Mormon Theocracy?

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Mindful is a great expert in Islam as it is practiced in the heart of Iran. I'd suggest deferring to her in some respects. Islam is almost as diverse as Christianity is, I'd wager.

With all due respect, has mindful verified her identity? We're all online here, and therefore anonymous. I realize Mike can see where she's posting from, but that doesn't mean she is who she says she is.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

With all due respect, has mindful verified her identity? We're all online here, and therefore anonymous. I realize Mike can see where she's posting from, but that doesn't mean she is who she says she is.

I appreciate your healthy skepticism, Lingo, but Mindful is legit. I know her and her family personally.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

I appreciate your healthy skepticism, Lingo, but Mindful is legit. I know her and her family personally.

Well there you go. Thanks for clarifying.

[SoonerCoug]

Here is my fundamental question: Why is it that we Mormons have been so quick to disavow our socialistic theocratic beginnings, whereas the former practice of polygamy is often defended by the average Mormon (with claims that its temporary existence was inspired by God and occasionally the implication that it's going to come back someday).

Does this mean that the Mormon utopian/socialist movement wasn't inspired, but polygamy was inspired? We've abandoned both concepts, but polygamy's former existence somehow seems to be defended by the average Mormon. This is reinforced by the Church's practice of sealing men to a multiple spouses (ala Russell M Nelson) for eternity, while not doing the same for women. By contrast, Mormon socialism is treated as if it never existed or isn't an important part of Mormonism, even though we still covenant to live the law of consecration.

Wow, I'd never seen this web site before:

http://www.removenelson.net/

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Here is my fundamental question: Why is it that we Mormons have been so quick to disavow our socialistic theocratic beginnings, whereas the former practice of polygamy is often defended by the average Mormon (with claims that its temporary existence was inspired by God and occasionally the implication that it's going to come back someday).

Does this mean that the Mormon utopian/socialist movement wasn't inspired, but polygamy was inspired? We've abandoned both concepts, but polygamy's former existence somehow seems to be defended by the average Mormon. This is reinforced by the Church's practice of sealing men to a multiple spouses (ala Russell M Nelson) for eternity, while not doing the same for women. By contrast, Mormon socialism is treated as if it never existed or isn't an important part of Mormonism, even though we still covenant to live the law of consecration.

Wow, I'd never seen this web site before:

http://www.removenelson.net/

Well, I've never heard of BYU students storming the Iranian embassy and holding people hostage for over a year.

And that website is amusing. It could also be called AListOfPeopleWithTooLittleNumberOfProblemsInTheirL ives.com

[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Here is my fundamental question: Why is it that we Mormons have been so quick to disavow our socialistic theocratic beginnings, whereas the former practice of polygamy is often defended by the average Mormon (with claims that its temporary existence was inspired by God and occasionally the implication that it's going to come back someday).

Does this mean that the Mormon utopian/socialist movement wasn't inspired, but polygamy was inspired? We've abandoned both concepts, but polygamy's former existence somehow seems to be defended by the average Mormon. This is reinforced by the Church's practice of sealing men to a multiple spouses (ala Russell M Nelson) for eternity, while not doing the same for women. By contrast, Mormon socialism is treated as if it never existed or isn't an important part of Mormonism, even though we still covenant to live the law of consecration.
]

I think you ask a pretty good question. My guess is with the Kirtland safety society failing and orderville not producing like hoped the brethren decided that living the law of consecration how Joseph and Brigham envisioned was just not feasible. Now the law of consecration is paying 10%

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death

I think you ask a pretty good question. My guess is with the Kirtland safety society failing and orderville not producing like hoped the brethren decided that living the law of consecration how Joseph and Brigham envisioned was just not feasible. Now the law of consecration is paying 10%

Orderville is my favorite place in Utah. Books of Mormon are everywhere on display and given away for free in the local stores. Wasn't the socialist experiment quite successful there for many years?

Wasn't Orderville in the news recently for something??? I think they're building something there, but I can't remember exactly what.

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Orderville is my favorite place in Utah. Books of Mormon everywhere given away for free in the local stores.

Some enterprising Utahn should start up an Orderville clothing company. It'd sell great at MHA conferences.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by YOhio

Some enterprising Utahn should start up an Orderville clothing company. It'd sell great at MHA conferences.

I have something wondered whether Orderville is what Colorado City would have been like had polygamy been completely abandoned by the offshoot group.

[il Padrino Ute]

Orderville is a great place. I love how laid back it is and like so many other of the small Southern Utah towns, the surroundings are beautiful.

It's a great place for a funeral.