Is this dishonest or is it okay?

[Lizzy60]

I'd like to be done with thinking about it

The nice thing is that we have nothing to do with polygamy anymore . Today it's not our doctrine. There's no reason for social justice warriors to pick a fight. Who can they fight anyway? All the polygamists are dead. The church leaders of that time are dead. Do people expect Nelson to take responsibility for what Brigham did? That's impossible. You can't get to your destination if you're constantly looking back.

Take Joseph's admonition to heart-
22 Brethren, shall we not go on in so great a cause? Go forward and not backward. Courage, brethren; and on, on to the victory! Let your hearts rejoice, and be exceedingly glad. Let the earth break forth into singing. Let the dead speak forth anthems of eternal praise to the King Immanuel, who hath ordained, before the world was, that which would enable us to redeem them out of their prison; for the prisoners shall go free.

We still have polygamy in the Church. We have been taught, and are expected to believe, that a man sealed to more than one wife (like Pres Nelson) will have both or even more wives in the celestial kingdom. Polygamy for eternity is a much bigger deal than polygamy for time only.

[shadow]

I'd like to be done with thinking about it

The nice thing is that we have nothing to do with polygamy anymore . Today it's not our doctrine. There's no reason for social justice warriors to pick a fight. Who can they fight anyway? All the polygamists are dead. The church leaders of that time are dead. Do people expect Nelson to take responsibility for what Brigham did? That's impossible. You can't get to your destination if you're constantly looking back.

Take Joseph's admonition to heart-
22 Brethren, shall we not go on in so great a cause? Go forward and not backward. Courage, brethren; and on, on to the victory! Let your hearts rejoice, and be exceedingly glad. Let the earth break forth into singing. Let the dead speak forth anthems of eternal praise to the King Immanuel, who hath ordained, before the world was, that which would enable us to redeem them out of their prison; for the prisoners shall go free.

I am not a SJW. That's dismissive of you to say.

Polygamy is not really over, because it still drives dishonesty and gaslighting in the church. It's like a tumor that was covered up, instead of excised. It still festers. There needs to be resolution. Talks that involve leaders' who had many wives should be able to incorporate that fact without shame. It's like a big mess that needs repentance to solve. Doesn't sit right with me, at all. I think if the church doesn't get out in front of the issue, God's work of revealing secrets will keep causing more people to understand that the church isn't being honest. I think the church needs to do the hard thing it advises us to do. Something like "Go talk to the bishop." God won't make the church do anything. It's in the leaders' hands to act.

Polygamy doesn't need repentance if it was right. If it was wrong, then those who practiced it incorrectly need to repent, and they're dead. And who's driving the dishonesty? Ironically it's those who claim that it was incorrect, that it was a sin and that Joseph didn't practice it. Incorrect beliefs will most definitely cause discord. If it festers in your life then repent of your incorrect belief. Table it until later if you must.
The church isn't hiding anything. They're open about it. You were able to go to a church website and see that Clayton was a polygamist. It was that easy. We don't practice it today so we don't need to have lessons on it. If we're taught it then some bone-heads would want to start practicing it. And really, why would we teach something we don't practice? And it's not like you can't learn about it- it's in our scriptures for those who choose to study it. There's an essay about it.

The crux of the matter is that some people deny that polygamy can be right in God's eyes and NOTHING will satisfy them. They want the church to come out and say polygamy was always evil and never should've been practiced. They want the church to say that Brigham started polygamy and Joseph had nothing to do with it. They want the church to lie to them so they can feel better about something they don't understand. They want their pound of flesh. You don't like honesty because it doesn't make sense to you so you complain and you feel disgruntled and you absolutely feel like you're a victim. You want the church to see things YOUR way. But hey, you're not complaining about Moses being a polygamist. You're settled with Abraham and his polygamy. You're not condemning Gideon and the many other polygamists. David had 8 wives before the Prophet Nathan, through God, gave him more. Joseph Smith didn't correct it, it's in his inspired version of the Bible. You're not demanding the church apologize for OT polygamy. And maybe you're not OK with OT polygamy but I'd ask who you're demanding an apology from for that? The Gospel is Christs, those prophets were His. You'll probably reply that the church had nothing to do with OT polygamy, which is true, but then the church today has nothing to do with polygamy from over 100 years ago either. However, the thing that links it all together is the Priesthood and Christ. Maybe God can calm your fears and feelings of injustice. Acting like a warrior demanding the church apologize to society for the injustice of polygamy won't move you forward in life, spiritually or otherwise. That's just my opinion.

