Some of these you love, some of these you hate... and some of them just make you cringe and laugh your ass off. These ads are from Plan 49. If you have never been to that website, you should check it out. Not only to they have old ads like this, they also have an area where you can buy prints... Hope you like it.
Here are some lovely examples of sexism from the advertising past. Hope you enjoy it!
Now, here are some ads that are just plain creepy...
It's time for a change... I am still working on the new template so please be patient with me if the blog isn't behaving like normal. Hope you guys like the new layout!
Andee
I sure talk about the church not telling the truth a lot... this post is no different. I was browsing the net looking for examples of the church not being honest, and here are just a few of over 100 ways the church has been dishonest. These are fantastic examples of the leadership purposefully misleading their members and potential converts...
For the record, I didn't write these... and I am not claiming that I did.
Official Mormon histories have omitted references to Joseph Smith’s drinking and use of tobacco in order to create a more inspiring impression of their prophet, who if living today (2007) would be unable to pass a worthiness interview and earn a temple recommend in the church he founded. (Changing World of Mormonism, pages 413-414 and Chapter 18 of the same online book). “Joseph tested the Saints to make sure their testimonies were of his religion and not of him as a personable leader. Amasa Lyman, of the First presidency, related: 'Joseph Smith tried the faith of the Saints many times by his peculiarities. At one time, he had preached a powerful sermon on the Word of Wisdom, and immediately thereafter, he rode through the streets of Nauvoo smoking a cigar. Some of the brethren were tried as was Abraham of old'" ("Joseph Smith as an Administrator," Master's Thesis, Brigham Young University, May 1969, p.161. Quotation found in The Changing World of Mormonism, page 31).
Joseph Smith and the Mormons’ official publications remove all references to Joseph Smith’s activities as a professional con man. Documents discovered in 1971 by Dr. Wesley Walters in Norwich, New York, verify that Joseph Smith was a "glass looker" and that he was arrested, tried and found guilty by a justice of the peace in Bainbridge, New York, in 1826.
LDS historian Dr. Francis W. Kirkham, refused to believe that Joseph Smith was a con man, who bilked people out of money with promises to find buried treasure through the use of a peep stone in a hat. He wrote, “if such a court record confession could be identified and proved, then it follows that his believers must deny his claimed divine guidance which led them to follow him.... How could he be a prophet of God, the leader of the Restored Church to these tens of thousands, if he had been the superstitious fraud which 'the pages from a book' declared he confessed to be? (A New Witness For Christ In America, vol. 1, pp.385-87 and pp.486-87; and The Changing World of Mormonism, Chapter 4, “Joseph Smith and Money Digging. See also Shadow or Reality? pp 35-36).
Hugh Nibley, famous dissembling LDS apologist also stated, “"...if this court record is authentic it is the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith." Dr. Nibley's book also states that if the authenticity of the court record could be established it would be "the most devastating blow to Smith ever delivered" (Hugh Nibley, The Mythmakers p. 142. See also The Changing World of Mormonism, Chapter 4, “Joseph Smith and Money Digging”).
In the court record Joseph Smith confessed that "for three years" prior to 1826 he had used a magic stone placed in his hat to find treasures or lost property, placing his money-digging activities from 1823 to 1826. Mormon histories indicate that a heavenly messenger revealed the presence of gold plates on September 21, 1823. Joseph Smith was conning overly optimistic treasure seekers out of their money at the very time he claimed that an angel revealed to him that gold plates lay buried near his home. He continued these deceptive practices for at least three of the four years after God was supposedly preparing him to receive the gold plates. These facts undermine the credibility of Mormonism’s first prophet and founder. (Dan Vogel, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, Signature Books, 2004, pp. 80-86)
One of Joseph Smith’s first experiments with adultery began with a teen-age girl named Fanny Ward Alger who worked in the Smith home as a maidservant. William E. McLellin, Mormon apostle, indicated that Emma Smith “looked through a crack and saw the transaction” in the barn. (Richard Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History, 2nd Edition, Signature Books, 1989, pages 4-11) The affair led to a severe rift between loyal follower Oliver Cowdery and Joseph. Cowdery referred to Smith’s indulgences with Fanny Alger as “A dirty, nasty, filthy affair.” Church leaders and loyal defenders avoid linking Smith with his adultery by calling it an authorized “plural marriage.” Todd Compton, author of, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith, 2nd edition, notes that in February or March of 1833, when Joseph was 27 and Fanny Alger 17, he had sexual relations with her. After Emma found out about Joseph’s secret love affair, she turned Fanny out of their house, where she had been working as a servant. (In Sacred Loneliness, pp. 34-36) It has been noted that calling it a marriage instead of an affair raises more questions. Polygamous marriages were not legal in Ohio, the man who married Ms. Alger and Smith had no authority to perform the illegal marriage, nor had God authorized Smith to enter into polygamous arrangements in 1833-1835.
