Another historical revision – Hyrum Smith’s missing anti-polygamy discourse from April 1844

[Alexander]

We could claim the same for homosexual unions. "The design from the beginning doesn't preclude homosexuality just because heterosexuality is a model" just like “the archetype from he beginning doesn’t preclude polygamy just becuase monogamy is model”.

One could argue that homosexuality is an abomination unless the Lord expressly commands it. I could argue that homosexuality "is unlawful for the majority of people, but it in actuality is a higher law."

Even though I am not a sodomite, I guess I must continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God.

Who am I to deny that God won’t institute homosexuality like he initiated polygamy?Who am I to say gay relationships aren't divine, if I cannot use the outset pattern of creation, or even the BoM to base my standards?

We have no excuse for trying to model ourselves according to counterfeit marital relations. I believe God is adamantly clear on what he wants. And I believe to use the scriptures to justify/excuse iniquity is to corrupt and transgress the word of God.

[cab]

Unfortunately the picture you’re painting isn’t what history bears out. Brigham, Henry and the Twelve weren’t out looking for poor destitute widows who were starving to take in. Go look at the ages of girls they married. By their own admission, they would jockey for position to wed the new girls and women who would arrive with each new batch of converts arriving to Utah.

Shame on you for thinking such perverted thoughts about young women.

It's always the same with liberals. They, themselves have a personal problem, but they pawn off their own shame to others. I've seen this so often. Somehow it makes them feel better if they can judge the thoughts and tear down others instead of dealing with themselves.

Yeah it’s like I said yesterday, the fact that they simply have to make everything to do with polygamy vulgar shows their true character and gives an insight into their sordid selves...

Exactly. That's where their thoughts go very first. It's telling.

And we're living in a very different world today. Porn is everywhere you look. These kind of dark thoughts wouldn't have been in the minds of those people on the frontier like they are today. Women covered up, there were no magazines, billboard, or television like today. Not to mention frontier life was work from dawn till dusk every day.

You simply can't judge their intentions back then. But that's exactly what virtue signalers of the cult of wokeism does. So high and righteous.

Our country would be far better off if we practiced polygamy rather than rely on the welfare state. Broken families because of polygamy, what a joke. Utah families have always historically been some of the strongest in the world...that is up until the sexual revolution.

Talk about broken families. Where the hell have you been during the last 50 years? I'd trade polygamy for what we have now any day.

Right they didn’t have porn in that generation. They had prostitution.
Or those who wanted to shroud their carnality with religious robes contrived things like spiritual wifery or celestial plural marriage.
The natural man hasn’t changed. Our carnal must be made spiritual through the mighty change of heart.

[cab]

I highly doubt it. The shock I had was when I discovered how flimsy the actual evidence is.

If the evidence is so flimsy why haven't you even attempted to explain that letter from Joseph Smith to the Whitneys? Guess the evidence isn't so flimsy after all.

I did plenty. Provided a link which detailed my take better than I could. Didn’t see a need to regurgitate. Then we started name calling and I exited stage left.

I must have missed that link. Can you share it again?

All I recall is you saying that the letter contained nothing of substance and was hearsay.

Then the thread was mysteriously locked, while this one remained open.

Even if the thread is locked you can still go find it. I’m trying to play tennis with my son right now.

[LDS Watchman]

We could claim the same for homosexual unions. "The design from the beginning doesn't preclude homosexuality just because heterosexuality is a model" just like “the archetype from he beginning doesn’t preclude polygamy just becuase monogamy is model”.

One could argue that homosexuality is an abomination unless the Lord expressly commands it. I could argue that homosexuality "is unlawful for the majority of people, but it in actuality is a higher law."

Even though I am not a sodomite, I guess I must continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God.

Who am I to deny that God won’t institute homosexuality like he initiated polygamy?Who am I to say gay relationships aren't divine, if I cannot use the outset pattern of creation, or even the BoM to base my standards?

We have no excuse for trying to model ourselves according to counterfeit marital relations. I believe God is adamantly clear on what he wants. And I believe to use the scriptures to justify/excuse iniquity is to corrupt and transgress the word of God.

