The Largest Repository Of Ex-Mormon Material In The World
Containing 3,337 Articles Spanning 205 Topics
Online Since January 1, 2005
|
PLEASE NOTE:
If you have reached this page from an outside source such as an
Internet Search or forum referral, please note that this page
(the one you just landed on)
is an archive containing articles on
"FUNDAMENTALIST LDS".
This website,
The Mormon Curtain
- is a website that blogs the Ex-Mormon world. You can
read
The Mormon Curtain FAQ
to understand the purpose of this website.
CLICK HERE to visit the main page of The Mormon Curtain.
|
|
|
FUNDAMENTALIST LDS
Total Articles:
6
The Fundamentalist LDS group that splintered off from main-stream Mormonism in 1890.
|
|
See http://www.sltrib.com/Opinion/ci_8923...
My comment was as follows:
Michael Nielsen is always worth listening to carefully in my view and I am glad that he has chosen to publicly weigh in on the connection between Mormonism and FLDS polygamy. His analysis sets FLDS polygamy in its Mormon context and gently (that is one of his many strengths) reminds the Mormon faithful of their polygamous roots, polygamous afterlife, and the way in which both influence contemporary Mormon reality in many respects. I think his public relations advice is excellent, and will be surprised if something like that does not already hold sway within the Mormon leadership cadre. Those folks receive some of the best corporate communications advice on the planet, and much of that is drawn from Dr. Nielsens area of speciality social psychology.
To cut to the chase in that regard, suppressing and ignoring the evidence is only an effective public relations strategy until a lot of people find the evidence and start talking about it. Then, coming clean, and apologizing, is by far the most effective strategy for most purposes. If this is not done, the publics trust is lost. Once lost, trust is hard to regain. This applies to a wide range of Mormon issues.
Our perspective largely controls the conclusions we reach. The perspective implicit in Dr. Nielsens analysis is that of a social psychologist who is accustomed to thinking in terms of social groups (like the Mormon Church) as organisms that evolve in order to adapt to their environments. Interestingly, most of us have an easy time seeing how these forces shape other groups, but cannot do so when it comes to our own. I suggest that this is the case with many posters who are critical of Dr. Nielsens article. Their belief in the reality of a particular type of God, His communication to J. Smith and other Mormon leaders, and a particular kind of life after death (involving polygamy) cause them to miss Dr. Nielsens point.
Dr. Nielsen pointed out some rough edges on the evolving Mormon organism. Does it make sense for Mormons to have completely rejected polygamy as a lifestyle while still clinging to it as an eternal belief, and at the same time attempting to become a mainstream, evangelical Christian sect? He says no, and I agree. This is a prime candidate for Mormon prophetic revelation, but is more likely to be dealt with as was the Adam-God doctrine, the importance of blood oaths in the temple ceremony, the idea that man can become like God (G. Hinckley assured us that that Mormon leaders dont teach that, to the great surprise of the few faithful Mormons who have heard about his statement in this regard) and countless other Mormon beliefs that fell out of step with the times. That is, Mormon leaders will stop talking about polygamy. It will be excised from teachers manuals. It will be put into the mysteries category, and hence discussion of it in all circumstances will be discouraged. Therefore, polygamys influence within Mormonism will decline. This is, of course, precisely what has already happened, while polygamy as a doctrine remains on the books and hence occasionally makes life difficult for those increasingly few Mormons who take their religion seriously enough to learn its theology and attempt to live by it. The fact that Mormons are discouraged from using anything other than scripture and the lesson manual to prepare lessons, and limited resources to prepare talks, makes it less likely that future Mormons will be troubled by these old ideas. Nonetheless, in this and many other ways, the most diligent Mormons are often those who suffer most.
Anyone who suggests that Mormon beliefs in general dont change, and that this one cant, are unfamiliar with both Mormon doctrine and history. The line upon line, continuing revelation concept was designed to allow Mormonism to evolve (and J. Smith to get off the hook when his frequent and often extemporaneous revelations proved wrong), though the human desire for certainty makes it tricky for Mormon leaders to use this part of Mormon theology. Hence, the pattern tends to be that current Mormon prophets cannot be questioned, and they (and only they) occasionally confirm that something that was once believed to be a prophetic statement was in error after it appears incontrovertibly inaccurate, and has in any event been long dead as a practical matter as a result of having been suppressed and ignored in the manner described above. But of course, the fact that a prophet has been proven wrong does not mean that anything else the prophet said should be questioned. That is, prophets are prophets unless proven wrong, and only in that specific instance will it be accepted that they were not speaking as prophets. Everything else they said that is believed to be prophetic still is. As long as that belief is accepted, there is no way to question Mormon prophetic authority no matter how often they are shown to have been speaking in error. Heads I win; tails you lose. Mormons, of course, would roll their eyes at the idea that the founding prophets of the JWs, Seventh Day Adventists or Muslims could be considered prophets on this obviously non-prophetic basis.