Vienna Jacques of Nauvoo heard rumors about “spiritual wifery.” She wanted Emma to ask Joseph if the rumors were true. Was “spiritual wifery” a doctrine of the church?” Emma asked and relayed Joseph’s answer. Vienna reported, “he, [Joseph] had told her [Emma] to tell the sisters of the society . . . “the whole idea was absolutely false and the doctrine an evil and unlawful thing.” Joseph was secretly practicing plural marriage at the time. (Mormon Enigma, p. 114) Joseph prevaricated. He was actively practicing and teaching the principle.
Joseph deceived Emma when he proposed to 14 year old Helen Mar Kimball as a plural wife. She agreed to marry Joseph because he told her that it “will ensure your eternal salvation and exaltation and that . . . of your fathers household and all of your kindred.” She remarked, “I willingly gave myself to purchase so glorious a reward.” She later admitted that she may have been deceived by her parents as well as Joseph. She stated, “I would have never been sealed to Joseph, had I known it was anything more than a ceremony.” It is mind-boggling that Joseph Smith placed the responsibility for Helen’s salvation, but also the salvation of her family squarely on Helen; in order to persuade (coerce?) her to submit to his proposal of marriage. She was 14 years and 11 months old. One is reminded of the modern Fundamentalists who use identical tactics. (Mormon Enigma, pp. 146-147; In Sacred Loneliness, p. 499)
Current LDS apostles are refreshingly honest about ordering church members to be dishonest. They have ordered those who employed by the church to suppress the truth about Mormon history.
--Boyd Packer declared, “There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not.”
“Some things that are true are not very useful.” (Boyd K. Packer, "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect", 1981, BYU Studies, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 259-271) He threatened and warned Church Education System Employees to suppress historical information when teaching LDS students.
--Dallin Oaks said, it’s one thing to criticize the head of a corporation of person in government but “It is quite another thing to criticize or depreciate a person for the performance of an office to which he or she has been called of God. It does not matter that the criticism is true." (Dallin H. Oaks, "Reading Church History," CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium, Brigham Young University, 16 Aug. 1985, page 25. also see Dallin H. Oaks, "Elder Decries Criticism of LDS Leaders," quoted in The Salt Lake Tribune, Sunday August 18, 1985, p. 2B) This was another salvo fired over the bows of Church Education System employees, warning them not to teach LDS students the whole truth about Mormon history.
--Oaks also wrote this in the church’s official magazine. "A different principle applies in our Church, where the selection of leaders is based on revelation, subject to the sustaining vote of the membership. In our system of Church government, evil speaking and criticism of leaders by members is always negative. Whether the criticism is true or not, as Elder George F. Richards explained, it tends to impair the leaders’ influence and usefulness, thus working against the Lord and his cause." (Apostle Dallin H. Oaks, “Criticism,” Ensign, Feb. 1987, page 68)
--Apostle Russell M. Nelson said, “"Indeed, in some instances, the merciful companion to truth is silence. Some truths are best left unsaid. . . .Any who are tempted to rake through the annals of history, to use truth unrighteously, or to dig up “facts” with the intent to defame or destroy, should hearken to this warning of scripture:” He then quoted from the Romans 1:17-18 – a threat to the ungodly to beware of the wrath of God. (Russell M. Nelson, “Truth—and More,” Ensign, Jan. 1986, page 69)
The message from current leaders is clear. Pretend that the LDS leaders are infallible, obey and conform. For easy access to these and other statements see http://i4m.com/think/leaders/mormon_loyalty.htm)
Here is a list compiled by Ken Clark:
(1) God was once a man who lived on an earth, was married and a polygamist,
(2) He lived such a good life he earned his exaltation through good works,
(3) After he died He was resurrected with a perfect body of flesh and bone,
(4) Ditto for his plural wives,
(5) He received power to create worlds including this earth, from His Father (Grandfather God) in Heaven (who received if from His Father in Heaven (Great Grandfather God), etc.,
(6) He impregnated his wives in heaven in the way that women get pregnant on earth, (Brigham Young added that there is no other process of creation.)