This argument doesn't fly. There isn't one place in all of scripture that supports homosexual relations being approved by God, nor did Joseph Smith ever teach that it was. Plural marriage on the other hand is a completely different story.

[LDS Watchman]

If the evidence is so flimsy why haven't you even attempted to explain that letter from Joseph Smith to the Whitneys? Guess the evidence isn't so flimsy after all.

I did plenty. Provided a link which detailed my take better than I could. Didn’t see a need to regurgitate. Then we started name calling and I exited stage left.

I must have missed that link. Can you share it again?

All I recall is you saying that the letter contained nothing of substance and was hearsay.

Then the thread was mysteriously locked, while this one remained open.

Even if the thread is locked you can still go find it. I’m trying to play tennis with my son right now.

You two have fun. I'd appreciate it if you would share the link again when you get a chance.

[Alexander]

We could claim the same for homosexual unions. "The design from the beginning doesn't preclude homosexuality just because heterosexuality is a model" just like “the archetype from he beginning doesn’t preclude polygamy just becuase monogamy is model”.

One could argue that homosexuality is an abomination unless the Lord expressly commands it. I could argue that homosexuality "is unlawful for the majority of people, but it in actuality is a higher law."

Even though I am not a sodomite, I guess I must continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God.

Who am I to deny that God won’t institute homosexuality like he initiated polygamy?Who am I to say gay relationships aren't divine, if I cannot use the outset pattern of creation, or even the BoM to base my standards?

We have no excuse for trying to model ourselves according to counterfeit marital relations. I believe God is adamantly clear on what he wants. And I believe to use the scriptures to justify/excuse iniquity is to corrupt and transgress the word of God.

This argument doesn't fly. There isn't one place in all of scripture that supports homosexual relations being approved by God, nor did Joseph Smith ever teach that it was. Plural marriage on the other hand is a completely different story.

Who am I to judge mighty David, who did nothing wrong in the sight if the Lord, who loved Jonathan more than he loved women? It says their souls were knit together, and they kissed.

[darknesstolight]

One final post for me here:

If you guys really and truly believed polygamy as practiced by BY was good and of God and if you really believed this was your ticket to highest glory then you wouldn't be out here talking about it.

Because the best way to find out what a person really believes is to see what they do or where they spend their time and energy.

So how about you polygamy folks put up or shut up. If this is such a glorious wonderful thing and you know God is just thrilled about you having 20 or 30 or more wives then start living it. If you know this is of God then you have no excuse to not live it. Fear of man doesn't excuse you.

I am going to call BS from here on out to anyone who advocates for BY polygamy as a requirement for exaltation but who isn't currently living it. Because I am living my faith and I can put my money where my mouth is.

Otherwise, you are just a wanna be hypocrit. And, BTW, being sealed to a living spouse and a dead spouse is NOT BY polygamy.

...

Nice try.

It's clear from the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith that having more than one wife is an abomination unless God expressly commands it and these marriages are performed by the proper authority from God. And I for one have not received such a command from God.

So, even though I am not a polygamist, I will continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God. Just as I will continue to defend every other true doctrine and principle.

You don't really believe what you are saying otherwise you'd be living it. Oh you'll pretend you are on some honorable errand to defend this doctrine but until you live what you are saying I have no respect for your arguments at all because at this point you don't even really believe the rubbish about BY polygamy that you are posting. If you did then you'd have your harem already.

Let me know when you converted to polygamy.

Right now all I see are bunch of hypocritical wanna bes.

...

[LDS Watchman]

We could claim the same for homosexual unions. "The design from the beginning doesn't preclude homosexuality just because heterosexuality is a model" just like “the archetype from he beginning doesn’t preclude polygamy just becuase monogamy is model”.

One could argue that homosexuality is an abomination unless the Lord expressly commands it. I could argue that homosexuality "is unlawful for the majority of people, but it in actuality is a higher law."

Even though I am not a sodomite, I guess I must continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God.

Who am I to deny that God won’t institute homosexuality like he initiated polygamy?Who am I to say gay relationships aren't divine, if I cannot use the outset pattern of creation, or even the BoM to base my standards?

