Of course. Distasteful to you.
You find things like cannibalism tasteful? I mean, to each their own I suppose.
Yep, and good luck and blessings to those folks and the folks they aid...who have chosen themselves to leave that belief system or have freely chosen to do something against the tenets of that system so that they are expelled. Aid and help given to those disaffected folks is NOT what is being discussed here, is it?
That aid being given to them by secular institutions apparently more concerned with their mental well being than their respective religious organisations. Which is a little sad, don't you think?
Yes. That particular group of Mormons (the polygamous group under Warren Jeffs) was a nasty one.
I would submit, however, that part of the reason they were so insular is because the outside world had decided that polygamy was illegal and jail worthy, and persecuted them for that. It is THAT which allowed Jeffs to be so powerful, precisely the way other 'mind control cults' had leaders which were powerful and, well, nasty.
Who goes to jail for marrying multiple people? Is that a thing in America? Sheesh! Leader of the Free World indeed!
Come over here. I know even secular polygamous/polygamist people. You don't need to leave society if you want to date multiple people. It's the 21st century, after all. Of course, if they wish to marry, they generally don't do it "by law" after the first marriage, if you get what I mean?
BTW, those folks are "Mormons" the way Westboro Baptists represent all Baptists.
"Mormons" in general don't have that issue....which is probably why the LDS leadership wants everybody to use the name of the church; "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints" rather than "Mormon," so that folks like you will learn the difference between Jeffs' group (10,000) and us (16,000,000)
Of course. Mormons are as diverse as literally any religion in history.
As far as you are concerned.
As far as a lot of mental health professionals are concerned. Did you really just try to justify child marriage by the way? 16 is way too young and that's often old in some sects. That is criminal. That should not be protected, it is literally child sexual abuse.
And 'freedom of religion' means that one must address those issues through teaching and proselytization, NOT external legal persecution through laws.
I never once advocated external persecution by law, unless in very dire circumstances. Like if there's a child starving themselves for a religious rite (fasting.) That is dangerous, that should not be protected. Any decent sane person of any religious persuasion (or even lack thereof) would be appalled if a child were to starve themselves or forced to and would recommend immediate intervention. I would hope so anyway. I mean come on. And before you say, oh well according to you. I come from a Hindu background, we grow up on folktales literally praising such activities, even stories involving pious children doing so. But to actually do that in real life? No, that's child abuse.
YOU may not like some religious practice.....but they probably don't like yours, either. I, personally, don't want to see a government in which the majority belief system can regulate the religious opinions and acts of minorities.
Dude, you get me all wrong. I am the person who would immediately jump up to your aid any time the government tried to penalize you for your religious beliefs and practices. In a civilized modern society, it is the right of every person to worship (or not worship) however one pleases. But that doesn't mean we can't look at some practices (in literally every religion ever) and be like, yeah, maybe those are best left in the past.
Let us be pragmatic and self reflective.
After all, you ARE talking to a 'Latter-day saint" here...one of those who are members of the larger 'Mormon" classification. We KNOW what it means to have the government pass laws. We ended up being driven right out of the USA altogether, at gun point.
And I find such a thing abhorrent. No government should do that to it's citizens. Its a blatant violation of civil liberty.
....and if those psychiatrists had been around back in the mid nineteenth century, every Mormon existing would have been treated for PTSD because of what the proper, right thinking people around them DID to them.
And we have changed since then. Well I would hope we have in the intervening years anyway.
All aid and service should be given to those who are unhappy with their belief system, or who leave it.
Why should anyone even need aid just to leave their religion? I mean geez, I know people who became atheists without so much as a tear shed. Because their families didn't treat them like trash for being atheists or converts or what have you.
I'm not talking about people who just "leave their system." I'm talking about people literally kicked out of home and shunned by their entire families because they questioned or left the religion. Sometimes they had no choice. We can absolutely look at that and say, yeah, that's messed up and that hurts people. I don't care what religion that practice is from, to be frank. I will call it out. Which I hope you know is not the same as wanting the government to intervene. Screw the government, I don't trust those dopes as far as I can throw them. I think in those kinds of scenarios, education is better than intervention.