(7) Through procreation God and his multiple wives created billions of spirit children (it’s a woman’s duty to be eternally pregnant),
(8) The spirit children fought a war in heaven to preserve agency and Satan (one of Jesus’ brothers, a son of God, and one of the brothers of the rest of God’s children) was cast down to earth to tempt mankind to sin,
(9) It is the duty of women to prepare bodies for as many spirits as possible (women practice having babies on earth and will continue to do it for eternity) and men get to put them there. Polygamy is the order of marriage in heaven.
(10) Jesus was one of God’s spirit children just like the rest of us, making Him a spirit brother of mankind (equal but smarter and better behaved),
(11) Men and women are supposed to prove that they are worthy to live in the highest kind of heaven there is—the highest degree of glory of the celestial kingdom—based on their deeds in this life (Abraham 3:22-23). They have to prove that they are worthy to be a god.
(12) Only "valiant" members of the church will enter the highest degree of glory of the celestial kingdom (D&C 76:50-70). Others who are really good but don’t become members will be declared "not valiant." (D&C 76:72-78).
(13) Jesus got his physical body because God the Father had sexual intercourse with Mary, making Him Jesus’ biological father as well as his spiritual father. Bruce R. McConkie, a former apostle says that 1 Nephi 11:18 points to this truth (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, Volume 1).
(14) Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross didn’t really pay for the sins of mankind—it was during His pleading in Gethsemane for the Father to "remove this cup from me" that He paid for everyone’s sins—even though the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants all say He paid for everyone’s sins on the cross.
(15) Mormon leaders taught for decades (late 1840’s to 1904) that unless members practiced polygamy they could not enjoy the highest degree of the celestial kingdom because it was the most important law given to mankind.
(16) Mormon leaders taught that black individuals were unworthy to hold the Mormon priesthood because they had been cursed by God for their lack of valiance before coming to earth during the war in heaven. They had not been supportive enough of God and Jesus and were cursed for their lack of faith with a dark skin and miserable lives (Joseph Fielding Smith, "The Way to Perfection"). Brigham Young decreed that if a black male/female married a white person only death "on the spot" for both of them could atone for that drastic sin.
(17) Joseph Smith changed his story about the First Vision several times beginning in 1832 and ending in about 1840. Each new version was more impressive than the preceding one, but contradicted "facts" in earlier versions, and actual events in his life.
(18) Joseph Smith radically changed the meaning of many verses in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants after claiming that the original accounts had been revealed to him by God—leaving open the question, "Was God confused or did Joseph get it wrong after claiming to have gotten it right?"
(19) The Book of Mormon doctrines and beliefs revealed in the Nauvoo period, and still present today do not resemble those that Joseph adapted, changed, revised, contradicted and altered later in his life and put forth as "official doctrines."
(20) Joseph preyed on gullible young women to carry out his sexual fantasies under the guise of obedience to God. He told adolescent girls as young as 14 that they would forfeit their own and their family’s right to eternal life if they didn’t marry him and consummate the marriage in the customary way. He would be indicted and convicted of rape and other sex crimes today. In Joseph’s case however, he married more than a dozen young women, plus other men’s wives, 5 pairs of sisters, and a mother and a daughter.
(21) A mountain of good scientific evidence proves conclusively that the Book of Mormon could not possibly be what Joseph claimed. The archaeological and DNA evidence alone are devastating to his claims.
(22) The Three Witnesses did not see anything. They admitted later in life that they saw gold plates "with their spiritual eyes" and not in a literal, physical sense.