One of the many examples from Mormon history that can be used to illustrate the ephemeral nature of eternal Mormon truth is this: What are the chances that a faithful Mormon in 1880 would have believed that the Mormon Church would abandon polygamy? At that time, polygamy was Mormonisms defining characteristic. The prophets continually trumpeted its eternal, immutable nature both before and after the First Manifesto in 1890. This mainstream Mormon prophetic position is what gave rise to the FLDS and other Mormon fundamentalist groups, and the disregard for mans law in favour of Gods law is what has the FLDS in trouble now. Contrary to what one poster indicated, it is not reasonable to say that the trouble in Texas is a child molestation issue instead of a polygamy issue. It is a child molestation issue that is caused by religious belief that polygamy is sanctioned by God, including polygamy with girls deemed underage by US law.
The difference between mainstream Mormonism and the FLDS is one of degree, not kind. Again, contrary to other posters, mainstream Mormonism bows to mans law and hence God's eternal truth is not the dictator of belief or behavior (unless perhaps you believe that God caused the US government to contradict God so that Mormonism would change ...). When US law required that polygamy be abandoned or the Mormons leave the US, the Mormons abandoned polygamy, including polygamy with underage girls. The FLDS refused to do so. And now in Canada (and probably the US), it is probable that polygamy between consenting adults is legal as a result of the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom. Man's law, after all, does change. If polygamy is an eternal law, why is it not practised wherever legally permitted, at a minimum? Or was the US law-propelled Mormon abandonment of polygamy a bizarre developmental step part of Gods deeply mysterious way of bringing mainstream Mormonism to its current position? What does God have to say about all that, President Monson?
Which brings us to another interesting question what would mainstream Mormonism be today had the Mormon prophets not had polygamy wrested from their tenacious grasp? This tells us something important about the nature of Mormon prophesy, and how seriously any of it should be taken.
If mainstream Mormonism were still polygamous, it is extremely probably that it would be a shadow of its current self, and a lot like the FLDS a cloistered group proud of its unwillingness to play ball with secular society and its resulting backwardness. Were not the early Christians a rag tag lot until embraced by the powerful of their day, after apostasy?
Contemporary Mormonism was created by the US government forcing the Mormon prophets to finally abandon polygamy after decades of actively resisting this; promising that it would never happen; lying about what they doing in that regard under oath and in countless public forums; etc. This chapter of Mormon history on its own makes crystal clear the need for the Mormon belief that God works in mysterious ways.
Im not as polite or nice as Michael Nielsen. My call to the Mormon leadership is that they come clean about polygamy and a whole lot else, including their penchant for deception from J. Smith forward. I am grateful that the Internet and other communications media are calling Mormonism to account, along with many other authoritarian organizations that prospered largely as a result of their ability to avoid accountability.
Accurate information is like sunlight it stops most kinds of rot while encouraging growth.
| I am watching with anticipation as the children and women are rescued from the polygamist compound. Utah should be able to start conducting raids on Hilldale and the many compounds around Salt Lake City using the alarming evidence found by Texas authorities.
I am a woman.
In my reliegeous sect I was brutally beaten, abused, starved, worked underage and used as a housemaid for my entire childhood. I dressed in rags while my father wore 300 dollar wool suits and fine shirts with his initials hand embroidered on the cuffs.
I begged church authorties to at least put an end to the beatings on numerous occasions. They told me to pray and read my scriptures. They spoke to my father. The frequency of abuse escalated and the beatings intensified.
I worked up the courage to call the police. When they came to my home, they knew my father who was powerful, they were of the same reliegous persuasion. They did nothing. They charged me with a crime. I was charged with being a run away and locked up with other child criminals for weeks. I met another one there in my same situation. His father was a man of local prestige and he had been beating the life out of this kid. Nothing happened. They sent him back home.
In my religeous sect I was forced into marriage at age 17 for living impurely. I had little choice.
