Mormon Discussion’s podcast production is certainly not connected to The Mormon Church aka The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It also is most assuredly not approved or endorsed by Intellectual Reserve, Inc or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Any of the awesome content or the solid opinions expressed, implied or included in Mormon Discussion Inc’s awesome podcast lineup and production are solely those of Mormon Discussion Inc. and/or its program hosts and not those of Intellectual Reserve, Inc. or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Mormon Discussion Inc is a 501(c)(3) and is in the arena of journalistic work and is part of a free press. A free press is fundamental to a democratic society. It seeks out and circulates news, information, ideas, comment and opinion and holds those in authority to account. The press provides the platform for a multiplicity of voices to be heard. At national, regional and local level, it is the public’s watchdog, activist and guardian as well as educator, entertainer and contemporary chronicler. Under the “fair use” defense, however, another author may make limited use of the original author’s work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism.
The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner’s exclusive rights.
Subject to some general limitations discussed later in this article, the following types of uses are usually deemed fair uses:
- Criticism and commentary: for example, quoting or excerpting a work in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment. A book reviewer would be permitted to quote passages from a book in a newspaper column, for example, as part of an examination of the book.
- News reporting: such as summarizing an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report. A journalist would be permitted to quote from a political speech’s text without the politician’s permission.
- Research and scholarship: perhaps quoting a short passage in a scholarly, scientific, or technical work for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations. An art historian would be able to use an image of a painting in an academic article that analyzes the painting.
- Nonprofit educational uses: for example, when teachers photocopy limited portions of written works for classroom use. An English teacher would be permitted to copy a few pages of a book to show to the class as part of a lesson plan.
- Parody: that is, a work that ridicules another, usually well-known, work by imitating it in a comic way. A comedian could quote from a movie star’s speech in order to make fun of that star.
I’m sure JS left a lot of lonesome brides that’s for sure, but then again the law of Sarah allowed for many of the other church leaders to take on the JS widow’s. So then again, they were never lonesome.
It’s incredible the amount of self-confidence one develops when you internalize that everything is a scam. However, with everything being a scam… then the church is no less false than everything else.
Church nowadays isn’t that bad and awful of an institution. I keep telling myself this in part because I remain an active member, but also because I don’t see the wickedness that somehow ex-members purport it to be.
It’s interesting when you pair up the notions of restoration and with progressive forms of marriage you realize that maybe JS wasn’t that far off from the era of modernity that he wanted to materialize but was also victim of circumstance due to the cultural heritage that he lived in. That’s the neo-apologist in me talking.
And I would agree with you that whatever marriage arrangements grown adults want to live in is up to them.
The problem I would have today, as I do with Joseph Smith’s day, is including minors in the equation, and also the use of spiritual coercion in order to compel compliance.
“Legal authority in times past”= “God given rights to polygamy given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob”
Understand, I think this is all invented. However, I believe that is what is meant by that verbiage.
But Mormonism isn’t a legalistic religion!
;^)
I am thinking of Sarah’s life within the Mormon community, and those things she would have missed (remember JS did not “woo” her, instead her parents had to convince her to go with the secret and then sham marriage). Imagine her considering becoming a mother as well. Imagine JS’s panic if she were to miss a monthly period. What if she were to be pregnant and began to show before the sham marriage to her brother-in-law? Could this also be a reason why Smith ‘broke new ground’ on her (really HIS) behalf. This whole mess is about JS , his insatiable lust, and his ability to promote a much, much bigger sham called a “church”.