(23) The Mormon Temple endowment ceremony is without a doubt taken from the Masonic ceremonies Joseph Smith participated in just weeks before he introduced the temple endowment. The grips, tokens, covenants, secret words, keys, etc. were word for word the same when first introduced. Members who were Masons previous to Joseph joining the fraternal order unashamedly referred to the Mormon endowment as "celestial masonry."
Mom and I wore ourselves out today...
We met at her place and decided to go on a long walk.
Note to self: When Mom says a long walk, she means a loooong walk.
It was nice though, I had a good time. I had my camera with me and I took some really nice shots of the area. We went to the Logan temple and much to the surprise of the anti-Andees we didn't burst into flames when we stepped foot on the temple grounds. I got some shots of the beautiful flowers and the trees that were trying desperately to change color for fall. I can't wait until they do!!
We walked over to a giant overlook of the valley, and found a trail marked with "Legalize Marijuana" on it. Good times. The views were spectacular, I will add some photos as soon as I am done with the editing process.
We hopped back in her truck and drove around trying to find the freaking cemetary. You know... roomie drove me there not too long ago. I remembered where it was (so I thought) but I was wrong. I ended up taking Mom on a joy-ride to Smithfield via back roads. Thats okay, we checked out an antique store there (found nothing we couldn't live without) and then hopped back in the truck for Logan.
After a quick job interview for Mom, we went to Firehouse Pizza. I ordered a medium cheese pizza with extra cheese (go me! Still doing the vegetarian thing... it's hard!) and Mom got herself a pizza with everything except mushrooms. It looked good. *sigh* Mom and I went to pay the bill and we couldn't find the money. We both had minor heart attacks and then quickly recovered when we found the bills in the truck. Whew.
Next, we went to the movie titled, The Errand of Angels... here is my review:
The movie starts as a young, pretty, red-haired girl starts a journal to chronicle her mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I don't think I ever remember them using her first name, or any of the other missionaries for that matter. Just a lot of "sister so-and-so." I kept wanting to give her a name like Laura, Sally, Mary, something... what can ya do?
She goes right into the mission. There is no shot of her family, any relationships outside of the mission. There is no shot of her saying goodbye to the lovely family at home. As a matter of fact, the only mention of her family that I recall is when she mentions her parents joined the church when she was five, and another time when she tells a sister missionary that her grandmother (a non-member) was paying for her mission. I thought for sure there would be a little home-sickness in the movie, but it wasn't mentioned at all.
There were a couple really funny moments during the film. The first was when she ate authentic Austrian food for the first time. The look on her face was precious when they told her what it was they were eating. Another funny moment is when she and a companion go door to door and her companion is bored out of her living skull. Cute moments... I wish there was more of those.
To be honest, the movie didn't really deal with Mormonism the way I thought it would. I only heard the name Joseph Smith twice (that I recall). The movie was based on the relationships she formed while on her mission and the lives she changed. There are touching moments when she leaves one area for another, and another emotional farewell at the end when she wanders into a church of a different faith and listens to two men sing Silent Night in German. It was a nice touch, leaving people with a note of acceptance of other religions with (somewhat) similar beliefs. I don't think it's that easy or real in the "real world," at least... that has been my experience. Maybe that is just because I live in Utah. Utah is a different world altogether.
Overall, the movie was kind of boring.
Believing Mormons, I am not saying the movie is boring because I am leaving the church. The movie was really boring. The music got to me a little. A lot of piano and flute that grew stale quickly. There were also tons of shots of the star on trains traveling to and from her areas as she was transferred. 20 minutes of the movie could have been saved if they didn't focus so much on her facial expressions on the trains. Yes, we get she is pretty and that she is trying to learn and be a good missionary. Thank you. Move on, Mr. Director sir.
I give the flick two out of five stars. Don't worry though, if you live outside Utah you won't be able to find it until it's available on DVD... don't spend money on it.
On the walk home from the movie I was carrying the leftover tub of popcorn. I love popcorn, especially stuff that has "official" movie theater butter on it. We had half of our tub left. I say had, because it's now gone. I walked right into a "for sale" sign, and our yummy buttered popcorn is now decorating a street next to my Mom's house.
Damnit.
Till next time!
