Complaint to FOX's Dayside

A rant about a guest

Published on May 9, 2006 By singrdave In Current Events

Dear Juliet, Mike, and email screeners:

I love Dayside. I really enjoy the program, I watch it every day from work while I eat lunch. Normally I have no problem with your show, but today I have a problem. I feel a rant coming on...

I have got to complain about the blinkard fool who you had on this afternoon. First of all, I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While I do not live in Utah, I am from Arizona. But I lived two years in Utah, and my wife was born and raised in Salt Lake City.

Paul (I forgot his last name) was the New York attorney who you had on to "explain" about polygamy and Mormonism, in regards to Warren Jeffs. That anonymous Mormon girl audience member knew more about Jeffs' legal troubles than this idiot lawyer. He obviously did not have a clue about Mormons, Utah, or polygamy. He clearly had never even been to Utah or even met a Utahn. I'm not even complaining that he endorsed polygamy, though it is an illegal practice that was outlawed in the 1800's by Congress and then subsequently outlawed and banned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Official Declaration banning polygamy was issued in 1896. Since then, any Mormons caught practicing polygamy or entering into marriages with multiple women have been swiftly excommunicated from the real, actual Mormon Church. Just because psychotic losers like Jeffs decide that they like that tenet too much to let it go... that's when they split from the "Utah Mormons" that Lawyer Paul was going on about.

"Utah Mormons" do not practice polygamy. "Utah Mormons" are not the people on that HBO "Big Love" show. True Utah Mormons are law-abiding citizens of the US, who have only one spouse each. There are places in Utah (as well as Arizona, Florida, Idaho, and other states) where you can find polygamists. In fact, Jeffs isn't even in Utah -- he's in Texas, just outside of Eldorado. About 3 hours west of San Antonio, in the middle of nowhere.

How do I know that? Because I pay attention. This blinkard fool Paul Lawyer-boy didn't even know that. Because he makes all these blanket assumptions about people who he lumps together as "Mormons": Utahns who *all* endorse polygamy, whether covertly or overtly. Speaking as an Arizona Mormon married to a Utahn (we live in Maryland now), this is completely false. Utahns do not endorse or condone polygamy. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not condone nor do they endorse polygamy. Of course there are "descendants of polygamists" in Utah: that is just a fact, it doesn't mean these people are okay with the practice. It means they are products of a practice that was renounced 110 years ago.

For crying out loud, I realize that you are in New York and that you are obligated to get who you can find to be on Dayside. But if you're going to get someone to talk about polygamy and Utahns... you could have looked a lot harder. This guy knew nothing about anything. I'd ask for his fee back.

Comments

singrdave

on May 09, 2006

For the record,
Actually written by me, after I got home from work. Actually signed with my own name (what do I have to fear?) and I will happily field any questions regarding the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' abandonment of polygamy from any member of the media.

singrdave

on May 09, 2006

Trust me, their choice of interviewees was not accidental, it was deliberate. They don't like polygamy, you see...

Well, I don't like polygamy either. The thing I didn't go into was THIS GUY DID.

This is priceless: he sees polygamy as protected under freedom of religion and sexual expression. He equated a 48-year-old man marrying numerous 14-year-old girls with the sexual freedom you find in Greenwich Village or San Francisco during the '60s.

Yes, he actually said that. I am not putting words into his mouth.

And I didn't even go into that.
There was lots to be upset about with this know-nothing bozo.

bakerstreet

on May 10, 2006

I think the perception is, though, singrdave, is that the Mormon Church does turn a blind eye. You have to admit, in the history of Utah they haven't run up against a lot of things they wanted to get done that didn't get done. If this behavior has flourished with people knowing about it one wonders why it wasn't crushed.

Don't all large religions/political organizations vying for people's minds have that problem, though? Dirty little secrets? Why would you think the Mormon church would be one that doesn't? It's pretty obvious that the Republican party panders to a lot of idealists whose beliefs they would never speak in the light of day. The Dems do the same thing with their pandering.

The Catholics tolerate a lot of sub-sects within the Church that they frown upon. They make bold statements and then allow the opposite to go on right under their noses. The Mormon church is no different. For a long time in Utah the Mormon church was the power behind everything there. Some people believe it still is to a lesser degree.

