Petitioner Angry Over "Celestial" Pol...

Petitioner Angry Over "Celestial" Polygamy

There are 177 comments on the Kutv.com story from Jun 8, 2006, titled Petitioner Angry Over "Celestial" Polygamy. In it, Kutv.com reports that:

An online petition accuses an elder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints of being a "celestial" polygamist and calls for the elimination of his name from a letter that advocates monogamous ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Kutv.com.

First Prev
of 9
Next Last
TwoDaddies

Los Angeles, CA

#1 Jun 8, 2006
Oops! Someone let the hypocricy cat out of the bag. In the Rush for Roberston's and Falwell's approval, the first presidency is caught with their wedding bands on the fingers of multiple celestial wives.

Dang it!!!
Logic please

Tooele, UT

#2 Jun 8, 2006
TwoDaddies wrote:
Oops! Someone let the hypocricy cat out of the bag. In the Rush for Roberston's and Falwell's approval, the first presidency is caught with their wedding bands on the fingers of multiple celestial wives.
Dang it!!!
Except for the fact that two concurrent marriages while both wives are still alive is currently not allowed in the LDS church. The protester seems to have forgotten this issue. Nelson and the coalition are attempting to define marriage "in this life" and "in this country" not for the eternities, which is in the realm of an altogether different government.
If the protester wishes to attack the doctrine of eternal marriage, then he might as well start a petition against God, Himself, as Nelson is not the source of the doctrine. Let's not be fooled into thinking that any constitutional amendments or marriage-defining laws will change what deity declares to be true.
TwoDaddies

San Antonio, TX

#5 Jun 8, 2006
Logic please wrote:
<quoted text>
Except for the fact that two concurrent marriages while both wives are still alive is currently not allowed in the LDS church. The protester seems to have forgotten this issue. Nelson and the coalition are attempting to define marriage "in this life" and "in this country" not for the eternities, which is in the realm of an altogether different government.
If the protester wishes to attack the doctrine of eternal marriage, then he might as well start a petition against God, Himself, as Nelson is not the source of the doctrine. Let's not be fooled into thinking that any constitutional amendments or marriage-defining laws will change what deity declares to be true.
I see, well then maybe the church is okay with two men being sealed in the temple for Eternity, just not here in this life?
dances_with_weeb les

Brazil

#6 Jun 8, 2006
Logic please wrote:
<quoted text>
Except for the fact that two concurrent marriages while both wives are still alive is currently not allowed in the LDS church. The protester seems to have forgotten this issue. Nelson and the coalition are attempting to define marriage "in this life" and "in this country" not for the eternities, which is in the realm of an altogether different government.
If the protester wishes to attack the doctrine of eternal marriage, then he might as well start a petition against God, Himself, as Nelson is not the source of the doctrine. Let's not be fooled into thinking that any constitutional amendments or marriage-defining laws will change what deity declares to be true.
okay, which god are we talking about here? the god of the isrealites? he ain't the god of mormons, you know. he never heard of them and he certainly isn't the fount of their doctrines. those came out of business meetings held in a boardroom. did you know that joe smith was a small town (palmyra, ny) drunk? he saw his 'vision' while he was laying passed out drunk in a pile of cow shit in his pasture.(btw... that's straight from history.)
Ryan B

Lenexa, KS

#7 Jun 9, 2006
dances_with_weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
okay, which god are we talking about here? the god of the isrealites? he ain't the god of mormons, you know. he never heard of them and he certainly isn't the fount of their doctrines. those came out of business meetings held in a boardroom. did you know that joe smith was a small town (palmyra, ny) drunk? he saw his 'vision' while he was laying passed out drunk in a pile of cow shit in his pasture.(btw... that's straight from history.)
What history are you reading that from?
Sheryl

Annandale, NJ

#8 Dec 8, 2006
Logic please wrote:
<quoted text>
Except for the fact that two concurrent marriages while both wives are still alive is currently not allowed in the LDS church. The protester seems to have forgotten this issue. Nelson and the coalition are attempting to define marriage "in this life" and "in this country" not for the eternities, which is in the realm of an altogether different government.
If the protester wishes to attack the doctrine of eternal marriage, then he might as well start a petition against God, Himself, as Nelson is not the source of the doctrine. Let's not be fooled into thinking that any constitutional amendments or marriage-defining laws will change what deity declares to be true.
You claim to follow the teachings of Christ; well, He stated that there are "no marriages in heaven". Care to explain that one?

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#9 Dec 8, 2006
Logic please wrote:
<quoted text>
Except for the fact that two concurrent marriages while both wives are still alive is currently not allowed in the LDS church. The protester seems to have forgotten this issue. Nelson and the coalition are attempting to define marriage "in this life" and "in this country" not for the eternities, which is in the realm of an altogether different government.
If the protester wishes to attack the doctrine of eternal marriage, then he might as well start a petition against God, Himself, as Nelson is not the source of the doctrine. Let's not be fooled into thinking that any constitutional amendments or marriage-defining laws will change what deity declares to be true.
ah, but they are wrong... the book of mormon clearly states that marriage is for eternity. tyey can't have it both ways and it's too late to change something so fundimental. poor mormons.

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#10 Dec 8, 2006
Sheryl wrote:
<quoted text>
You claim to follow the teachings of Christ; well, He stated that there are "no marriages in heaven". Care to explain that one?
the mormons don't follow the bible as much as the bom. in fact, they arenot even considdered to be christians.