Who's driving this discord of a doctrine we no longer practice? Is it God or Satan? It wouldn't be God- we left polygamy well over 100 years ago. We don't practice it. And even then, back in the day only about 5% of the church practiced it- a very small amount. Plus God says to forgive, not to rebel. He wants peace, not discord. Satan is stirring the hearts of men to rebel against Christ's church. I honestly hope you'll see this movement for what it is.

[Chip]

Shadow, I'm neither a victim nor a SJW, and this isn't a "movement". It's about a culture we share that buries its history. Can't even discuss it, except here on the interwebs.

A few months ago, I was at a leadership training put on by our stake presidency and a slide was shown that listed the top reasons why people leave the church. At the very top of the list was "church history", followed by "Joseph Smith". As you can imagine, there was ZERO discussion about any of the serious reasons, except the last one which was "somebody at church offended me". Lots of platitudes offered about that one. The rest got the blanket treatment of, "those people don't have testimonies".

I know too well from experience that any discussion of real issues only indicates you must be apostate, yourself. So, the leadership has created a culture where discussion of things can't take place, especially in a group. And people are leaving over it. Their response is only to give "stay in the boat" talks. It's like they don't want to touch it with a ten foot pole, themselves.

[Centerline]

Just curious, what would the discussions look like that would bring harmony to individuals who have concerns over church history?

I was in a bishopric when the Gospel Topics Essays came out. We had a combined meeting with the adults to discuss some of the issues. Each one of us was prepared to discuss a number of the topics if any questions were raised. I didn’t think any questions were going to be brought up in an antagonist manner during the large meeting, and I was right. Of course there were probably some people there who had serious questions but were apprehensive to voice them at that time.

I learned later a few individuals did approach the bishop privately and they had some very productive discussions.

[Thinker]

I'd like to be done with thinking about it

The nice thing is that we have nothing to do with polygamy anymore . Today it's not our doctrine. There's no reason for social justice warriors to pick a fight. Who can they fight anyway? All the polygamists are dead. The church leaders of that time are dead. Do people expect Nelson to take responsibility for what Brigham did? That's impossible. You can't get to your destination if you're constantly looking back.

Take Joseph's admonition to heart-
22 Brethren, shall we not go on in so great a cause? Go forward and not backward. Courage, brethren; and on, on to the victory! Let your hearts rejoice, and be exceedingly glad. Let the earth break forth into singing. Let the dead speak forth anthems of eternal praise to the King Immanuel, who hath ordained, before the world was, that which would enable us to redeem them out of their prison; for the prisoners shall go free.

We still have polygamy in the Church. We have been taught, and are expected to believe, that a man sealed to more than one wife (like Pres Nelson) will have both or even more wives in the celestial kingdom. Polygamy for eternity is a much bigger deal than polygamy for time only.

After she died, my grandma (never a member & disliked organized religion) was sealed to both of her 2 abusive ex-husbands. Besides being insane on different levels, it seems to be polyandry.

When I think of people whos spouse died and then they remarry - and love both of their spouses. What then? Maybe Christ was right in saying, “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” - Matthew 22:30

I realize that teaching of Christ goes against lds teachings - and maybe in this life - many need to believe we will be together in the next. Peace of mind, hope - as Jung said of belief in an after life, “it’s psychologically hygienic.” We live and love better now, by believing in life and relationships after this life. However, I believe that we are much more than this body/life & that there’s a much bigger picture we generally don’t see in this life.

[Chip]

Just curious, what would the discussions look like that would bring harmony to individuals who have concerns over church history?

I was in a bishopric when the Gospel Topics Essays came out. We had a combined meeting with the adults to discuss some of the issues. Each one of us was prepared to discuss a number of the topics if any questions were raised. I didn’t think any questions were going to be brought up in an antagonist manner during the large meeting, and I was right. Of course there were probably some people there who had serious questions but were apprehensive to voice them at that time.