Andee
Mom and I are going to have a day of fun. I have been looking forward to this for a week. We are going to walk main street, go out to lunch, do more walking, antique shopping, and then we are going to see our first LDS-specific movie since becoming evil apostates.
The Errand of Angels follows a young woman on her mission to Austria. I can't wait to learn how they portray the experience compared to how it "really is."
I promise a full movie review tonight, as well as photos from my day of fun. Maybe I will have a couple antiques to show you as well... I can hope...
Andee
I love Halloween.
I used to pass out candy for all the little kids, but people have stopped trick-or-treating. At least, that has been my experience. So, instead of doing that, I turned Halloween into an Autumn-fest. I like to decorate with fall colors, do creative things with pumpkins, and buy bags of Halloween candy for myself. What? Nothing wrong with that. One thing I don't do is decorate with fake spiders... don't like spiders... not even fake ones.
The first idea comes from Hostess with the Mostess. It's a blog I just found today that I plan on adding to my bookmark list. Aren't these caramel apples awesome? I plan on trying to make these soon... the chocolates might be a little too hard for a novice like myself, but they are cool nonetheless.
These cat pumpkins are fantastic. I wonder if I could do this without coating everything I own with a layer of black spray paint. It's awesome... love it.
Lace pumpkins are so pretty. They take a lot of time and attention, but I think I will try this as well! I will post my results on the blog...
Here is a slightly less intricate way to make a lace pumpkin... I made these last year...
More to come!
Andee
I was just flipping through my Ensign collection and found this question sent to the magazine in February of 2002. The Questions and Answers page starts on page 70. First is the text of the question and answer from Hoyt W. Brewster Jr. (note the middle initial thing, annoys the hell out of me).
My wife and I want to have equal voice in decisions made in our home, but we are taught that it is my responsibility to preside in the home. What does this mean, and what are its limitations?
Response By Hoyt W. Brewster Jr., president, Salt Lake Brighton Stake.
From the time Adam and Eve were places upon the earth to the present day, the principal of presiding authority has been practiced. Where groups are gathered, societies created, and partnerships formed, individuals are designated by appointment, delegation, or election to preside--that is, to provide presiding leadership or order to the group.
When the Creator provided Eve as a companion-wife, or help-meet, for the lone man Adam (see Gen. 2:18; Moses 3:18), He created the first and fundamental unit of society, the family. Though both man and woman are equal in Heavenly Father's eyes, for "male and female... are alike unto God" (2 Ne. 26:33), Adam was given the presiding role of the family.
Some have misunderstood or misinterpreted the instruction to Eve when Deity declared, "Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee" (Gen. 3:16; emphasis added; see also Moses 4:22). Commenting on this scripture, President Spencer W. Kimball (1895-1985) said: "I have a question about the word rule. It gives the wrong impression. I would prefer to use the word preside because that's what he does. A righteous husband presides over his wife and family." ("The Blessings and Responsibilities of Womanhood," Ensign, Mar. 1976, 72).
The scriptures and declarations of the prophets have consistently taught that a husband has the divinely delegated responsibility to preside, or provide Christlike leadership, in the home. For example, the recent proclamation of the family states, "By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families" ("The Family: A Proclamation to the World," Ensign, Nov. 1995, 102).
It is significant to note the wording "preside... in love and righteousness." The Apostle Paul taught this same concept, although in different words, to the husbands and fathers of his day. "For the husband is the head of the wife," he wrote, "even as Christ is the head of the church" (Eph. 5:23). Then this servant of the Lord admonished, "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it." (Eph. 5:25).
Husbands are to give themselves totally to the welfare of the family. The presiding position does not entail the right to dictate or to "exercise unrighteous dominion" (D&C 121:39).
A bishop was startled during and interview with a husband and wife seeking counsel when the man said: "I want you to tell my wife that she is to do whatever I say because I preside in the home!" To the husband's amazement, it was he who then received instruction from the bishop in principals of true priesthood leadership.
On another occasion a stake president was interviewing a woman and asked about her relationship with her husband. Tears of gratitude began to well up in her eyes as she told of her love for him. Not only was he a kind and loving husband to her, but he was a wonderful father to her children from a previous marriage. He provided them with the love and an example of Christlike conduct.