We have no excuse for trying to model ourselves according to counterfeit marital relations. I believe God is adamantly clear on what he wants. And I believe to use the scriptures to justify/excuse iniquity is to corrupt and transgress the word of God.

This argument doesn't fly. There isn't one place in all of scripture that supports homosexual relations being approved by God, nor did Joseph Smith ever teach that it was. Plural marriage on the other hand is a completely different story.

Who am I to judge mighty David, who did nothing wrong in the sight if the Lord, who loved Jonathan more than he loved women? It says their souls were knit together, and they kissed.

Yeah as dear friends they had brotherly love for each other and had a plutonic kiss, which was common between men back then and still is today in some cultures.

What else you got?

[EvanLM]

Isaiah 4:1 is NOT about polygamy. the content around this verse is about haughty women.

Lesbians that prefer to work and spend money on their appearance then repent last minute and realize they are not under the new and everlasting covenant.

wealthy heteros that have worked or gained their wealth from inheritance that are TOO GOOD to marry a man with less earnings, or less college degree, than them and are willing to marry a covenant widower, etc. The best example of this are Oaks and Nelson's wives. Sherry Dew is also like this. Anyway they suddenly realize after all of their haughtiness and selfishness that they need to be under the new and everlasting covenant. some like these women that I just mentioned continue to remain haughty and self centered.

the scripture says- let us be called by thy name(save us under the new and everlasting covenant) but we will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel- and now that I am at risk of losing my salvation then I need to be sealed to someone. i've met a lot of women in the church, single, self righteous, no commitment to motherhood, spend all money on self, sure that God will give them all the blessings for rejecting his sons and covenant until the last minute.

There are also many women who have married outside the church for many reasons one is money and will also expect to save themselves at the last minute when they should have been encouraging the man that they married towards these covenants. I'm not sure if these women fit in but. . . .

Also counting on polygamy in celestial kingdom- NOT " she being desolate shall sit upon the ground."

Isa 4:4 when the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion and have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst there of by the spirit of JUDGEMENT, and by the spirit of burning. Those women who finally marry in the covenant(called by thy name) should not expect to be the wife in the celestial kingdom but the Lord will bless them for finally repenting.

Those who married in the NandEC and their spouse becomes wicked and they stick it out with the help of the Lord, will be rewarded for their faithfulness to their spouse and posterity.

[LDS Watchman]

One final post for me here:

If you guys really and truly believed polygamy as practiced by BY was good and of God and if you really believed this was your ticket to highest glory then you wouldn't be out here talking about it.

Because the best way to find out what a person really believes is to see what they do or where they spend their time and energy.

So how about you polygamy folks put up or shut up. If this is such a glorious wonderful thing and you know God is just thrilled about you having 20 or 30 or more wives then start living it. If you know this is of God then you have no excuse to not live it. Fear of man doesn't excuse you.

I am going to call BS from here on out to anyone who advocates for BY polygamy as a requirement for exaltation but who isn't currently living it. Because I am living my faith and I can put my money where my mouth is.

Otherwise, you are just a wanna be hypocrit. And, BTW, being sealed to a living spouse and a dead spouse is NOT BY polygamy.

...

Nice try.

It's clear from the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith that having more than one wife is an abomination unless God expressly commands it and these marriages are performed by the proper authority from God. And I for one have not received such a command from God.

So, even though I am not a polygamist, I will continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God. Just as I will continue to defend every other true doctrine and principle.

You don't really believe what you are saying otherwise you'd be living it. Oh you'll pretend you are on some honorable errand to defend this doctrine but until you live what you are saying I have no respect for your arguments at all because at this point you don't even really believe the rubbish about BY polygamy that you are posting. If you did then you'd have your harem already.

Let me know when you converted to polygamy.

Right now all I see are bunch of hypocritical wanna bes.

...

Resorting to childish insults is a clear sign that you don't have any valid counterarguments to what the historical record and the scriptures say about this subject.

[EvanLM]

only the muslims or islams get a lot of women after this life- go for it.

Polygamy was only practiced for a short time because women could not get land unless they had a mans name on their homestead of 160 acres. They could not vote legally under the feds rules.