I learned later a few individuals did approach the bishop privately and they had some very productive discussions.

Hello, Centerline.

Honestly, church history seems so crazy that I don't think it can be addressed thoroughly and leave members feeling okay with the church. This is the problem underneath the problem. I strongly believe the leadership realizes this. The Gospel Topic Essays make some serious admissions, but they stop far short of connecting the dots, which would provide cathartic resolution to the riddles of church history. To fully admit what went on, the church wouldn't be able to maintain its notion of inerrant authority and its basic legitimacy would even come into question. Coming fully clean presents a huge risk, but the church would be on much better footing, afterwards. I think the church must do this or languish, ultimately. I think God's purposes are going to be achieved with or without the church we have today.

[Thinker]

Just curious, what would the discussions look like that would bring harmony to individuals who have concerns over church history?

Good question.
People need to be validated, but that means admitting some negatives - so validation usually doesn’t happen. In a way, the dismissive way it is handled now pushes members away - and in denying them the validation they need, they search and find more issues, and feel like the church & members are against them, lying and not trustworthy.

Personally, the history is not as bothersome to me as what is hurting me and people I love NOW. His-story is past - but people are being hurt financially and psychologically now. That’s my concern. I still attend & help in church - it’s not all or nothing. There are beautiful, good aspects (like applied spirituality in loving & serving one another). Take the best, leave the rest. We ALL do this to one degree or another.

Unfortunately, the polarized (either-or) thinking taught, like, “The church is either true or it isn’t,” creates problems in which when someone discovers something false in the church, the entire church is disgarded as false. This isn’t healthy but it often happens. We really need to work on correcting cognitive distortions like that.

[Chip]

I totally agree, Thinker!

[cab]

Something somehow must bring the church to the point where we are ready to humble ourselves before the Lord with truly broken hearts and contrite spirits. Only then can we as a people "enter the gate" and receive the Holy Ghost and actually take his name upon us with new hearts (2 Nephi 31 & 32, Mosiah 4 & 5). My feeling is that it's going to take a true act of God before this occurs and Zion can be redeemed, and I believe that is what the scriptures foretell. The future will be terrible and glorious. If we seek the Lord with all our hearts, then there is no fear.

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

The nice thing is that we have nothing to do with polygamy anymore . Today it's not our doctrine. There's no reason for social justice warriors to pick a fight. Who can they fight anyway? All the polygamists are dead.

Shadow. This is simply not true. The Church as we know it, was formed on the foundation of polygamy. In fact Polygamy is still the law of Heaven. Many negative aspects and admittedly some positives are inseparably connected to polygamy.

1. Required Bishop Confessionals and notions that men determine "worthiness" - Polygamy
2. Prophetic infallibility and leader worship - Polygamy
3. Mountain Meadows Massacre - Polygamy
4. Moral relativism and deception, "Lying for the Lord" - Polygamy
5. Weird doctrines (Adam God, etc.) and hyper-conformist culture - Polygamy

Study the history of the Church from 1850 - 1910 and highlight current doctrinal and cultural practices that are developed in this era when polygamy was THE FOUNDATIONAL doctrine.

[topcat]

The nice thing is that we have nothing to do with polygamy anymore . Today it's not our doctrine. There's no reason for social justice warriors to pick a fight. Who can they fight anyway? All the polygamists are dead.

Shadow. This is simply not true. The Church as we know it, was formed on the foundation of polygamy. In fact Polygamy is still the law of Heaven. Many negative aspects and admittedly some positives are inseparably connected to polygamy.

1. Required Bishop Confessionals and notions that men determine "worthiness" - Polygamy
2. Prophetic infallibility and leader worship - Polygamy
3. Mountain Meadows Massacre - Polygamy
4. Moral relativism and deception, "Lying for the Lord" - Polygamy
5. Weird doctrines (Adam God, etc.) and hyper-conformist culture - Polygamy

Study the history of the Church from 1850 - 1910 and highlight current doctrinal and cultural practices that are developed in this era when polygamy was THE FOUNDATIONAL doctrine.

