Our Living Conditions, Part 5

So how did it work living in a United Order?

Well, first of all, my father gave me a couple of responsibilities.

I must say about my dad, he had your typical A-type personality. He was a very charismatic, driven person. But much to his credit, he was always self-effacing. People were always trying to thrust him into positions of leadership. There were even a couple of people who tried to make him their “prophet”. But my father always resisted such notions. When we moved out into the wilderness of Arizona, we made a conscious decision not to govern ourselves by the “one-man rule”, but by common consent and council.

My father, given his innate sense of leadership and priesthood calling – not to mention his position of family patriarch - could have easily asserted himself as “bishop” of our United Order, the agent in charge of collecting the consecrations. He would have naturally fit that role. But my father was afraid of the power that this role would give him in our family. He was more afraid that other people would perceive that everyone would view it that he was “taking everyone’s money”. Ironically, many people still said that about him.

So he appointed someone to act as a sort of treasurer for our Order. That person was me. I was supposed to occupy this office for a year, after which the position would rotate to someone else.

I was mortified to have this position. So you create a United Order, and the person you pick to run it… is a spendthrift. I had never been good with money. I’m still not. Even though I have made a living doing accounting and handling other people’s money with success and care, when it comes to my own money, I suck. My wives are better at budgeting that I am.

I went to my father privately and expressed my objections.

“I think it will provide you with an opportunity to learn something,” my dad told me. “You’ll be able to become strong in an area where you are weak.”

The next thing – I am a people pleaser. It is a challenge to have someone who is a people pleaser in a position like that, because I do not like to say no. People would come to me for money for certain needs, and invariably I would say yes. Even if the funds were not available.

After a year of handling everyone’s money very poorly, I gladly handed the reins of the office of “treasurer” back to my dad. And he handed them right back to me. I acted in the capacity of treasurer for nine years. (And I don’t think I ever got better at it.)

“I don’t think you’ve learned what you need to yet,” my father said.

The way we would work things – we would get paid weekly, and every pay day (before we had a chance to spend our money) we would all come together for a meeting we simply called “Financial Meeting”. Present were all the wives and all the husbands. Everyone would have an equal voice.

The main thing accomplished at Financial Meeting was to place all of the earned wages into the “pot” and then to disperse them according to everyone’s needs. This means specifically that my pay check went every week to the extended family. At this meeting, everyone was supposed to bring their bills to the table, we were supposed to review them, and the funds were supposed to be redistributed according to those needs, and according to the priority.

And this worked most of the time except for two different kinds of personalities. First of all, you had people pleasers, like me, who thoughtlessly gave all of their income and bit back their own needs for the sake of others. At each meeting, I would watch the sum grow smaller and smaller as more and more needs were brought up. My heart would sink, and I would think, “I guess I can try and pay that bill next week.”

The consequence is – I am still trying to pay off bills that I put off back then. This is no one’s fault but my own. I can’t blame anyone nor can I blame United Order. I should have spoken up. One thing I learned from all of that was that no one can benefit anyone if they are in debt. And it was not fair to my children that ignored my own debt.

On the other hand, there were people like my former sister-in-law Sarine. If people like me bit back their needs, Sarine was always needy. Having grown up in a family that lived off of the dole in the Allred Group, she had no concept of self-sacrifice. There were several occasions when my father would say to her, “Sarine, your needs exceed the amount of money we have brought in this week. If we meet all of your needs, there won’t be anything left for anyone else.”

And she would blink with incomprehension.

For almost four years, Martha and I shared a trailer with Sarine and her husband. At one Financial Meeting, Sarine actually brought up that it was not fair that Martha and I kept our bedroom door open during the winter, because the heat was going into our room and thereby not giving her enough heat. My dad answered, “They have just as much right to the heat as you do.”

When we moved out into our own place, Sarine made constant upgrades (threatening to leave if she did not get them.) In a system where we were all supposed to be equal, Sarine had a washer and drier. (The rest of us went to the laundromat once a week.) Sarine had a water heater. (The rest of us heated water on the stove.) Sarine had water pressure. (The rest of us hauled water.) Sarine had solar power. (The rest of us used candles at night.) It was the quintessential case of the squeaky wheel.