After Utah got statehood then women were able to hold land - about the same time that this polygamy was to cease being practiced. When the few swaints (2%) refused to quit then the Lord removed his protection for their wickedness resulting in Johnsons army coming against them and threatening the loss of statehood and land.

[EvanLM]

many prophets preach against polygamy in the BofM

[LDS Watchman]

After Utah got statehood then women were able to hold land - about the same time that this polygamy was to cease being practiced. When the few swaints (2%) refused to quit then the Lord removed his protection for their wickedness resulting in Johnsons army coming against them and threatening the loss of statehood and land.

This isn't even remotely historically accurate.

[darknesstolight]

One final post for me here:

If you guys really and truly believed polygamy as practiced by BY was good and of God and if you really believed this was your ticket to highest glory then you wouldn't be out here talking about it.

Because the best way to find out what a person really believes is to see what they do or where they spend their time and energy.

So how about you polygamy folks put up or shut up. If this is such a glorious wonderful thing and you know God is just thrilled about you having 20 or 30 or more wives then start living it. If you know this is of God then you have no excuse to not live it. Fear of man doesn't excuse you.

I am going to call BS from here on out to anyone who advocates for BY polygamy as a requirement for exaltation but who isn't currently living it. Because I am living my faith and I can put my money where my mouth is.

Otherwise, you are just a wanna be hypocrit. And, BTW, being sealed to a living spouse and a dead spouse is NOT BY polygamy.

...

Nice try.

It's clear from the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith that having more than one wife is an abomination unless God expressly commands it and these marriages are performed by the proper authority from God. And I for one have not received such a command from God.

So, even though I am not a polygamist, I will continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God. Just as I will continue to defend every other true doctrine and principle.

You don't really believe what you are saying otherwise you'd be living it. Oh you'll pretend you are on some honorable errand to defend this doctrine but until you live what you are saying I have no respect for your arguments at all because at this point you don't even really believe the rubbish about BY polygamy that you are posting. If you did then you'd have your harem already.

Let me know when you converted to polygamy.

Right now all I see are bunch of hypocritical wanna bes.

...

Resorting to childish insults is a clear sign that you don't have any valid counterarguments to what the historical record and the scriptures say about this subject.

Uh huh.

Many people say they believe in God but live as if they don't.

That means they don't really believe in God.

You Matthias are not the special exception to this rule. It applies to you too.

Let me know when you're truly converted to this doctrine because you are out here defending the idea and condemning people who disagree with this idea you don't really even believe yourself. That's hypocritical and it makes you a wanna be. That's not childish name calling. Them be the facts son!

For reference I am living the doctrine I preach.

What I am saying does not apply to you if you are currently living polygamy with your many wives who are alive and living with you together. In fact you would at that point have a leg to stand on and legitimacy for pushing so hard and condemning folks for disagreeing with you. That's why what I say is relevant because I am responding to your ideas and posts as you have written them.

...

[LDS Watchman]

Nice try.

It's clear from the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith that having more than one wife is an abomination unless God expressly commands it and these marriages are performed by the proper authority from God. And I for one have not received such a command from God.

So, even though I am not a polygamist, I will continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God. Just as I will continue to defend every other true doctrine and principle.

You don't really believe what you are saying otherwise you'd be living it. Oh you'll pretend you are on some honorable errand to defend this doctrine but until you live what you are saying I have no respect for your arguments at all because at this point you don't even really believe the rubbish about BY polygamy that you are posting. If you did then you'd have your harem already.

Let me know when you converted to polygamy.

Right now all I see are bunch of hypocritical wanna bes.

...

Resorting to childish insults is a clear sign that you don't have any valid counterarguments to what the historical record and the scriptures say about this subject.

Uh huh.

Many people say they believe in God but live as if they don't.

That means they don't really believe in God.

You Matthias are not the special exception to this rule. It applies to you too.

Let me know when you're truly converted to this doctrine because you are out here defending the idea and condemning people who disagree with this idea you don't really even believe yourself. That's hypocritical and it makes you a wanna be. That's not childish name calling. Them be the facts son!