You beat me to the punch, I mean, crushing upper cut that exposes the truth and lies.

Polygamy is a big, big deal.

The "Lord won't permit me to lead you astray" INFALLIBILITY doctrine would not exist if it wasn't for polygamy. Polygamy was the great blunder Wilford Woodruff sought to cover up, and we know what happens to priesthood authority when one undertakes to cover one's sins and gratify one's vain ambition and exercise control over others (DC 121:37).

It could be said polygamy is the keystone of the Brighamite religion. Just as Mormonism would fall if the BoM was false, Brigham's religion falls with determining the truthfulness of polygamy.

It is beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Church has labored strenuously to create a culture where the members don't question polygamy and where they don't dig deeper into our history. The biggest black eye against the Church's attempt to brainwash members into not questioning the Church's authority was in 1981, when that obscure, mostly unknown quote was resurrected from circa 1890 and canonized in 1981 with zero announcement. The sordid act was done in the cover of darkness. The excerpts in OD1 were ADDED in 1981, with special highlight given to the "can't lead you astray" silliness which has single-handedly blinded generations of unsuspecting good people in the Church.

The only quasi logical defense the Church has now is to overgeneralize and relish in the vagueness of the OT practice by repeating, "Look at the ancients, they did it! So that's why Joseph did (albeit "secretly"), and that's why Brigham and company did it." Never mind that we don't really understand what was done in the ancient religion because the OT doesn't give us hardly any insight. Yes, SOMETHING apparently was done that RESEMBLED polygamy, but to connect the dots and say what Brigham was doing was what a few of the ancient prophets did is a tenuous stretch at best.

I agree with Chip, repentance is in order. And the opportunity has been given. And the opportunity has been rejected. Though the Brethren (even one brave soul, if there is even one alive) could take the route of Alma the Older, and go against the grain and repent openly, saving his soul, and perhaps getting the attention of some saints who are willing to abandon some wicked traditions of their fathers in favor of further light and knowledge from heaven.

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

It could be said polygamy is the keystone of the Brighamite religion. Just as Mormonism would fall if the BoM was false, Brigham's religion falls with determining the truthfulness of polygamy.

Yes, "The Church as we know it" is certainly Brighamite. I dont think that is all bad.

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

To put aside polygamy as yesterday's news, having nothing to do with the church today is crazy.

It's like the New York Yankees disavowing baseball as a game that if played any further would lead to immediate termination from the organization. They could claim they are still a great organization with many great attributes, and they look forward not back to baseball.

Fast forward 100 years, assuming the Yankees organization still exists as an anti-baseball organization, would they be able to claim they have nothing to do with baseball?

They denounced it over 100 years ago! Of course a lot changes in 100 years but soon generations would grow up never seeing or remembering Yankees baseball. Some in the organization could say, "a long time ago we did play a very limited amount of baseball. Only in specific circumstances and it was only a blip in our history. It was neither right nor wrong. Dont worry about this very insignificant part of our history! We now hate baseball!"

Meanwhile the organization leaders occasionally grab their mits and bats and head out to the secret baseball game to reminisce about the good ole days of Yankee baseball.

The Mormon Church can no more separate itself from polygamy than can the Yankees seperate themselves from baseball.

[Centerline]

I think it would be more like the New York Yankees making significant changes in the way they play baseball not the disavowing of the game itself.

The purpose of the New York Yankees as a baseball team is to play the game of baseball. The purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ is not to come unto polygamy. If it was the Church of Polygamy and they disavowed polygamy as a practice that would be very confusing.

[topcat]

Something somehow must bring the church to the point where we are ready to humble ourselves before the Lord with truly broken hearts and contrite spirits. Only then can we as a people "enter the gate" and receive the Holy Ghost and actually take his name upon us with new hearts (2 Nephi 31 & 32, Mosiah 4 & 5). My feeling is that it's going to take a true act of God before this occurs and Zion can be redeemed, and I believe that is what the scriptures foretell. The future will be terrible and glorious. If we seek the Lord with all our hearts, then there is no fear.