But this is an inevitable fact about a communistic lifestyle. There will always be idealists who will believe and try to make it work. And then there will be parasites who will take advantage of the hard work and sacrifice of others.

The Financial Meeting was a place where other issues were brought up. For instance, it was in this way that we eventually arranged for all of us to have septic tanks. (After one year, no more buckets.) I brought up in a previous post the relevance of personal property in the United Order. When I married Temple, she brought her personal belongings with her. She owned a llama. She had owned this llama long before she met me, and when we got married, she brought her llama and we put him in a pen we built on our property.

Now, what does a llama do? I asked this question of many people before. A llama eats. That is the answer. A llama eats. So we had a weekly expense of purchasing hay. There were some in our Order who complained about this expense and insisted that we sell the llama, get rid of it and thereby rid ourselves of what they deemed as a luxury.

And I always insisted that the Order had no right to make that decision for Temple. It was her personal property, and the Order had no right to step over that boundary and make that decision for her. I agreed to take care of that expense myself, but I would allow no one to make that decision for us. My father always did joke with Temple that, if times got lean, we would eat the llama. Temple always sensed that this was a half-joke.

When we first moved out to the Land, my dad wanted a set of rules made. He wanted to pattern this set of rules after the Orderville Charter. He assigned my oldest brother to create this set of rules. Each week, my father would ask my brother how this was progressing, and each week my brother would say that he had not got around to it yet. My brother admitted to me later that he was reluctant to create a set of rules that would be too binding. I was very grateful for this.

One rule that did my dad did create, though, was the “No TV” rule. A man my dad respected once told him that TV would ultimately destroy a United Order. The story of my dad hearing this would grow and grow with each telling to the point that my dad decided that no one would have a TV on the Land. We all made an agreement about it. I never agreed with the decision, but I made it because I respected my dad. And since we had no power, I didn’t think it would matter anyway.

I have since gone back on that agreement years ago. The way I look at it – no man should tell another man what he can or can’t do in his own home. I love my dad, but in this instance I think he was wrong. Maybe God will hold me accountable for making an agreement and then going back on it. But there is nothing to fear about technology. We are not Amish. A TV itself is not good or evil. It is how we use it.

I am not saying that it was all bad in our United Order. There was much that was good. For one thing, we all ate together.

Each Financial Meeting, someone was assigned to do the grocery shopping for the whole Order. That person would go out each week and but the food for everyone. Sometimes, it was slim. You would work all week, and then someone would bring you back only a few bags of groceries.

But then we would all eat dinner together. The women would divide up cooking days between themselves. For instance, you would not have to cook for most of the week. But once or twice a week, you would have to cook for everyone. It worked out pretty good, and everyone ate well. (Except for the nights that Sarine would cook. On her nights she only ever made lentil soup. Yuck.)

We would all meet at my father’s house and eat. Since we had no TV, we would sit around and talk. I look back at those times as some of the best of my life. As the years go by, I wish that I could go back to that time of my life. Everything was simple then, and we were all united.

But there were complaints about some of the women not helping with the dishes after dinner. So the decision was made that we would still cook dinner for each other, but everyone would eat at their own homes.

When I was courting Temple, she came and visited for a couple of weeks while we were all still eating together. By the time we got married and she moved in, the Order was eating dinner in their own homes. Temple told me that she could feel the difference. We were less united.

For a while, we still cooked dinners together. There were even other families who moved into the area that participated in this for a couple of years. But this went by the wayside as well, eventually.

In fact, in my mind, the ending of the meals marked the decline of our United Order. But I will talk about that in the next installment.

.

Our Living Conditions, Part 4

In 1994, my family pointed out some injustices that we observed in the congregation that we belonged to – the Allred Group (AUB). Suddenly we found ourselves excommunicated… again… only a few years after having been cut off from the LDS Church. Disillusioned, my parents moved back to Arizona.

