DiscussMormonism.com

Below is a link to an interesting article in today's Trib about Jim Engebretsen, a BYU employee (at the Marriott School of Business) who had posted a personal page (on BYU's network) in defense of polygamy. Turns out that Engebretsen is part of the "More Good Foundation" (his "testimonial" is on the foundation's webpage, along with DCP's). Sounds as if BYU was none too pleased.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5166192

Now, that's funny. Thanks for the link. The More Good foundation was supposed to flood the Internet with "positive" information about the church, and instead it ends up in a newspaper article explaining that Joseph married young girls and lied about it (along with Grego's rationalization of it). Priceless.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:Below is a link to an interesting article in today's Trib about Jim Engebretsen, a BYU employee (at the Marriott School of Business) who had posted a personal page (on BYU's network) in defense of polygamy. Turns out that Engebretsen is part of the "More Good Foundation" (his "testimonial" is on the foundation's webpage, along with DCP's). Sounds as if BYU was none too pleased.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5166192

The guy who started this fiasco, Jim Engebretson, is a former Goldman Sachs broker, who, apparently, has made sufficient money that he can take a pay cut to be MBA Director at BYU. When I was doing my MBA, I interviewed with Godman Sachs in Philadelphia and stayed at Engebretson's house. Don't really know anything about him, however. (Didn't get the job--not so bad, it was a sales job, and I both hate and suck at sales.)

What I'd like to ask Engebretson, is that if polygamy is not so bad, would he be willing that his daughters participated in it?

Anyone doubt what his answer would be?

guy sajer wrote:
What I'd like to ask Engebretson, is that if polygamy is not so bad, would he be willing that his daughters participated in it?

Anyone doubt what his answer would be?

I already know the answer. A while back, I asked on FAIR if members were asked to give their 14 year old daughter to the prophet to be his wife (without the consent of the prophet's lawful wife), would they consent?

Only one member said no. Everyone else said they would.

Runtu wrote:

guy sajer wrote:
What I'd like to ask Engebretson, is that if polygamy is not so bad, would he be willing that his daughters participated in it?

Anyone doubt what his answer would be?

I already know the answer. A while back, I asked on FAIR if members were asked to give their 14 year old daughter to the prophet to be his wife (without the consent of the prophet's lawful wife), would they consent?

Only one member said no. Everyone else said they would.

Actually, the answering I was assuming was "no." I'd have to see how many FAIRistas responded, but they are surely not representative--it was probably mostly the more fanatical who responded. It is, moreover, one thing to consider this in the abstract, when it is a very, very low probability. Were they actually faced with this, I'd bet my bottom dollar the attitudes of many would change drastically.

How any person who loves his/her daughter would give her up to be the property of an other man is beyond my limited ability to comprehend. It is, moreover, morally reprehensible. She's not theirs to give away. She's not property. She's a human being with as legitimate a right to her own moral agency and happiness as her parents. She should not be sacrificed to satisfy the parents' warped sense of religious duty.

To those FAIRistas who answer in the affirmative, you disgust me.

I don't understand. What did this guy say that any FARMS apologist hasn't already said? And FARMS is part of BYU.

Doesn't make sense to me.

guy sajer wrote:

Runtu wrote:

guy sajer wrote:
What I'd like to ask Engebretson, is that if polygamy is not so bad, would he be willing that his daughters participated in it?

Anyone doubt what his answer would be?

I already know the answer. A while back, I asked on FAIR if members were asked to give their 14 year old daughter to the prophet to be his wife (without the consent of the prophet's lawful wife), would they consent?

Only one member said no. Everyone else said they would.

Actually, the answering I was assuming was "no." I'd have to see how many FAIRistas responded, but they are surely not representative--it was probably mostly the more fanatical who responded. It is, moreover, one thing to consider this in the abstract, when it is a very, very low probability. Were they actually faced with this, I'd bet my bottom dollar the attitudes of many would change drastically.

How any person who loves his/her daughter would give her up to be the property of an other man is beyond my limited ability to comprehend. It is, moreover, morally reprehensible. She's not theirs to give away. She's not property. She's a human being with as legitimate a right to her own moral agency and happiness as her parents. She should not be sacrificed to satisfy the parents' warped sense of religious duty.

To those FAIRistas who answer in the affirmative, you disgust me.

Follow the prophet,
Follow the prophet,
Follow the prophet,
Don't go astray

Follow the prophet,
Follow the prophet,
Follow the prophet,
He knows the way!

Who Knows wrote:I don't understand. What did this guy say that any FARMS apologist hasn't already said?

I think the last line of the article says it all (and the one that made me lol) (emphasis added):

"I thought they had cleared more of the information than they had," he said. "We'll find another home for it. We were just trying to get good content out. I can understand why they don't want it to be associated with BYU."

Rollo Tomasi wrote:Below is a link to an interesting article in today's Trib about Jim Engebretsen, a BYU employee (at the Marriott School of Business) who had posted a personal page (on BYU's network) in defense of polygamy. Turns out that Engebretsen is part of the "More Good Foundation" (his "testimonial" is on the foundation's webpage, along with DCP's). Sounds as if BYU was none too pleased.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5166192

"Not confirmed"? What exactly was not confirmed? That Joseph married young girls? Or that Joseph lied to Emma? Or that Joseph lied from the pulpit? Or that apologists make lame arguments?

No wonder the church/BYU pulled it. Put it somewhere unofficial. Geez, if the guy is that far up in management, don't you think he'd have a clue by now?

I get the sense the church (and its leaders), really, REALLY, REALLY wants to distance itself from the weirdness, cruelty and primitive degradation that is polygamy.

But, its apologists members want to justify it, honor it, and even celebrate it as something wonderful and Godly.

I find it odd.

Why don't members sort of get a clue and stop praising something the leaders want to go away? Why make the church stand out as something bizarre and perverted when the church is desperately trying to be more accepted?

I just don't get it.

~dancer~