The problem is that those who wait to repent will lose out on some blessings. What I mean by that is best communicated by quoting these three verses from Alma 32:

14 And now, as I said unto you, that because ye were compelled to be humble ye were blessed, do ye not suppose that they are more blessed who truly humble themselves because of the word?

15 Yea, he that truly humbleth himself, and repenteth of his sins, and endureth to the end, the same shall be blessed—yea, much more blessed than they who are compelled to be humble because of their exceeding poverty.

16 Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is he that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe.

It's best not to wait for a humbling catastrophe (like the Salt Lake Valley being filled with 100 foot of fresh water, thus healing the "dead sea", as hundreds of thousands of people are drowned, and the SLC Temple is destroyed -- a geological possibility since there's an ocean of fresh water below the surface of the earth in Utah), or to wait for certain or all Mormon apostles being indicted and convicted on pedophilia and/or sex trafficking charges, as an example.

[shadow]

I suggest that many of you repent of polygamy and move on in your life. Repent of Abraham's polygamy. Repent of Gideon's polygamy. Repent of Joseph's polygamy. Repent of Brigham's polygamy and so on and so forth. If that's what you want then do it! Nobody is stopping you.

[John Tavner]

I suggest that many of you repent of polygamy and move on in your life. Repent of Abraham's polygamy. Repent of Gideon's polygamy. Repent of Joseph's polygamy. Repent of Brigham's polygamy and so on and so forth. If that's what you want then do it! Nobody is stopping you.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means

[shadow]

I suggest that many of you repent of polygamy and move on in your life. Repent of Abraham's polygamy. Repent of Gideon's polygamy. Repent of Joseph's polygamy. Repent of Brigham's polygamy and so on and so forth. If that's what you want then do it! Nobody is stopping you.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means

What word is that?

[Serragon]

This reminds me of that time when I watched the movie "17 Miracles" which includes Levi Savage, a former Mormon Battalion member and missionary to Asia, who assisted the Willie Handcart Company as they journey to Salt Lake City in 1856. He married a woman that he met on that journey. She was travelling with her daughters.

Afterwards I googled "Levi Savage" to find out more about him:

After returning to Salt Lake City with the ill-fated pioneers, Savage married Ann Brummel Cooper, a member of the Willie handcart company he helped rescue. He later also married two of Ann Brummel Cooper's daughters, Mary Ann Cooper, and Adelaide Cooper, although he only had children with Mary Ann. Savage married Ann Brummel Cooper on October 31, 1858. At the time of the marriage, Ann's daughter Adelaide was 6 years of age (b. Nov. 28, 1851). Mary Ann was 8 (b. Nov. 22, 1849). Savage later married Adelaide when he was 48 and she was 16 (m. October 17, 1868). One week later he married his other step-daughter, Mary Ann (m. October 24, 1868). She was 18.

I think this is a bit different. What he did 10 years later had no bearing on the story of the movie. At the time of the events portrayed, no facts were ommitted.

The story in the talk from the OP was information left out of the same events so that the correct emotional response could be achieved.

[brlenox]

Something somehow must bring the church to the point where we are ready to humble ourselves before the Lord with truly broken hearts and contrite spirits. Only then can we as a people "enter the gate" and receive the Holy Ghost and actually take his name upon us with new hearts (2 Nephi 31 & 32, Mosiah 4 & 5). My feeling is that it's going to take a true act of God before this occurs and Zion can be redeemed, and I believe that is what the scriptures foretell. The future will be terrible and glorious. If we seek the Lord with all our hearts, then there is no fear.

The problem is that those who wait to repent will lose out on some blessings. What I mean by that is best communicated by quoting these three verses from Alma 32:

14 And now, as I said unto you, that because ye were compelled to be humble ye were blessed, do ye not suppose that they are more blessed who truly humble themselves because of the word?

15 Yea, he that truly humbleth himself, and repenteth of his sins, and endureth to the end, the same shall be blessed—yea, much more blessed than they who are compelled to be humble because of their exceeding poverty.

16 Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is he that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe.