I was owned by my husband and punished physically by him. When I was naughty my car was disabled and the phones were taken away. I was forbidden to leave the house.
The beatings got worse and then he began raping me. It started simply enough and before I knew it I was no longer able to sleep for fear he would attack and rape or sodomize me. I complained to church authorities.
" A man cannot rape his wife, he can do with her what he wants."
I endured this for years. I had to get out. I was afraid my husband would kill me or my children. Do you think I got help? NO. I called the police when he broke into the home on several occasions and physically assaulted me.
I left the church and refused to attend. Our families were up in arms and blamed me for my husbands apostacy. His mother refers to me as a "Jezebel."
My husband had my father on his cell phone in seconds. My father told the police not to do anything. They didn't take any action.
I had a nervous breakdown. I had no support. No friends. No family. I didn't have any history of having a job. I couldn't get one. We were running out of food and local officials said I had cars in my name so I was disqualified for food stamps.
Then my father helped take my children away and has fought on the side of my husband so I can never see them again.
My father wrote me a letter telling me to return to the church or lose my entire family. (children included.) I didn't. I have fought for years to retain even minimal contact with my children. The legal system is a nightmare.I cannot find legal assistance. Legal Aide has refused numerous times to take my case. No child support or spousal support was EVER paid. The court orders were NEVER enforced and instead reserved for trial. Because of all of those calls to police never resulted in my husband being charged with anything.
Are you horrified at the nightmare in my community? How can perpetrators tell the police what to do?
You should be horrified. This all happened in Sandy Utah. I filed for divorce two years ago. MY FAMILY AND THE POLICE WERE NOT POLYGAMOUS FUNDAMENTALISTS, BUT MORMONS!!
Mormon/ Latter Day Saint women live this horrible life and we have no way to escape. When we leave our husbands and the church that has been complacent in the abuse we lose our children, we lose everything!
My father was a local church authority, teaches at the police academy and IS a local judge.
This is why Utah authorities have done nothing. They claim their religeon is different, but it is not. It is all based upon control and a man owning his women or woman and children.
We are "Modern" women? We should be able to support ourselves and our children and there is help for those who cant. THAT IS A LIE!
WE HAVE NO VOICE IN THIS STATE. SOMEONE PLEASE HELP US!!
| | | The Backbone Of Both The LDS And FLDS Is Exploiting The Family Unit
Article Archived: Friday, Apr 18, 2008, at 08:08 AM
Stored Under Topic: FUNDAMENTALIST LDS
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: Rubicon |  | |
On the news tonight one person mentioned Warren Jeff's FLDS empire would implode if it no longer could treat women and children like it's property. It was mentioned that women and children were the cash that keeps the whole thing going. The worthy priesthood holders must have at least three wives to get into the Celestial Kingdom. If you check the teachings of Brigham Young, polygamy was Celestial marriage.
One former FLDS wive said the FLDS church is a master at controlling the mother child relationship. She said FLDS fathers spank infants until they cry and they hold their faces under a water tap and repeat until the child is so exhausted it can't continue. This is in FLDS terms is called "breaking a child". The father and the church rule by fear and intimidation. The priesthood holders want the Celestial Kingdom but the church has to assign you a wife. Marriage falls under the power of the church and young post puberty girls are forced into these marriages.
The young boys are used as slave labor in the many FLDS construction companies and the ones who don't fit in are tossed out at 18 and the ones who meet the church's criteria are given young wives and become the futrure leaders of the cult.
So what does this have to do with the LDS church? For one thing the LDS church uses temple marriage as it's backbone. The polygamy is gone in actual physical practice but is still practiced in temple sealings.
In my own experience as a LDS church member I had to keep a temple recommend not because I wanted one but it would make me look bad if I couldn't go to family and friends temple weddings. The LDS Church still has a heavy influence in family weddings. You better marry another LDS member in the temple and your relatives better have temple recommends or someone is going to look bad and maybe even be a third world citizen in their Mormon social group. The temple recommend is how the church gets it's members over 18 to jump through all it's hoops and pay lots of money to the church. You better also make sure you make your kids jump through the hoops to or the bishop or Stake President might not give you a recommend out of being a poor Mormon parent. This is how the LDS keep their members on a short leash.