Martha and I stayed in Utah, trying to make a go at it by ourselves. We were basically still a newlywed couple with a little baby – Sophie. We found ourselves experiencing the worst bout of bad luck ever. I was working construction, piece meal, 12 hours a day, 7 days a week and barely making enough to make ends meet. (I have learned that money is relative.) We were trying to get into a house, but we were having no success everywhere we turned. One house had structural problems. Another had a cloud on the title. After some serious praying, we felt that we needed to move to Arizona.

So in our prayer, we told God, “You need to make this happen. We need money if we are going to move.” That day, our tax return arrived in the mail. We paid all of our bills, loaded as much of our belongings as we could into our Mercury Topaz, and gave away the rest of our belongings and drove to Arizona.

This is where our real venture into United Order began. Martha and I lived in my parents’ house in Mesa, along with my brother and his wife. The day I arrived in Arizona, I found a job hunting for natural gas leaks for the gas company. My dad worked as a social worker. My brother worked in the lab. Every week, when we got paid, the three of us put our paychecks into the proverbial “common pot”. From that pot, we paid all of our bills together, bought our gas and groceries, and if there was anything left, we took care of entertainment, or put it into a surplus fund. (There was rarely anything left.)

We got up every morning at 4AM for prayers. The wives cooked and cleaned together. We ate together. Although there were some drawbacks of being 25 and living with your parents – and there were a few minor disputes among the women about the chores – this was a happy time. We all felt united and that our needs were met.

But there was a general feeling that this lifestyle would work better out of the city and in a more rural setting. Our small neighborhood was nice – mostly Mormon – but we were surrounded by bad neighborhoods with a lot of gang activity. Any given evening, one could step onto the front porch and listen to gunfire coming from nearby neighborhoods. Someone tried to break into our house once, and on another occasion someone stole all of my tools out of my truck.

On the weekends, we would drive around Arizona, looking for land. Prescott, Cottonwood, Flagstaff, Tucson – anywhere outside of the Phoenix area. After one such excursion, my parents found a 40 acre ranchette outside of the Show Low area, in eastern Arizona. I knew this area, because as a Boy Scout, many of our outdoor activities took place here. It was high elevation, pine trees, lakes – and a lot cooler weather than Phoenix. It was a place that you would not soon forget, and I felt good about it.

So one February afternoon, the whole Jessop clan drove up from Phoenix to look at this land. It was located about five miles off of the highway down a bumpy stretch of dirt road. The property was a piece of windy rangeland with only a few juniper trees – a perfect circle of earth surrounded by rolling mountains and a huge expanse of blue sky. The only trace of civilization was the jet contrails high in the sky. It felt safe. I loved it immediately.

We bought the place with cash that the United Order had set aside, and the next project was to put a well on it. My dad asked me to put a stake down where we wanted the well and the tank. I walked around the empty property, and it was the only time I ever “witched” a well. Looking around the sagebrush, I searched until I found a place that “felt” right. We hit water 100 feet before most of our neighbors did, and it was sweet water. Our property sits on top of a lava bed that serves as a natural filtration system, and you can taste it.

My father put his home up for sale, and my brother put his home in Utah on the market. With the proceeds, we purchased two double-wide trailers to set up on our new property. But between the sale of the homes and the set up of the mobile homes there was a period of about two weeks when we were homeless.

In December, 1995, Martha and I again loaded up all of our belongings into our car, along with our two babies and headed into the wilderness. We lived out of a motel, and I drove down the snow-covered dirt every day to oversee the set up of the trailers. We spent Christmas in the motel, and by New Year’s Eve, we were in our new home.

There was no electricity. The nearest power source was over four miles away. Back in Mesa, I was an avid Trekkie. My day finished out regularly with an episode of “The Next Generation”, and suddenly here I was without a TV. Entertainment consisted of reading a book by candlelight in a drafty trailer, hoping the flame would not blow out.

