Between the FLDS events in Texas and the continued popularity of Big Love, polygamy (or plural marriage, as it is often termed) has been in the news lately. It has always been a topic of regular discussion on LDS blogs, where opinions are all over the spectrum. Here are a few recent posts.
- “The plural wives of Joseph Smith” at Latter-day Commentary, giving a short but informed defense of the 19th-century LDS practice along with lots of links to good online resources. It’s easier to discuss it as a practice than as a doctrine, given the current ambivalent posture of the Church, where one can get in trouble for publicly affirming it but also for publicly criticizing it. LDC notes: “Although some may claim otherwise, it is not a secret subject. It is just not taught in your basic church curriculum.”
- “Count me as one who believes” is a more personal reflection by an LDS blogger.
- “The Ultimate Polgamy Post” (not so recent) at FMH offers a more wide-open discussion (one of FMH’s specialties). “I have very mixed feelings about polygamy. … On the other hand, I’m a BIG fan of traditional monogamous pair bonds.”
For a very long list of posts on this topic, you can always go to Mormon Archipelago and do a Bloggernacle search on polgamy.
posted March 31, 2009 at 1:33 pm
What I don’t understand is why the general Christian community is against polygamy, considering the examples found in the Bible which prove that it was sanctioned by the Lord in certain cases, such as with Abraham and Jacob.
posted March 31, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Right on Ryanwin- it also baffles me as to how so many Christians oppose all marriages other than the one man, one woman Adam and Eve-style marriage when there are about eight different types of marriage in the Bible, including the traditional monogamous heterosexual marriage, polygamy (polygyny, more accurately), levirate marriage, concubinage, etc.
To be fair, God never actually sanctioned Abraham’s polygamy, I think He was actually pretty pissed about him having a child with Hagar when He had promised Abraham he would have a child with Sarah. But there are definitely instances where God DID sanction polygamy in the Bible, such as with David in 2 Samuel 12:8 (I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more).
When Christians argue against gay marriage, they often say “Marriage has always been between one man and one woman”. That’s a pretty bad argument, taking into account the frequency of polygamy in the Bible, Torah, and Quran, as well as in numerous cultures today, especially Africa and the Middle East.
posted March 31, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Your Name, astute observations. The Bible, however, does not record any anger directed from the Lord toward Abraham. In fact, all scriptural indication is that he was a righteous man throughout his entire life. This is significant considering that he also had children with his concubines, as recorded in Genesis 25:6. If this were displeasing to the Lord, surely he would not receive the blessings he was promised, nor would later prophets have visions of him sitting on the right hand of God. LDS scripture reveals further of his righteousness and obedience in Doctrine and Covenants 132:34-37.
“Marriage has always been between one man and one woman” is indeed a fallacy, but can be corrected to say “between man and woman.”
posted March 31, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Yep.
You can have 2 or 3 girlfriends impregnated and not support any of your children and the law looks the other way.
But look out if you want to marry the mothers and support the kids.
You may find yourself on Oprah.
posted March 31, 2009 at 11:33 pm
There is no christian foundation in the New Testament against plural marriage.
Polygamy existed in the Christian world. It is documented that monogamy was adopted by leaders of the church in Roman times. Monogamy was a Roman practice and it was adopted by Christian leaders of the time in order to RECRUIT new followers from the Roman faith to Christianity. In effect, it was a compromise made to entice Romans to join Christian faith and it was made with no religious foundation what so ever!
Marketing caused the adoption of Monogamy, not God.
posted April 1, 2009 at 1:24 am
Whatever, as the fields dry, as pandemic pathogens
spread, as men keep their jobs as women lose their jobs and men keep theirs, particularly where polygamy has been practiced in the last few centuries, as women and children attached to the male members of married couples have nowhere to live, women whose great grandmothers practiced
plural marriage are going to look more favorably
on extended family–whether this means Aunts and grandmothers, or polygamy or man sharing.
The Archbishop of North Africa admitted some time ago that the Bible nowhere condemns it. The breakup
rate is about the same as the monogamous divorce
rate (Kimball Young 195?”)
Indigenous people will remember when the missionaries imposed European ways on Native peoples. We saw a rerun of that atrocity in Texas.
“The State shall make no establishment of religion.”
Ummm, where have I heard that before. I can think of no more apt example of this. It is the separation of Church and State that needs imposing.
Kathleen
posted April 2, 2009 at 10:53 pm
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Joannah
posted April 18, 2009 at 12:57 am
I was raised in one of these polygamist communities and the oppression against females was intollerable. I left when I was a teenager and have no interest in Mormonism as a whole.
Personally I have no problem with polygamy and categorize it as a sexual preferences as I would being gay or lesbian. I do not think it is the federal government’s responsibilty to dictate morality and it is ludicrous that it is illegal.
I do have a problem with sexual lifestyles if that lifestyle harms another person, particularly when children are involved. I also have an issue with polygamy being lived in the name of religion. Atrocities have been committed in the name of religion since the beginning of recorded history. Let polygamists be what they are, but call it what it is, responsible sex between multiple partners. Just keep it responsible and between consenting adults.