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#11 Dec 8, 2006
Ryan B wrote:
<quoted text>
What history are you reading that from?
several history books contain this information. the history of palmyra, n.y. is one. the history of the erie canal, the history of the fingerlakes region, and the history of rochester n.y. and outlying areas are a few more. maybe you should study them and then get back to us.
Sheryl

Annandale, NJ

#12 Dec 8, 2006
dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
several history books contain this information. the history of palmyra, n.y. is one. the history of the erie canal, the history of the fingerlakes region, and the history of rochester n.y. and outlying areas are a few more. maybe you should study them and then get back to us.
I have the Book of Mormon and I simply cannot take it seriously.
Sopot

Ottawa, IL

#13 Dec 11, 2006
dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
ah, but they are wrong... the book of mormon clearly states that marriage is for eternity. tyey can't have it both ways and it's too late to change something so fundimental. poor mormons.
As always, there is no basis for the hate, prejudice, bigotry, and malicious ignorance that you spew against religions that differ with your radical homosexual views.

The Book of Mormon does not mention marriage for eternity at all.

Quite a large number of Joseph Smith's Palmyra contemporaries refuted the malicious lies that were told about the character of Joseph Smith and his family. It is doubtful that your precise fabrications appear in any "history."

It is also obvious that the matter being discussed in national politics did not involve Mormon theology. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been one of the most ardent opponents of plural marriage in the hear and now for over a century.

“Love thy neighbor!”

Since: Dec 06

Westland , MI

#14 Dec 11, 2006
Sopot wrote:
<quoted text>
As always, there is no basis for the hate, prejudice, bigotry, and malicious ignorance that you spew against religions that differ with your radical homosexual views.
The Book of Mormon does not mention marriage for eternity at all.
Quite a large number of Joseph Smith's Palmyra contemporaries refuted the malicious lies that were told about the character of Joseph Smith and his family. It is doubtful that your precise fabrications appear in any "history."
It is also obvious that the matter being discussed in national politics did not involve Mormon theology. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been one of the most ardent opponents of plural marriage in the hear and now for over a century.
Since the BOOK OF MORMON is full of " hate, prejudice, bigotry, and malicious ignorance".......why are you so upset? Isn't that the Mormon way of life? "Hate thy brother if he is different than you?" At least you have something in common with Christians.
Sopot

Ottawa, IL

#15 Dec 11, 2006
Gay Mom wrote:
<quoted text>
Since the BOOK OF MORMON is full of " hate, prejudice, bigotry, and malicious ignorance".......why are you so upset? Isn't that the Mormon way of life? "Hate thy brother if he is different than you?" At least you have something in common with Christians.
Perhaps you should read a book before you spew lies about it. Your rant has no basis in reality.
Truth

United States

#16 Dec 11, 2006
Bill, face it, the Mormon's don't like descendants of slaves and neither does Narth. Your two bastions or should I say bastards of knowledge, which you so happily believe do not like you because of your birth. How does that feel?
Sopot wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you should read a book before you spew lies about it. Your rant has no basis in reality.

Since: Dec 06

I love my hometown :)

#17 Dec 11, 2006
Gay Mom wrote:
<quoted text>
Since the BOOK OF MORMON is full of " hate, prejudice, bigotry, and malicious ignorance".......why are you so upset? Isn't that the Mormon way of life? "Hate thy brother if he is different than you?" At least you have something in common with Christians.
Very good post! But beware, these "charitable" Mormons are gonna get you now!
Truth for Bill

United States

#18 Dec 11, 2006
Hello Bill/Sopot/Jim,

Here is some nice information from the Book of Mormon about their hate toward you:

http://www.truthandgrace.com/Racism.html

Just thought you might like to know that you are not well liked and accepted by them, if you are as you have claimed a descendant of slaves. Maybe you should pick a church better suited to your race next time.
See More

Hinesburg, VT

#19 Dec 11, 2006
(above...they mean you, Swill)

Pay attention.
Sopot

Ottawa, IL

#20 Dec 11, 2006
Truth wrote:
Bill, face it, the Mormon's don't like descendants of slaves and neither does Narth. Your two bastions or should I say bastards of knowledge, which you so happily believe do not like you because of your birth. How does that feel?<quoted text>
If you check original sources, you'll find that yours lied on both accounts.
Truth for Bill

United States

#21 Dec 11, 2006
So which sources are more correct than the Book of Mormon for the racist LDS and also which source other than the Narth website itself are more correct for thier racist views. See, the problem here is that I used your very own sources, both the book of Mormon and Narth's website, for this very information.

Please tell me where I should find better information.
Sopot wrote:
<quoted text>
If you check original sources, you'll find that yours lied on both accounts.
Truth for Bill

United States

#22 Dec 11, 2006
So I checked my copy of the Book of Mormon, given to me by the LDS church against the website I posted and the quotes are correct. In case you don't have a Book of Mormon here is the LDS online version:

http://scriptures.lds.org

Please tell me where more correct quotes would come from so that I can inform the website about racism in the LDS church. I must seem so silly to you to actually quote the Book of Mormon itself when you say there is a more correct source for the LDS church.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Microphone cut after Mormon girl reveals she's ... 2 hr Latter Day Taints 2
News Microphone cut after Mormon girl reveals she's ... 2 hr Latter Day Taints 2
News Microphone cut after Mormon girl reveals shea s... 2 hr Cordwainer Trout 1
News 12-year-old girl comes out to her Mormon congre... 7 hr nomo 62
News Choosing to Stay in the Mormon Church Despite I... (Aug '16) 14 hr tongangodz 515
News Who says Mormons aren't Christians? (Oct '11) Jun 17 Good Riddance 32,101
Mormon missionaries: how do you react to "No So... (Dec '09) Jun 15 tongangodz 30
More from around the web