For reference I am living the doctrine I preach.

...

You want some facts? You constantly falsely accuse other people of being hypocrites, while you are guilty of some serious hypocrisy yourself.

How many times do you cry when someone talks about you, instead of your arguments?

And yet here you are talking about those of us who you disagree with, instead of addressing our arguments.

You make personal attack after personal attack and then as soon as someone retaliates you cry foul and report them to the mods.

Sorry buddy, you don't have the moral high ground. But if you want to tell yourself that you do, be my guest.

[darknesstolight]

You don't really believe what you are saying otherwise you'd be living it. Oh you'll pretend you are on some honorable errand to defend this doctrine but until you live what you are saying I have no respect for your arguments at all because at this point you don't even really believe the rubbish about BY polygamy that you are posting. If you did then you'd have your harem already.

Let me know when you converted to polygamy.

Right now all I see are bunch of hypocritical wanna bes.

...

Resorting to childish insults is a clear sign that you don't have any valid counterarguments to what the historical record and the scriptures say about this subject.

Uh huh.

Many people say they believe in God but live as if they don't.

That means they don't really believe in God.

You Matthias are not the special exception to this rule. It applies to you too.

Let me know when you're truly converted to this doctrine because you are out here defending the idea and condemning people who disagree with this idea you don't really even believe yourself. That's hypocritical and it makes you a wanna be. That's not childish name calling. Them be the facts son!

For reference I am living the doctrine I preach.

...

You want some facts? You constantly falsely accuse other people of being hypocrites, while you are guilty of some serious hypocrisy yourself.

How many times do you cry when someone talks about you, instead of your arguments?

And yet here you are talking about those of us who you disagree with, instead of addressing our arguments.

You make personal attack after personal attack and then as soon as someone retaliates you cry foul and report them to the mods.

Sorry buddy, you don't have the moral high ground. But if you want to tell yourself that you do, be my guest.

I am making observations and expressing them publicly.

...

[LDS Watchman]

Resorting to childish insults is a clear sign that you don't have any valid counterarguments to what the historical record and the scriptures say about this subject.

Uh huh.

Many people say they believe in God but live as if they don't.

That means they don't really believe in God.

You Matthias are not the special exception to this rule. It applies to you too.

Let me know when you're truly converted to this doctrine because you are out here defending the idea and condemning people who disagree with this idea you don't really even believe yourself. That's hypocritical and it makes you a wanna be. That's not childish name calling. Them be the facts son!

For reference I am living the doctrine I preach.

...

You want some facts? You constantly falsely accuse other people of being hypocrites, while you are guilty of some serious hypocrisy yourself.

How many times do you cry when someone talks about you, instead of your arguments?

And yet here you are talking about those of us who you disagree with, instead of addressing our arguments.

You make personal attack after personal attack and then as soon as someone retaliates you cry foul and report them to the mods.

Sorry buddy, you don't have the moral high ground. But if you want to tell yourself that you do, be my guest.

I am making observations and expressing them publicly.

...

Okay, keep telling yourself that.

[darknesstolight]

Uh huh.

Many people say they believe in God but live as if they don't.

That means they don't really believe in God.

You Matthias are not the special exception to this rule. It applies to you too.

Let me know when you're truly converted to this doctrine because you are out here defending the idea and condemning people who disagree with this idea you don't really even believe yourself. That's hypocritical and it makes you a wanna be. That's not childish name calling. Them be the facts son!

For reference I am living the doctrine I preach.

...

You want some facts? You constantly falsely accuse other people of being hypocrites, while you are guilty of some serious hypocrisy yourself.

How many times do you cry when someone talks about you, instead of your arguments?

And yet here you are talking about those of us who you disagree with, instead of addressing our arguments.

You make personal attack after personal attack and then as soon as someone retaliates you cry foul and report them to the mods.

Sorry buddy, you don't have the moral high ground. But if you want to tell yourself that you do, be my guest.

I am making observations and expressing them publicly.

...

Okay, keep telling yourself that.

Why would I do that?

Jeff Lindsay, HE believes in polygamy.