The qualities essential to presiding in righteousness are enumerated in modern scripture:
"No power or influence can be or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
"By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile" (D&C 121:41-42).
The husband who exhibits these godly traits honors his priesthood and his position as the presiding authority in the home. He will speak and act out of love and with a desire to bless his family, not to dominate or dictate. Such a husband follows the example of Christ.
A righteous husband sees his wife as described by President Howard W. Hunter (1907-95): "a companion equal and necessary in full partnership" ("Being a Righteous Husband and Father," Ensign, Nov. 1994, 51). I believe that a wife who feels loved is treated with respect, is listened to as she counsels with her husband, and knows her voice is a valued part of family decisions will recognize the marriage as a full partnership in which she is an equal contributor. Such a partnership is based on trust in one another and trust in a loving Father who presides over His eternal family.
Puke. Peeeeeeouuuuuuke. Blech.
Can I just say something really quick? Who gets to decide that men are to preside over anyone? MEN. Yeah. Did women make that decision? NO!
I love how this guy tries to make the fact that men are supposedly the head of the family just because they are men "okay." It's not! It's not okay! This is bullsh!t and everyone knows it.
Know what I got from this article? This:
Men, you are in charge. With that comes responsibility to be good and righteous... but you are still in charge. Ladies, you counsel with your husband, but what he says goes. You are equal *pat on head* you know you are. Your husband knows best, so listen to him. He has the mystical powers of the priesthood. Without him, you go nowhere.
Why in the would should a man have the right to do the "presiding" over the family? Why not a woman? What is wrong with a woman in that position? I don't think that the position should be there to begin with, this is for the sake or argument. If someone has to preside, why does the man automatically get the job? Because he is a man? Because he has a penis? COME ON! Are you kidding me?
No wonder there is so much sexism out there... everyone's minds have been filled with this dribble since they were newborns.
The examples given in the article of a man abusing his head-of-the-household powers and then a man taking care of children that are not bioligically his, are examples given to explain this to us as if we are preschoolers who don't know the difference between good and bad. "You see children, being a good person means you help your family, being a bad person means you order them around and make them shine your shoes." Give me a break.
A man isn't in charge of me simply because he is a man. I refuse to be a part of an institution that requires it...
Andee
Okay, so everyone knows that Mormons practiced polygamy. No secret at all. No one debates that, it's accepted. It happened.
My question is why?
Why in the WORLD would God ask a man to marry two 14 year old girls? Why?
I am at a complete loss... and most of you know how infrequently that happens. I cannot wrap my brain around it. Why would God want Joseph Smith to marry pre-teens? Not only marry them, but warn them they would be damned to Hell if they didn't do what he wanted? Their eternal well being was supposedly on the line... along with their family. Of course they would go along with it... they wouldn't have liked it, but they would have gone along with it.
I don't get why people think that polygamy was in any way something that the sister wives enjoyed. I am sure there were friendships and love shared between them, but competiting for the attention of the same man has to get taxing to say the least. Not to mention that they have to stay in his favor for help with their kids. It wasn't easy, it wasn't a joy.
Seriously... what the Hell?
It's not any easier thinking about grown women who were married to him (some without Emma's knowledge). If God wanted the Mormon church to prosper and share information with the world, why would He command that church to do something so outrageous and alarming as polygamy? Logically it makes zero sense.
There is quote after quote about polygamy from Brigham Young (among many others) claiming that polygamy is essential for reaching the celestial kingdom of heaven. If the man doesn't have more than one wife, he has less status. Women are therefore looked at as property. Something men have. Something. But they are someONE.
Joseph Smith had many wives, but the only one that is talked about officially is Emma. How unfair is that to the other wives who had to deal with something like this? They each had their own personality, their own hopes and dreams, but they are forgotten because the church feels they don't matter.
My point is that by not talking about these women who put up with the situation, we are ignoring the huge sacrifices they made. Most Mormons don't even know they existed. It's insulting to their memory.
So how did something that was so essential for the celestial kingdom turn into something that was never talked about? Was Brigham Young lying when he told people that polygamy was essential? Did God change his mind?
WTF?
