So when polygamy becomes legal...

[Devildog]

Which it ultimately will...

Will the LDS church re-embrace early doctrine?

[Devildog]

Short answer: no, if by re-embrace early doctrine you mean reinstate polygamy.

Why not? If it was inspired, and it was legal in the land, why not?

[Scratch]

Yep, the church's position is that monogamy is the default and polygamy is the exception. There are plenty of countries where polygamy is legal but you can't practice it as a member of the church. The U.S. would be just another example of this.

[Devildog]

I think this is a decent write up from the Church site:

http://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-and-families-in-early-utah?lang=eng&query=plural

The shorter answer is that it is not needed anymore.

I just can't buy this...

This church makes me feel like I'm staring at OZ behind the curtain... the contradictions and the expectation placed on me to just look away seems too much.

[LA Ute]

I just can't buy this...

This church makes me feel like I'm staring at OZ behind the curtain... the contradictions and the expectation placed on me to just look away seems too much.

I don't expect ever to understand polygamy in this lifetime. I have polygamous ancestors. Maybe I'll get to interview them about it someday.

[GarthUte]

I just can't buy this...

This church makes me feel like I'm staring at OZ behind the curtain... the contradictions and the expectation placed on me to just look away seems too much.

Do what I do - I don't worry about things I don't care about.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Do what I do - I don't worry about things I don't care about.

Exactly. So long as everything else is legal (eg. welfare fraud a la Tom Greene and others), DILLIGA(flip)?

[OrangeUte]

My opinion is that if we really wanted to abandon polygamy, we would have taken it out of the doctrine and covenants. I understand that the 132nd Section has a lot more to it than polygamy, but that's what started it all and it's left in there. a lot of that section is embarrassing to read, not to mention non-sensical.

The threat against Emma if she doesn't comply is just ridiculous.

But, despite not editing 132nd section, I can't believe that the church, with all of its image consciousness, would ever go back to polygamous relationships. I say the lds church will not go back.

[jrj84105]

Would the larger polygamist sects even be in favor of legalization? The ability of polygamist families to defraud the welfare system would be seriously curtailed by legalization. The ability of the oppressive theocratic regimes to maintain control of fundamentalist groups would be severely limited if their followers could maintain their lifestyle in the general population.

[UtahDan]

There are some details that bother (namely, stuff about secrecy and Joseph Smith and stuff about the hereafter), but I don't know that polygamy itself is that hard to understand. The Church was small, polygamy pushed it past a critical mass so it could grow exponentially, and now it's big.

Except it didn't do that. That only works if men are scarce but the reverse was actually true.

[LA Ute]

There are some details that bother (namely, stuff about secrecy and Joseph Smith and stuff about the hereafter), but I don't know that polygamy itself is that hard to understand. The Church was small, polygamy pushed it past a critical mass so it could grow exponentially, and now it's big.

To be more clear, I have questions about it that I don't expect to get answers to in this life.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Huh? Maybe I'm missing something, but the Church was small and became big, right? Isn't that enough to say that the thing worked? A lot of kids came from that system. The families were selected somewhat carefully, so that the many kids tended to remain strong members of the Church. Not sure why relative gender populations matter.

Most of the growth came from heavy recruiting in Europe and elsewhere, particularly after the railroad was completed. And many studies have shown that total population growth occurs at a faster rate in monogamous communities than in polygamous communities.
Never mind the higher mortality rates for the children of many polygamous women who were essentially left to fend for themselves and their children, with the husband only coming around a few times per month and providing little in the way of support.

Also the overall male/female ratio at the time in Utah was roughly 50-50. Therefore certain men (my own ancestors included) were marrying a bunch of women, and many others were forced to remain single (and become a 'menace to society', per Brigham Young) or to go out on a mission and 'baptize a wife (or three)'.


It is hard to see the entire institution as being anything more than a reward for...something. Also served to increase the progeny of certain people, mostly church leadership.

[NorthwestUteFan]

I will need to find those research articles later, but here is a single data point.

Brigham Young had perhaps the greatest access to wealth and resources in the territory (as well as being more 'desirable' spiritually speaking - plus he could say "the Lord said you need to marry me") and could thus afford more wives and children than most men.

He had 56 children with 16 wives, fir a total of 3.5 per. At the time monogamous couples could and dud easily exceed this rate.

Increase the total number of sexual partners you visit and you will decrease the number of times when you happen to 'know' a partner on a fertile day.