And there was no plumbing. We had a well and water. But no septic tank. The toilet was a toilet seat set on top of a bucket. You would take the contents of the bucket somewhere on the large expanse of the property, dig a hole with a shovel and bury it.

The first day there, I refused to do this. In the mud and muck, I drove my car up the hill and sloshed through the mud until I found a nice juniper tree to do my business. But the car got stuck in the mire, and I had to walk home with the awful clay mud you find here caking to my shoes. The mud froze in the night, and when I finally got my car out the next day I had to chip the mud away from the wheel wells with a chisel and hammer. My next visit to town, the frozen mud caused my wheel bearings to drop and bounce merrily away, leaving me stranded.

And it was cold. We bought propane heaters and set them up in the kitchen, but they barely did the trick. The heat barely reached the bedrooms.

My first night there, the wind swept up over the Mogollon Rim and rushed across the plateau and blasted into the side of our trailer. The walls shook, and Sophie started to cry. She wouldn’t stop, and Martha asked me to go get my father so that we could administer a blessing to her. I stepped out into the cold to walk over to my father’s trailer. The ice crunched beneath my shoes, and the stars – unobsctructed by any city lights – were brighter than any I had ever seen. I looked at my watch and saw that it was midnight – the New Year. As the wind howled over this cold place, I wondered, “What the hell am I doing here?”

In the next installment, I will discuss how I adjusted to life on “The Land”, and how we continued living the United Order there.

The Winter of Our Discontent

Our Living Conditions, Part 3

So when I was a kid, my father explained to me a little bit about the United Order.

This can be a bit overwhelming to a nine year-old. In the ultimate sacrifice, I imagined consecrating all of my belongings to God, and men from the Church coming into my room to cart away all of my most cherished possessions. I pictured them boxing up the Conan and Tarzan books that I loved so much and taking them away to serve the greater good. What a sacrifice that would be. God would then know that I was willing to give up everything in His honor.

Even though I may not have understood everything my father taught me, the teachings did make an impression on me. Growing up as a teen in the decadent 80s, there was a lot of pressure to conform. Wearing Polo, Reeboks, designer clothing was an imperative. I reacted by going as “non-conformist” as possible. I used my lunch money to buy used clothes from the thrift store – the uglier, the better. Loud paisley shirts from the 60s, mustard yellows, puke greens. I spiked my hair with egg whites and wore guyliner. Why? Because, in my overdeveloped sense of idealism, everything that bucked the system was good. (Ironically I became well-known in my high school as someone with a high fashion sense.)

More importantly, I became aware of social issues. I read many of the underground punk/ anarchist “’zines” that preached dropping out of society by scavenging – eating only cast-away food and wearing only used clothes. I decided on my own to read “The Communist Manifesto”, and the idea of redistributing the wealth to the masses resembled what I had been taught about the United Order. So, there at the tail end of the Cold War, I decided that I was a communist.

When I was old enough to register to vote, our high school set up a booth where students could register. The lady behind the desk asked me if I would register as Republican or Democrat. Can you imagine the shock on her face when I said, “Neither. I want to register with the Communist Party.”

Sure, it was mostly the shock factor.

I remember my junior year, being interviewed by a panel from the American Legion for entry into Boy’s State. I cringe now (and laugh a little) as I remember telling these old veterans of the Korean War that I was a communist. Needless to say, I was NOT selected for Boy’s State. When I was a student in Belgium, I met many communists. One of them sat across from me and blew cigarette smoke in my face.

"You know, I really hate your country,” he said (in his thick French accent). Then I started to speak of the proletariat, dialectical materialism and the “bourgeoisie”, and he wound up later telling me, “You know, you are the first nice American I have ever met!”

This phase was short-lived. I quickly rejected Marxism, but this whole experience left me with a great distrust of wealth and the people who have it. I remember arguing in college with a friend, insisting that people only became rich by somehow enslaving others. (Sorry about that, Poppy.) I saw no purpose or meaning in spending my time in the pursuit of money. As long as I had “sufficient for my needs”, that was all I needed. Having anything else would be sinful, and, deep down, I felt that I didn’t deserve anything else. I was already placing myself in a poverty mindset that I even now am trying to break.