You don't think that if they wanted to shut down these communities it wouldn't get done? I find it hard to believe.

Dr Guy

on May 10, 2006

The Catholics tolerate a lot of sub-sects within the Church that they frown upon. They make bold statements and then allow the opposite to go on right under their noses

Baker, I would be interested to know what these sub-sects are.

But to the topic, I do have a question, and I think I know the answer, but would rather not assume. Why did the LDS originally condone polygamy? I am in full agreement with you on the current status of the Church, but am curious as to the origins.

bakerstreet

on May 10, 2006

Eh, if grownups living together was all that was wrong they couldn't. Instead it is selling your children into slavery in hopes that other people will sell their children to you. This isn't personal, this is a cult that thrives on vicitimization.

You don't think the Mormon church could have put bounties on the heads of these people before now? You don't think that they could have taken a hand in investigating and offering up these communities to law enforcement? You don't think back when they originally banned polygamy they couldn't have crushed it outright? Take a look at how the Mormon church did business back then and you'll find that they had no qualms taking a fight into their own hands.

The Mormon church has seen itself as a power on earth unto itself, not just a religious institution living under the protection of the government. If you think the average community would tolerate people swapping children you are crazy. This is an unfair smear on Mormonism, and I believe devoutly that they could have been doing a lot more to bring these people to justice if they wanted to.

No offense intended to the Mormon on the street, not in the least. I don't believe even the Mormon Church wants this stuff to go on. It think, though, that perhaps they've been more interested in keeping these wastes out of the public eye than dragging them into it.

If I am wrong, and there have been public efforts that have somehow not gotten attention, I apologize. I just think they could have been lobbying and offering public incentive for communities to purge this filth from their midst, instead of just saying "Those people aren't really Mormons."

I'd like to see the Mormon Church offer their own bounty for this cretin. I'd like to see them "go after" a practice done in their name in the same way other groups go after environmental or political causes. If they have, again, my apologies, but it seems to have been overlooked by the MSM, and that's about all I have to go on.

polygamist master of hundreds

on May 10, 2006

Fantastic. More people ragging on the beautiful and wonderful practice of polygamy.

singrdave

on May 14, 2006

Mormons and Polygamy
Various news outlets, including Fox News, CNN, 10 May 2006

Actions by law enforcement agencies in recent months have triggered increased news media attention to polygamist groups, particularly those living in southern Utah and Arizona. Too often news reports refer to these groups as "Mormons" or "Mormon sects." To make such a reference is misleading and confusing to the vast majority of audiences who rightfully associate the term "Mormon" with members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (Correct terminology)

Examples:

Fox News (Big Story with John Gibson, 2 May 2006) — Judge Andrew Napolitano talked at length on the political risks he believed that the Utah attorney general was running by pressing for the prosecution of polygamist leaders in Utah. His comments implied that the Church and its members would be opposed to the actions of the Utah attorney general. Such an interpretation is wholly unjustified and is inconsistent with the previous comments of Church President Gordon B. Hinckley (see below).

CNN (“Sect Leader Is Hunted,” 9 May 2006) — During a report about law enforcement’s crackdown and hunt for Warren Jeffs, leader of a polygamist group, CNN superimposed the face of Jeffs over an image of the Salt Lake Temple. Again, this implies a connection between the two. This is not just careless editing, but highly offensive to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Warren Jeffs is not and never has been a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Reporters’ Questions
Several reporters have called for the Church’s comment on Warren Jeffs being placed on the FBI’s most-wanted list. Warren Jeffs and polygamist groups have no association whatsoever with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There is no reason why the Church would wish to comment about a legal action concerning a group with which it has no affiliation or connection.

Mormons Do Not Practice Polygamy
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints discontinued the practice of polygamy in 1890. (Read history)

In 1998, President Gordon B. Hinckley said, "I wish to state categorically that this Church has nothing whatever to do with those practicing polygamy. They are not members of this Church. Most of them have never been members. They are in violation of the civil law. …

"If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church." (Read full statement)

There Is No Such Thing as a "Mormon Fundamentalist" or "Mormon Sect"
The term “Mormon” is a nickname commonly applied to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There is no such thing as a "Mormon fundamentalist," nor are there “Mormon sects." A correct term to describe these polygamist groups is "polygamist sects." The inclusion of the word “Mormon” is misleading and inaccurate.