You do not and even if by some miracle you could believe something and not live as if that belief is real, that state of existence is functionally equivalent to not believing.

Now you claim you aren't living it because God hasn't commanded it. Then why are you out here talking about it?

Answer:

Matthias said "In a revelation to John Taylor, he was told that the Lord would never revoke the law of Celestial plural marriage. Brigham taught that it was necessary for salvation.

These are undeniable facts.

I believe this is correct."

You have claimed repeatedly that the Church erred when it ended the practice of polygamy. You have repeatedly stated that polygamy should not have been stopped.

You have publicly stated that John Taylor is right, polygamy was and never will be revoked. So what do you mean God has not commanded polygamy today?

You said you believe that polygamy was never revoked AND it is required for salvation.

And here you are preaching this doctrine you clearly don't believe else you'd be living this law you say is not revoked and is required for salvation. Don't you want salvation? Your own belief system, if you are going to be true to yourself, is that polygamy is active today, the current leaders are in a stare of apostasy to some degree or another because they rejected polygamy and polygamy is necessary for salvation.

So let me know when you are truly converted to your doctrine and you can show me by example how to live a life that leads to salvation and then you will have authority and legitimacy to preach and to condemn because you will be speaking as one who knows and not merely as one who just thinks he knows.

...

[LDS Watchman]

You want some facts? You constantly falsely accuse other people of being hypocrites, while you are guilty of some serious hypocrisy yourself.

How many times do you cry when someone talks about you, instead of your arguments?

And yet here you are talking about those of us who you disagree with, instead of addressing our arguments.

You make personal attack after personal attack and then as soon as someone retaliates you cry foul and report them to the mods.

Sorry buddy, you don't have the moral high ground. But if you want to tell yourself that you do, be my guest.

I am making observations and expressing them publicly.

...

Okay, keep telling yourself that.

Why would I do that?

Jeff Lindsay, HE believes in polygamy.

You do not and even if by some miracle you could believe something and not live as if that belief is real, that state of existence is functionally equivalent to not believing.

Now you claim you aren't living it because God hasn't commanded it. Then why are you out here talking about it?

Answer:

Matthias said "In a revelation to John Taylor, he was told that the Lord would never revoke the law of Celestial plural marriage. Brigham taught that it was necessary for salvation.

These are undeniable facts.

I believe this is correct."

You have claimed repeatedly that the Church erred when it ended the practice of polygamy. You have repeatedly stated that polygamy should not have been stopped.

You have publicly stated that John Taylor is right, polygamy was and never will be revoked. So what do you mean God has not commanded polygamy today?

You said you believe that polygamy was never revoked AND it is required for salvation.

And here you are preaching this doctrine you clearly don't believe else you'd be living this law you say is not revoked and is required for salvation. Don't you want salvation? Your own belief system, if you are going to be true to yourself, is that polygamy is active today, the current leaders are in a stare of apostasy to some degree or another because they rejected polygamy and polygamy is necessary for salvation.

So let me know when you are truly converted to your doctrine and you can show me by example how to live a life that leads to salvation and then you will have authority and legitimacy to preach and to condemn because you will be speaking as one who knows and not merely as one who just thinks he knows.

...

I don't recall making that statement you ascribe to me. If I did, you are taking it out of context, or I misspoke.

I do believe that polygamy will be required of everyone at some point, if they wish to progress to the level where God is at. I also believe that this requirement has not been revoked, nor will it be.

I do NOT believe that plural marriage is required in THIS life for most people. It is only required when God specifically commands it. But when God commands it, people are required to live it in this life in order to reach the Celestial kingdom.

I also believe that plural marriage can only be entered into righteously by the proper priesthood authority.

I know that I personally have NOT been commanded to live plural marriage. I know that for a certain fact. I also know of no one who I believe legitimately has the authority from God to perform plural marriages at present. I also don't know if anyone on earth today has received that command. Perhaps some have, but that is between them and God.

As for my belief that it was wrong for the church to abandon plural marriage. I also believe that God foresaw that the church would abandon this principle and many others and that it's all part of his plan. The general membership has rejected many of the more difficult doctrines and principles and has been headed down the wrong track for years, but God still works through his church and hasn't completely abandoned us.