So the FLDS and LDS still use the old doctrine of temple marriage to keep their churchs running. The only difference is how and the level the church exploits the family unit. Thomas S. Monson isn't going to take your daughter away from you when she's 13 and use her to reward some older loyal priesthood holder. But he will pester you to bless, baptize, bring her to the church indoctrination meetings (primary, young women, church, seminary). If all goes well she will be married off to a returned missionary and pop some kids out before she's 25.
The reward for the returned missionary is lot's of brainwashed girls ready to wed the horny lot.
The only difference between the FLDS and LDS is the amount of freedom the members are allowed. They both use the temple as their backbone.
| | | FLDS - Renegade Mormon Splinter Group And Today's Courtroom Farce
Article Archived: Friday, Apr 18, 2008, at 09:41 AM
Stored Under Topic: FUNDAMENTALIST LDS
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: Nightingale | | |
I've just read my first article about the first court hearing today re the FLDS custody cases.
I am shocked to read that the state does not, apparently, have actual evidence of rampant child abuse (which is NOT what the authorities have claimed and not what you would expect from the actions they have taken).
I am distressed at the apparent total debacle in the courtroom.
I am surprised at the new name for the FLDS used in the article: "Renegade Mormon Splinter Group" and thinking that it's the other way around. FLDS are not the renegades but rather the LDS! They are the ones who veered off Polygamy Path (supposedly) whereas FLDS just carried on upholding the JS/BY way.
I'm guessing the Mormon Church *really* dislikes this issue being all over the news and especially the inevitable mention of that word _Mormon_. CNN interviewers have not shied away from asking FLDS if they consider/ed themselves Mormon and at least the ex-FLDS members have said a decided yes to that.
As to the article's characterization of the courtroom scene today as "farce", I am sadly disappointed. I was actually going to say how impressive it was that the lawyers were volunteering and working pro bono. I thought that could be reason enough to put a moratorium on lawyer jokes for at least a week. But as the article describes, having 350 lawyers on one long series of connected cases is far worse than having too many cooks in the kitchen, too many captains at the helm and too many prophets in one church.
I am shocked at my own naivete that I thought they might actually be organized and efficient and come up with some definitive decisions today. Doesn't seem like it will be quick. I know it's a nightmare situation in many ways but I thought that the basic premise of some of the essential elements could be examined and then dispositions processed quickly (i.e., the status of the kids and where they are going).
I was counting on the state having unimpeachable evidence to back up its actions. I am so hoping that this didn't escalate to this level because some of the officials involved just didn't know much about the FLDS. As I have said, they have allowed this to go on for years. There surely would have to be a good reason to finally address it in such a full scale way.
As I mentioned in some of the earlier threads when this thing first broke - you really need to get your ducks in a row so you don't take such strong action and then get to court and end up not being able to prove the case or being judged to have acted precipitously, etc. Once you launch a "rescue" effort and then have to put all the pieces back by court order, say, it is doubly difficult to get law enforcement to try again and even harder to get people inside to cooperate.
For many years, "activists" have been trying to get the RCMP to investigate abuse allegations in Bountiful BC, an FLDS compound in Canada. Too often, there are no witnesses, the alleged "victim" will not give evidence and no case is brought or it cannot be proven. Each time it is harder to get authorities to try again. The activists (women who are ex-members of Bountiful and others who have an interest in protecting the children) are slowly being able to establish some kind of a useful relationship with the leader, Winston Blackmore, in terms of getting him to be more open to the surrounding community, to acknowledge that abuse is wrong and must not be allowed to occur, to ensure the kids are being educated according to provincial/national standards (this was not happening before), to allow phones and computers inside the compound, to give media interviews and to cooperate with health and education officials who want to ensure that standards are maintained.
That's why I usually advocate for the low key approach. I have seen that it generally gets the best results. (Disclaimer: if there is abuse occurring, that must be stopped and the child protected right away - no negotiations or delays, of course).
I am so hoping the Eldorado situation is not going to come down to a clash of cultures, freedom of religion, difference of opinion kind of thing. At that point, the main issues are not addressed, there could be a further widening of the gulf between FLDS and the rest of society (not good for the kids) and it could put other areas off from trying to root out alleged polygamy abuses. As much as we may dislike the culture and beliefs, that is not, of course, a reason to break apart an entire community. The only valid reason for such extreme actions by the state would surely be that they had unassailable proof to accompany the allegations, that will hold up in court, that will justify the course they took. Otherwise, it's not a good precedent for any other group and, hate FLDS/LDS if you will, but that alone is not justification. I don't think that any rational person is saying that freedom of religion is absolutely sacrosanct but it certainly is one of the main pieces of this that authorities must reconcile. Wecan hate what they teach but does it give us the right to remove their kids? If there is no abuse or they cannot prove abuse, much as I hate to see the kids subjected to such a walled off life, what alternative is there but to send them all back home?