The Associated Press Stylebook states, "The term Mormon is not properly applied to the other Latter Day Saints churches that resulted from the split after [Joseph] Smith’s death."

bakerstreet

on May 14, 2006

Don't they call themselves Mormon Fundamentalists? I can see how fundamentalism isn't a church-sanctioned state, but I think the people who call themselves that reject the mainstream church's sanction, anyway. I think that these people can use the word Mormon in the same way that cults in the Middle Ages are called "Christian" cults even though they were crushed by the mainstream church.

singrdave

on May 14, 2006

Don't they call themselves Mormon Fundamentalists?

Yes, and we sure wish they'd stop.

It's bad enough that these guys exist, then to get lumped in with them...

I've probably been asked five times in the past couple of months about polygamy. Which is good, I guess, since I have the opportunity to put the record straight. But it always comes up in the context of "Don't you Mormons...?"

bakerstreet

on May 15, 2006

Do you think, though, if the Church itself was doing all it could to get the word out that people would be asking? Could part of the confusion be due to the fact that the public isn't educated enough about the REAL LDS?

That's the crux of what I was trying to say above. You have a world wherein everyone says one thing and does another. Even when the Catholic church comes out against pedophiles, people still tend to associate them. It's less fair with these idiots, granted, since they aren't even a part of the church, but do you think that it wouldn't be better if the Church itself responded with something so resounding it drowned out the fringe nuts?

Pardon me asking, but isn't there a bit of secrecy involved with Mormonism? Not to the level of Scientology, mind you, but are all the facts about the beliefs available on a bullet list somewhere, or does one learn more as one advances through the church. I am probably just swayed by unfair propaganda, mind you, so my apologes if it isn't true.

singrdave

on May 16, 2006

Could part of the confusion be due to the fact that the public isn't educated enough about the REAL LDS?

Honestly we are attacking that on two fronts:
1) our church holds press conferences regarding our beliefs, but they are not well attended by the national media. Unless the Olympics are being hosted, Elizabeth Smart's been kidnapped, or Lori Hacking's gone missing, people don't give a rat's butt about Salt Lake City, Utah.

2) we send missionaries out to every doggone door we can find, trying to get you non-Mormons to know more about our beliefs. You think that's just about conversion, but on some level that's PR, too. If they can't "get a baptism", then at least they can walk out of the house knowing they softened some hearts towards the LDS church. (As LW will attest, apparently...)

Pardon me asking, but isn't there a bit of secrecy involved with Mormonism?

Only because people aren't interested enough to listen. South Park notwithstanding, there are some pretty interesting beliefs that we have. Not just in the mindset of "oh, aren't they different" but "oh, I never thought about it like that before". That's what the Church's commercials, videos, offers to send you a Bible or a Book of Mormon, and missionaries around the world are all about. Bringing the world the truth about our Church and debunking the stories.

singrdave

on May 16, 2006

An addendum, now that I remember:
I mean, I know I've been reading ParaTed2k's articles about our core beliefs. His series of thirteen articles (13 Articles of Faith) are very insightful and illumnating as to what exactly Mormons believe. And what we don't. And I know they've elicited lots of very positive comments from a lot of people.

We have a charge for every member to be a missionary. Not just a white-shirt-and-tie, knocking-on-your-door kind of missionary. Though I did do that for two years, I'm deep in the heart of my adulthood now. But I can still be a missionary, bringing the Gospel to others. Both around me and through this blog. Answering questions, sniffing our falsehoods, and righting wrongs. It's part of my obligation.

bakerstreet

on May 16, 2006

So all the talk about secret beliefs and ceremonies is just talk? There's a lot of it out there, you know.

Dr Guy

on May 17, 2006

So all the talk about secret beliefs and ceremonies is just talk? There's a lot of it out there, you know.

I agree there is a lot among the public. But here we are blessed with several members of the LDS who have eagerly shared their beliefs. The sad fact is that the LDS cannot eliminate fear and superstition the world over, although like Singrdave says, they are trying. But for us, we can and should at least educate ourselves to dispel the myths.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!