In 1988, while I was away studying in Belgium, I received news that my father had been called into the stake president’s office to be reprimanded for his belief in plural marriage. Within a year, he was excommunicated, and a year later, so was I, along with the rest of my family. My father found a book on United Order, and, in it, there was a special baptismal ceremony that was used for bringing people into the order. Since we were alone in Arizona and knew no one else who believed the same as we did, my father decided to initiate the United Order with his own family.

So we set up a portable swimming pool in the back yard, and early one summer morning in 1990, my father baptized us all into a United Order. For me, a college student working my way through school at an auto parts store, it meant that I gave half of my money to my dad and kept the other half for my education and entertainment. It didn’t feel any different than paying rent and helping with the bills.

The whole family eventually moved to Utah and joined the Allred Group (AUB), where I soon married Martha. There were several quasi-United Orders set up. One in Southern Utah, and one in Santaquin. My father set out immediately to try and join one of them. But one of the members of the Council, Bill Baird, cautioned my father against this, pointing out that many of these orders already had built in problems.

“You have everything you need within your own family to live the United Order,” Bill told my father.

So for the next ten years, I practiced living the United Order with my father and my brothers. There were some good experiences and some bad ones. I will tell you in the next installment what I learned.

Our Living Conditions, Part Deux

(Once again, Sophie took all the photos in this segment.)

There was a scene in the 1986 movie “The Mission” where the visiting Catholic cardinal visits a plantation run by indigenous people on a Spanish mission in disputed territory in Paraguay in the mid-1700s. The cardinal asks what is done with the profits from the plantation, and the priest – an Indian – answers that the profits are divided between the workers.

“Ah,” observes the cardinal. “There is a French radical group that practices that doctrine.”

“Your eminence,” answers the Indian priest innocently. “It was a doctrine of the Early Church.”

This utopian idea that the early Christians shared all things in common and “had no poor among them” appealed to my dad as a young man – in particular how this applied to Mormonism in the 19th Century.

As early as Kirtland, Ohio in the 1830s, the founder of the Mormon Church, Joseph Smith, was experimenting with communal living – called the United Order, with its accompanying principle, the Law of Consecration.

The Law of Consecration is supposed to work this way – everything that you have you “consecrate” to the Church. Of course, people’s definitions of what it means to “consecrate” your belongings can vary from person to person. United Order is supposed to work in the following manner – you consecrate everything you have to an agent of the Church – usually a bishop. This means that you give your property, holdings and equity over to this person, and they are supposed to deed back to you what you need to make a living. The rest of your property is then supposed to be common property of the Saints. From that point on, you are supposed to yearly consecrate your surplus to the bishop as well.

That is all fine and dandy, except that there was not one United Order in the Mormon Church that was handled the same way. Each one was different – from the one in Ohio, to those in Missouri and Illinois, and finally to those under Brigham Young in Utah.

Joseph Smith intended the United Order to be the reintroduction of Mosaic economic law in these latter-days. However, some have said that Sidney Rigdon influenced Joseph Smith when he brought some of his ideas of French communism that he had practiced in some of the Protestant sects he had belonged to previously. And in Utah, there is evidence that suggests that some of the Utah United Orders were Brigham Young’s experiments in Marxism after he read “The Communist Manifesto”. Orderville was one such United Order.

Just a word about Orderville. I could not have lived there. Even though it was one of the longest lived orders – and one of the most successful – it was one of the most strict. The Jewish kibbutzim in Israel have nothing on Orderville. They decided when and what you ate. There was a dress code, and the rules of conduct were so rigid that you could get kicked out of the order for practically anything.

The thing about United Order in Utah – it did not last. By the turn of the century, practically no one in the Church was living United Order anymore. It became an outlawed practice, like plural marriage. And in the minds of many, plural marriage and United Order were indelibly connected. In fact, it was Brigham Young who said, “The fullness of the gospel is plural marriage and United Order.”

