Absolutely Awoelflebater has a point, Yep I am fine with marriage being reserved (licensed) for describing the raising of offspring by adults. ..for the purpose of.. Then, Civil unions for various combinations of everything else. Clearly in the cases of early Mormonist plural wives it was patriarchal sexual abuse flat out coming from the top guy down.
I have been at recent conferences listening to these papers delivered by the scholars who have read through the early Mormon archival writings. It is eye-opening explosive stuff way more than just some smoking guns. This Smith guy was a narcissistic schizophrenic nut straight out. If you would like some insight as to context in to the mind of what was going on with the golden tablets, hieroglyphs, and conversations with angels then revisit the movie, A Beautiful Mind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film) A lot more is known now about states of Mental Health than was known then in the 19th Century. Jai Guru Dev, -Buck jr_esq@...> wrote : Ann, You've got a point. That's probably why polygamy is not legal in the US. But the country's mores are changing quickly given the fact that gay marriage is now acceptable and legal. We'll just have to wait and see what else is next. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : It may be legal in the country where you live. But it's still technically illegal to practice polygamy in the USA. From what I understand, there are parts of Utah where the authorities do not enforce the law even though they know the people who are living in a polygamous household. These assholes who own multiple wives in these fundamentalist communities should be kicked in the nuts. I have no patience for these guys. They're all high and mighty religious and holier than thou and at the same time lording it over the barefoot and pregnant. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : Why do you associate polygamy with "multiple wives?" The actual definition of the word is a marriage with multiple partners. Why not multiple husbands for one wife, or just multiple partners, period? As for "challenging the prohibition," you're still stuck in American Puritan mode. Polyamorous marriage is practiced (and legal) in many countries currently. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 8:43 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] LDS Joseph Smith had 40 Wives If this was possible during his time, will it become legal again to have plural wives now? With the acceptance of gay marriage, IMO it would soon be possible for people to challenge the prohibition of polygamy in the USA. What do you think? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/11/joseph-smith-40-wives_n_6138508.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/11/joseph-smith-40-wives_n_6138508.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592