Information icon.svg

RationalWiki has reached 7,000 articles!

Talk:Fundamentalist Mormonism

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Why do polygamous faiths go in for polygyny rather than polyandry? (A 'square' would go in for polygony) — Unsigned, by: 82.198.250.3 / talk / contribs

Probably because they don't value women as people, only as baby-makers. Though honestly, the polygyny doesn't bother me in and of itself, so much as the way the women and girls are actually treated. (And yes I know I'm responding to an old comment.) Wehpudicabok [話] [変] [留] 05:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Ditto, I'm also going to respond to this very old comment, but I feel as if a historical answer from a former Mormon need be given. During the early years of Mormonism, when Joseph Smith was still leading them on their trans-continental migration, he received one of his frequent revelations from god, canonised in The D&C (Doctrine and Covenants), proclaiming that God himself had declared polygamy to be a highly holy institution, and that participating in it is a great honour. Although he practiced in in secret for many years, and it wasn't publicly declared until they established themselves in Salt Lake City. Converted From ConservatismTell Me Here If IScrew Up 23:19, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Because the founders of the religions are men that end up as the leaders, and as such in a polygynous society would be the ones with a dozen or so wives. The men below him have a harder time finding wives (so the leaders took so many), but are allowed to marry outside the faith to bring in more converts, and obviously the women are forbidden from doing so. There is no reason to let your wives screw around with other men though, so no polyandry. CorruptUser (talk) 00:12, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I like your explanation better Converted From ConservatismTell Me Here If IScrew Up 16:09, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Getting Fundamentalist Mormonism up to silver class.[edit]

Here is a list of current differences between this article and the Wikipedia article. Rationalwiki's article mentions information on the lost boys high rates of prostitution and low rates of high school diplomas, higher rates of rare birth defects, violating child labor laws, mothers not being allowed to take their children away, the high rates of welfare, teaching children the church leader is the U.S. president, and the practice of giving away the families of the excommunicated. Amateur Encyclopedist (talk) 22:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit for a purpose[edit]

I did a lot of the original work on this article, spending much time and energy getting good references to back everything up and choosing the wording carefully, and it really annoys me when random people come along and make stupid and/or unnecessary edits to the main page, for instance, changing the term "females" to "women" and in another instance "girls" - I chose the wording for brides to be "female" specifically because many of the brides are not yet women, they are still girls, or child brides, not actually consenting "women" and in this section I was making a gender comparison, so females of course is the relevant term. So think much more before randomly changing something in a well-thought-out article. It's so much easier to come along and stick your fingers in someone else's pie than to bake the pie yourself. If it's not a clear-cut, needed improvement, leave it alone. This is the main reason I decided to stop contributing to this wiki 2 or so years ago. Refugeetalk page 23:27, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Like it says right under the edit field every single time you edit here, including to make talkpage replies: If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.. Besides, if an "improvement" is actually crap, revert it and reason about why with the person who made it. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 00:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Don't be stupid; of course I am aware of that saying, I have edited here for years, since the beginning, so there is no reason to quote that to me - why don't you think about what I am saying instead of just being a snarky idiot. People who make nitpicky little stupid edits that are not needed are a liability to this wiki when they drive off long-time dedicated editors who put a lot of effort into pages. No-one wants to have to constantly revert these types of edits. Please have the sense to think about what I said, not just quote something back to me that I helped to formulate. Or if it gives you that much satisfaction to say "nah-na, look at this" then I can easily leave the editing here to you. Psshhht. Refugeetalk page 05:22, 20 August 2016 (UTC)