So when Mormon fundamentalists organized themselves in the late 1920s, it is no coincidence that – not only did they begin to practice plural marriage again – but they began to practice a form of United Order.

I think it is interesting to note that many of the prominent figures in the early Mormon fundamentalist movement in the 1930s and 40s were also members of the Communist Party. Lyman Jessop considered himself a communist, and Joseph Musser campaigned for the Communist Party. In our post-Cold War era, this may seem shocking, un-American or plain silly. But I must point out that this was in the days before the follies of Soviet Marxism or Communist China were made manifest. And as far as being un-American, these were people whose fathers and grandfathers had been imprisoned and persecuted by the American government, and many of these men were imprisoned themselves by the FBI, many while there sons were fighting in the South Pacific. If you take this in consideration with the fact that United Order seemed on the surface to resemble communism, it is not that shocking that many of them belonged to the Communist Party.

Around 1935, the Barlow brothers joined up with the Johnson family to buy some land right on the Utah-Arizona border – and area called Short Creek (now the location of Colorado City/ Hildale, seat of the FLDS Church.) They intended to live United Order, and they invited any who wished to live with them to relocate. Many men did.

One of those men who went to investigate was Lyman Jessop (mentioned above). He read the charter for the order, called the United Effort Trust. He was disturbed. As I mentioned earlier, you consecrate to the Church, and then you are deeded back your stewardship, or inheritance. And you are supposed to hold title to this. But in Short Creek, the leaders held title to ALL land, and no one could own any property. You could build your home on a piece of property leased to you by the leaders. But the land was owned by the hierarchy. This disturbed Lyman Jessop, and this issue was one the problems that eventually led to “The Spilt” – the division of the FLDS and the AUB.

One man who lived in Short Creek in he 1940s told me a story. While he was up on the Kaibab plateau, working on lumber, the priesthood leadership barged into his home while his horrified wife looked on. They collected all of his food and redistributed it to people in need, leaving him with only a couple of jars of canned peaches.

“I had no freedom to make any of my own decisions,” he said. “About the only thing I could decide for myself was whether or not to get my wife pregnant.”

As I write this, I know of at least a dozen United Orders in Utah, Arizona and surrounding states. Communism is alive and well in America. LOL

But back to my dad. A young BYU student sits in the restricted section of library circa 1969. In order to read the forbidden books, he has had to arrange to have a professor sit across from him while he reads. He is not allowed to copy from the books, or to take them out of the library. They are controversial books on Mormon history and doctrine, filled with teachings no longer allowed by the Church. He read about plural marriage, the Adam-God Doctrine and about United Order.

He looks up at the bored professor sitting across from him and asks an incredulous question.

“Is this true? Did the early brethren really teach these things?”

The professor gives him a knowing smirk. “Yes. They did.”

The young man goes home and ponders these things for years, dreaming about how to live these things again. He talks to wife about them. He gets reprimanded by his bishop and by the church general authorities for talking about these things openly. He is threatened with excommunication. He teaches his children about them.

Now it is circa 1979, and this young man now has his nine year-old son with him. They are driving a green cargo van through the hot Mojave Desert, outside of Barstow, California on one of many business trips. The young man speaks for hours with his son about Mormon doctrines – including United Order. The boy hardly understands any of it. But he listens anyway.

Next time, I will talk about my father and his teachings of United Order, and how I decided to practice it.

Our Living Conditions, Part 1

So, the White Mountains has been assaulted by snow for the last several days, and I haven’t had much chance to get online. I have been meaning to make a series of posts that deal with my “Living Conditions”. I put that in capital letters, because this seems to be the main criticism that I have drawn. Even Dawn Porter, as her van withdrew from my humble abode, seemed to be gasping – not so much at the polygamy – but at our living conditions.

