such things were not outlawed? This also smacked of falseness to me. And in not actively protesting the "evil" of monogamy, are they not then aiding and abetting to the downfall of this civilization and assisting evil?

There are many people in Utah who agree with you on this and have broken away from the Main LDS Church to "restore it(the true gospel) yet again" the real faith of what they consider to be Jesus's Church. There is a fantastic book coming out July 15 that gives you an insider look at these sick offshoots of Mormonism. It's called: Under The Banner Of Heaven by Jon Krakauer. Because of what I do and the work I've done with Mormonism the publisher, Doubleday, sent me an advice copy. The book will make you sick because it describes the actions of Ron and Dan Lafferty who, at the commandment of God, sliced the throats of their Sister in law and her Six month old baby from ear to ear. The book also talks about the recent Liz Smart case and her aductor. It will be THE book to buy on Mormonism this year. If you've never heard of the LDS teaching of Blood Atonement, I'll be glad to post some info here for all to read. The short meaning of the term is this: There are some sins that the blood of Jesus did not pay for, in those cases the only way for a person to receive forgiveness is to pay with their own blood. Usually by having their throat sliced from ear to ear so that their blood will hit the ground.
Up until 1990 in the LDS temple ceremony, this was only one of the penalties demonstrated to the members that they would agree to pay if they revealed what they learned inside the endowment session. Again if you would like, I could reprint what was actually said and done.

[Dee Dee Warren]

I will be back and this is an issue for another thread, but you are dead wrong on the homosexuality issue, and i find your labeling of the LDS denunciation of it as greatly misplaced.

Also I do take offense at referring to other's beliefs as "funny." It is not necessary.

[David O]

Is everyone as repulsed by David's polygamy? Was God afraid to tell him it was bad? Was Moses way off base when he married the Cu[color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color]e woman? His sister thought so. I can't understand why monogamy is so "clear" from the Genesis passage, but submission to men and not teaching or usurping the authority of a man is mysterious. I also can't understand why monogamy wasn't in the Mosaic law. It was specific enough to mention not boiling a kid in it's mother's milk.

[Exmo-Robertson]

Today @ 04:37 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135943#post135943)
Dee Dee Warren:

Also I do take offense at referring to other's beliefs as "funny." It is not necessary.

I changed that statement for you.

[Dee Dee Warren]

There is a whole thread where the polygamy issue was debated and it is clear as is the headship issue clear with which I agree with you David. And yes I am just as repulsed by anyone's polygamy as a perversion of God's original plan for men and women and as emotionally abusive of women. As a man, you would not know.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Thank you ExMo.... I have some further thoughts where you and I will be in agreement, and an inconsistency I think I may see in your position.

[David O]

As a man, you would not know.

As a woman you might not be capable of knowing something that most of the men who authored the Bible seem to have known. Who is wiser, you or David and Moses. Should you be repulsed by Moses? I don't think so. I have been in relationships that you would probably find inconceiveable, like one of two men kept by the same woman. I was a feminist and worked very hard to not be offended. I got out of that mess by taking the Bible very seriously and literally. The only thing that I allow myself to be repulsed by now is false doctrine. Are you repulsed by God for having 2 wives in the book of Ezekiel?

[Kevin W. Graham]

== As a man, you would not know.

As a woman who has never practiced it, neither would you. Right?

This is a two edged sword since there are many relationships that involve emotional abuse without benefit of polygamy. Likewise, there are several polygamous communities in Colorado where the women seem to be completely content in their chosen lifestyle. I've seen them talk about it on talk shows and they appear to be emotionally stable as can be. I think those who suffer from polygamy emotionally are typically those who are forced into polygamy, usually at a young age. These are the cases we usually hear about on TV, but I don't think the problem is polygamy itself, but rather the fact that a child was forced into this lifestyle. It is a sad case indeed.

I couldn't imagine prcticing polygamy myself, but that lack of insight doesn't give me the right to criticize what God sanctioned (remember God gave David his wives).

[David O]

the fact that a child was forced into this lifestyle.

Leah and Rachel had no apparent choice in their marriage.

[themuzicman]

That's a bit of a stretch. We know that Jacob had no choice in the first marriage, since he was decieved into it. It is certainly possible that Leah demanded that she be given first. Obviously Rachel would have been denied at first, not by Jacob, but by Laben.

While it would seem that Genesis prescribes one man, one woman marraiges, it would seem that it was not a part of any requirement to serve God.

My guess is that polygamy became necessary because of the frequent wars that routinely took the lives of a large percentage of the marryable men available. The only way to quickly repopulate after a devistating war would be to have multiple women getting pregnant by a single man. Since multiple wives was an expensive proposition, the rich were the ones who wound up with the harems.

Today, such threats are not a problem, and polygamy is no longer a necessary evil. Unless you are trying to populate a region with a particular cult, I suppose.

Just MHO.

Michael

[David O]

and polygamy is no longer a necessary evil.
Michael

Was it evil or not evil. You can't have it both ways.

I don't see very many women having much choice in marriage in the Bible. I see men asking their Dads to get women for them, and women taken as war booty. They may not have had as high of a divorce rate as us. It certainly doesn't play a big part in the stories of the Bible, but divorce plays a big part in stories of the modern American church.

[themuzicman]

Apparantly you don't understand the concept of a "necessary evil."

Michael

[David O]

Apparantly you don't understand the concept of a "necessary evil."

Michael

I'm 40 years old. I've heard of it. I don't buy it the way you're attempting to use it. God doesn't do evil, and He has 2 wives in Ezekiel.

[themuzicman]

ROFL!

That portion of Ezekiel is clearly symbolic, not literal. You can't honestly think that is a basis for actual polygamy.

And, if you'll study some Ancient Near East history, you'll find that threats to the male population such as war were quite real, and polygamy the only real solution.

Michael

[David O]

symbolic, not literal.


So you're saying that God can symbolically sin and it's OK?