As for the doctrines and principles that have been rejected and taken away temporarily, I believe we are to wait patiently until they are reinstated when the setting in order happens.

[EvanLM]

polygamy ISN"T a difficult doctrine - you are at a milk level brother and it show in your arguments woops "plural marriage" but only on the mans side, right? check out recent articles on polyandry polyamorous, etc they will ring true for you

[EvanLM]

I took a wyo history class to get my degree at the UNiv of Wyo. I learned about the marriages of Wyoming women (who weren't Mormon or religious) to men with no sex or love so that the women could apply for 160 acres homestead. Women could not hold land and a lot of Wyoming women became rich cattle ranchers because of the opportunity to land grab by fake marriages. Same time that Utah was homesteaded.

You are so under educated- I apologize for that reality friend. You need to expand your knowledge - I use to think that Utah was the center of all knowledge and that Mormon church was center. I grew up and learned that other histories were being made and other knowledge was available.

[EvanLM]

just saying

[Alexander]

We could claim the same for homosexual unions. "The design from the beginning doesn't preclude homosexuality just because heterosexuality is a model" just like “the archetype from he beginning doesn’t preclude polygamy just becuase monogamy is model”.

One could argue that homosexuality is an abomination unless the Lord expressly commands it. I could argue that homosexuality "is unlawful for the majority of people, but it in actuality is a higher law."

Even though I am not a sodomite, I guess I must continue to defend the truthfulness of this principle when commanded by God.

Who am I to deny that God won’t institute homosexuality like he initiated polygamy?Who am I to say gay relationships aren't divine, if I cannot use the outset pattern of creation, or even the BoM to base my standards?

We have no excuse for trying to model ourselves according to counterfeit marital relations. I believe God is adamantly clear on what he wants. And I believe to use the scriptures to justify/excuse iniquity is to corrupt and transgress the word of God.

This argument doesn't fly. There isn't one place in all of scripture that supports homosexual relations being approved by God, nor did Joseph Smith ever teach that it was. Plural marriage on the other hand is a completely different story.

Who am I to judge mighty David, who did nothing wrong in the sight if the Lord, who loved Jonathan more than he loved women? It says their souls were knit together, and they kissed.

Yeah as dear friends they had brotherly love for each other and had a plutonic kiss, which was common between men back then and still is today in some cultures.

What else you got?

I think you’re just anti-homosexual. What’s stopping God from commanding homosexuality?

[LDS Watchman]

This argument doesn't fly. There isn't one place in all of scripture that supports homosexual relations being approved by God, nor did Joseph Smith ever teach that it was. Plural marriage on the other hand is a completely different story.

Who am I to judge mighty David, who did nothing wrong in the sight if the Lord, who loved Jonathan more than he loved women? It says their souls were knit together, and they kissed.

Yeah as dear friends they had brotherly love for each other and had a plutonic kiss, which was common between men back then and still is today in some cultures.

What else you got?

I think you’re just anti-homosexual. What’s stopping God from commanding homosexuality?

Can you point to a place in the scriptures, teachings of Joseph Smith, or even the teachings of the church after his death that say that God has EVER approved or commanded homosexual relations?

Didn't think so. I'm not interested in playing games.

[Alexander]

Who am I to judge mighty David, who did nothing wrong in the sight if the Lord, who loved Jonathan more than he loved women? It says their souls were knit together, and they kissed.

Yeah as dear friends they had brotherly love for each other and had a plutonic kiss, which was common between men back then and still is today in some cultures.

What else you got?

I think you’re just anti-homosexual. What’s stopping God from commanding homosexuality?

Can you point to a place in the scriptures, teachings of Joseph Smith, or even the teachings of the church after his death that say that God has EVER approved or commanded homosexual relations?

Didn't think so. I'm not interested in playing games.

See, homosexuality is a higher law. I don’t think you’re ready for a higher doctrine like it, as you’d probably fly apart like glass. It’s only given to the highest most trustworthy people. In fact it’s higher than polygamy. It’s not in the scriptures because it is so high of a doctrine and so sacred.