Meanwhile, back at the courthouse, I sure hope they can find a way to streamline things a bit so they can make at least interim decisions quickly, for everybody's sake. Yeah, the moms may dress two centuries behind the times and could use a good hairstylist but still they have hearts and the kids may be better off outside, in our view, but still they miss their families. A Solomon is definitely what is needed.
Here's the article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080417/a...
|  | Hot To Trot! Trend-Setting Fundies In Their Undies: (F)LDS On The Cutting Edge Of Fashion
Article Archived: Tuesday, Apr 22, 2008, at 08:10 AM
Stored Under Topic: FUNDAMENTALIST LDS
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: Steve Benson | | |
"There they are, three in a row, trembling through a Today show chat in matching pioneer-style dresses, or talking softly on CNN with hair poufed to the heavens: no makeup, no jewelry, not an ankle or bare elbow in sight, setting curious tongues afire across the country.
"Already, fashion bloggers are waxing snarky about 'polygamy pastels,' wondering whether Marc Jacobs might be inspired for his next collection. Radio talkies are twittering about the long underwear worn beneath the billowing dresses, which the women sew from a master pattern. . . .":
http://www.azcentral.com/style/fashio...
Commenting on the above article, a newspaper reader observed the following in a letter to the editor, headlined, "FLDS, Islam seem to agree on women":
"Regarding [the story on ] "Fundamental fashion" . . .
"I read with amazement your article about fashion among the women in the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
"Who would have guessed that Warren Jeffs was also a fashion designer? If he'd have taken it one step further and added a head covering, he could have ordered burkas.
"It seems like the FLDS and conservative Islam both share the same opinion of women."
- Paul McAfee, Tempe
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepub...
| | | The FLDS Ranch Compound In Texas Is A Prison For Women And Children
Article Archived: Tuesday, Apr 22, 2008, at 08:21 AM
Stored Under Topic: FUNDAMENTALIST LDS
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: SusieQ#1 | | |
My observations.
It's a prison compound. It's run like a state prison anywhere in the US.
Nobody can leave, they are locked in, they have practically no contact with the outside world, they have assigned work duties, they wear uniforms. The children have an outside play area but cannot leave the compound.
It appears that the women stay in the large houses most of the time.
Initially the men told the local sheriff that they were building a "hunting reserve." They eventually admitted it was the FLDS church.
Where are the men? The women never mention them.
Where do the men live on the compound? What are the assigned duties for impregnating the women? Do they have a menstruation chart for each woman? They are to produce one child a year.
Who are the midwives? Who is the doctor?How many children and women die in childbirth?
Watching the video, listening to the interviews and news reports it became clear that the women and children are living in a prison inside the gates of the FLDS YFZ Ranch Compound in Eldorado, Texas.
News reports indicated that the women were never seen in the streets. They were not allowed out of the gated compound.
Apparently the men are doing the shopping for food and supplies, material for clothing, stockings, and other items in their uniforms, in the local community. They apparently make their own regulation underwear. I think I saw part of the collar on one of the woman, slightly above the collar of her dress.
I noticed that the women had certain tasks that they were probably assigned. The older white haired women appeared to have kitchen-cooking-baking duties as well as mending duties. In the tour video, one was working with loaves of bread on a large table.
The other women must be assigned to the laundry, kitchen help, cleaning, doing the other women's hair styles, ironing, sewing the dresses, (which appeared to be interchangeable). I noticed a small area where many dresses were hanging. It appears that there are two styles of dresses. One is more plain than the others.
They dress the young children in many layers just like the women wear.
I also noticed that the bedrooms appeared to have beds for three children and one separate bed that was made-up nicer -- appeared to be for an adult.
In one bedroom I think I saw an open laptop computer on the desk.
They all ate their meals in the same dining room also.
Shoes were kept outside in a cupboard.
The women were in stocking feet inside the house in the video.
They engage in all kinds of illegal acts: polygamy is illegal, "breaking babies" certainly must be a criminal act, convincing young girls they want to be the polygamous wife of a man much older than she is, impregnating girls.
The women are out of another era.
I have the sense we are just seeing the tip of the ice berg.
| |