It's best not to wait for a humbling catastrophe (like the Salt Lake Valley being filled with 100 foot of fresh water, thus healing the "dead sea", as hundreds of thousands of people are drowned, and the SLC Temple is destroyed -- a geological possibility since there's an ocean of fresh water below the surface of the earth in Utah), or to wait for certain or all Mormon apostles being indicted and convicted on pedophilia and/or sex trafficking charges, as an example.

This is kind of the deal for me...if you have to make up fictional examples to make your point ...you have no point. If you are going to accuse or insinuate criminal activity and then hold people accountable for fictional possibilities that only exist in the realm of make believe then fantasy is your guiding light. And that's a light that you can make a bright and compelling as you wish but it still remains fantasy.

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

The purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ is not to come unto polygamy. If it was the Church of Polygamy and they disavowed polygamy as a practice that would be very confusing.

The Church was all about polygamy. Celestial marriage was the most important doctrine taught and polygamy was the way it must be practiced. You only see the Church today and assume it must not have been.

The Church was FORCED to disavow (wink, wink) Polygamy. The federal government was very close to putting an end to the Church because of polygamy. The Church publicly went from Polygamy is THE way to the highest degree in the Celestial Kingdom, to we don't (wink, wink) practice this anymore. It was massive confusion at the time.

[topcat]

Something somehow must bring the church to the point where we are ready to humble ourselves before the Lord with truly broken hearts and contrite spirits. Only then can we as a people "enter the gate" and receive the Holy Ghost and actually take his name upon us with new hearts (2 Nephi 31 & 32, Mosiah 4 & 5). My feeling is that it's going to take a true act of God before this occurs and Zion can be redeemed, and I believe that is what the scriptures foretell. The future will be terrible and glorious. If we seek the Lord with all our hearts, then there is no fear.

The problem is that those who wait to repent will lose out on some blessings. What I mean by that is best communicated by quoting these three verses from Alma 32:

14 And now, as I said unto you, that because ye were compelled to be humble ye were blessed, do ye not suppose that they are more blessed who truly humble themselves because of the word?

15 Yea, he that truly humbleth himself, and repenteth of his sins, and endureth to the end, the same shall be blessed—yea, much more blessed than they who are compelled to be humble because of their exceeding poverty.

16 Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is he that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe.

It's best not to wait for a humbling catastrophe (like the Salt Lake Valley being filled with 100 foot of fresh water, thus healing the "dead sea", as hundreds of thousands of people are drowned, and the SLC Temple is destroyed -- a geological possibility since there's an ocean of fresh water below the surface of the earth in Utah), or to wait for certain or all Mormon apostles being indicted and convicted on pedophilia and/or sex trafficking charges, as an example.

This is kind of the deal for me...if you have to make up fictional examples to make your point ...you have no point. If you are going to accuse or insinuate criminal activity and then hold people accountable for fictional possibilities that only exist in the realm of make believe then fantasy is your guiding light. And that's a light that you can make a bright and compelling as you wish but it still remains fantasy.

The principle I'm espousing was best expressed by Alma in Alma 32 in the verses I quoted.

That's the guiding light. Humbling oneself instead of being compelled to be humble. If you wait for criminal activity to be public knowledge (in other words, for the wolf's sheep mask to be pulled off), then what reward do you deserve? Because you've already failed the test. Having wolves in sheep's clothing is not fantasy. It's unfortunate reality. https://youtu.be/Hd-INmywmwU (Haven't watched all of this, but it's interesting, and I sense no false messenger here).

[shadow]

The purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ is not to come unto polygamy. If it was the Church of Polygamy and they disavowed polygamy as a practice that would be very confusing.

The Church was all about polygamy.

No it wasn't. In fact, very few actually practiced polygamy.

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

The purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ is not to come unto polygamy. If it was the Church of Polygamy and they disavowed polygamy as a practice that would be very confusing.

The Church was all about polygamy.

No it wasn't. In fact, very few actually practiced polygamy.

Are you just trolling me?

[topcat]

The purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ is not to come unto polygamy. If it was the Church of Polygamy and they disavowed polygamy as a practice that would be very confusing.

The Church was all about polygamy.

No it wasn't. In fact, very few actually practiced polygamy.

Are you just trolling me?

Not saying who, but such trolling is a paid vocation. Wouldn't be surprised if it was happening here.