Talk:Mitt Romney/Archive 5

message: I've inserted the info about Ann Romney's family into the article about Ann Romney.Ferrylodge (talk) 22:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ann Romney's family 

message: A new phrase in the article says that his ancestors went to Mexico "in order to continue to practice their religion without fear of retaliation by the US Federal government."  This sounds like we are defending polygamy as a matter of religious freedom.  I'll tweak it slightly, to say that his ancestors went to Mexico "in order to continue to practice their religion and lifestyle without fear of retaliation."  Both the feds and the states were cracking down on polygamy.Ferrylodge (talk) 01:05, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the 1880's only the Federal government was persecuting Mormons in Utah. The state of Utah was not actively engaging in this activity at the time. Are you saying that Mormons were not engaging in polygamy as a result of their faith? That would be a novel position; do you have any references that the practice was anything but religious in nature? I can assure you that no references exist to support that position. The 3% to 20% of LDS men and women who engaged in plural marriage were doing so solely because of their religion; it was not a "lifestyle" choice. Now, I am completely aware that the south was engaging in polygamy, but those individuals were not LDS and that was strictly a lifestyle choice. --Storm Rider (talk) 01:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My main concern is that the US Supreme Court continues to assert that people are free to practice their religions even though they are subject to generally applicable laws.  See, for example, Employment Division v. Smith.  For us to imply that violating generally applicable laws is necessary in order to practice one's religion may or may not be correct, but it is an argument that has been rejected by the US Supreme Court.  As for Utah cracking down on polygamy, that state was admitted into the union only on condition that they do so, if I recall correctly.Ferrylodge (talk) 01:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I've edited to try to address your concern: "fled to Mexico in 1884 in order to continue to practice it without fear of retaliation."Ferrylodge (talk) 01:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I mentioned it in my edit summary, but if the LDS renouncing plural marriage is to be included in the article, it really should be mentioned that it was due to the pressure applied to the church by the feds. Not going to say LDS Church would still be practicing plural marriage, but the decision to renounce the practice in 1890 was due to losing the Supreme Court case and the impending seizure of all the Church's assets. --Bobblehead (rants) 02:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

text: This is not a debate, but it's worth noting that virtually no legal scholar defends the late 19th century decisions against Mormons. The laws were not passed as generally-applicable legislation which only happened to detriment Mormons; they were expressly anti-Mormon. Idaho territory banned all Mormons from voting, and the Supreme Court upheld it in Davis v. Beason. In this era, the Supreme Court compared polygamy to human sacrifice. They said that the free practice of religion referred not to actual practice—as one might suspect—but to the abstract right to believe in a religion, as if the Congress could ever infringe upon that. It took decades to purge this nonsense from the caselaw. At any rate, linking to the 1890 Manifesto should be sufficient as in "the LDS Church officially renounced polygamy in 1890." Cool Hand Luke 09:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that linking to the 1890 Manifesto should be sufficient as in "the LDS Church officially renounced polygamy in 1890."  There's no need to say in this article that this Manifesto was issued under pressure from the federal government.  That is not only very tangential to Romney, but also could easily be interpreted as a warning that if Romney is put in charge of the federal government then he'll help restore polygamy.  In fact, we've got a footnoted quote where Romney discusses how much he abhors polygamy.Ferrylodge (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does Wikipedia defend polygamy as a matter of religious freedom?