Take the following selection from one blog as an example:

http://kelley-penonpaper.blogspot.com/2008/11/tube-review-forbidden-love-polygamy.html

“Dawn then goes out into the wilderness of Arizona to meet with a Polygamist man who agrees to meet with her on camera. None of the more "Respectable" men were willing to go on camera. Moroni is a man who's made his life in literally the middle of no where. They live in a trailer that Dawn describes as being like the Tardis, (surprisingly spacious for it's outward appearance) which cracked me up. When she speaks with this family, the differences are quite obvious, this man is indeed in love with these women and he does provide a life life for them and his children as well. But living in isolation as they do, where they have removed their oldest children from mainstream education, opens them to further probing questions. Dawn asks Moroni if he were in a monogamous relationship with Martha, his first wife, that he would indeed have committed adultery, that he is a polygamist at heart. But aside from that, he admits to the hardship of being a polygamist husband, and that it was so difficult the first year, that both women were alternately angry with with him, and one day they were all ok. He also admits to being afraid that he won't be able to satisfy the sexual demands of his wives, but they are still on the market for a third wife, in their tiny hovel that has no electricity or plumbing.”

This post was pretty typical. The first thing I wondered was – what the heck is a TARDIS?? Then I Googled it. It is an acronym that stands for TIME AND RELATIVE DIMENSIONS IN SPACE. This refers to a structure that is smaller on the outside, but much larger on the inside. Kind of like tents in Harry Potter. The term originated on the TV show Dr. Who (remember the elevator?), and I loved Dr. Who.

The term fits so well. It really does look smaller on the outside than it is on the inside. It is small, but it feels like home.

The question is – how did we wind up in such a small space? Was it by design? I hope to answer that.

First of all, I must say – even though I am a “dirt poor construction worker”, I am certainly not Mr. Fix-it. My wives have been cursed by the fact that they married a man who couldn’t lift up a hammer to save his life. I was the quintessential suburban kid. I wasn’t raised on a farm. I spent my early years in retail. I never built anything. I would rather read a book than chalk a line. My part in the construction industry has always been administrative. I am the paperwork guy on the jobsite.

As I said, this has been the curse of my wives. They would have had a better life if I was Mr. Fix-it. This is something that any man considering to homestead it should consider before he goes into the wild.

When Incubator TV first approached me, I had no trepidation about speaking publically about plural marriage. The first thing that I thought about was people seeing where (and how) we live. We rarely have guests, because we don’t have an adequate living room space. We have nowhere for guests to stay the night, because every available bed space is being used in our home. We usually put guests up at my mom’s more comfortable accommodations nearby.

We nearly said no to the whole thing, mainly because of our living conditions. So when a stranger comments on our “hovel”, we feel it very keenly. We are not forcing ourselves to live in this way due to some ascetic practice – it has been all circumstantial.

In my next post, I will have to take you all the way back. I will discuss United Order, the Law of Consecration, communism, Marxism and how these relate to Mormonism and my lifestyle.

By the way, the photos in this segment were all taken by my daughter Sophie.

A Sisterwife's Gift

Years ago, when Celine Dion started doing her weekly show in Vegas, I promised my wife Temple that I would take her to Vegas to see the show.

Now, I am not a Celine Dion fan. I would rather hear a Power Vac go through a garbage disposal than hear Celine Dion sing live. (I am remembering Colin's kayak jokes.) But that is not the point. Temple loves Celine Dion. Let me rephrase that. Temple looooooooves Celine Dion.

So last fall, I was assigned to do a job in Vegas, I thought, "Here is my chance to take Temple to see her idol." I could bring in Temple to Vegas while I was working and let her go to the show.

Little did I know... Celine was ending her stint in Vegas last December and tickets skyrocketed to anywhere from $600 to $1500 a ticket. There was NO WAY I could afford to take Temple to one of those shows. I sadly informed her that I would not be able to keep my promise.

At the end of November, 2006, they announced that Celine Dion would be performing a show in Phoenix, AZ on December 6, 2008 - on what was to be her last tour. They advised people to get tickets, because they were expecting to sell out within a few days.

Again, I was kicking myself, because I wouldn't get paid on time to get tickets.

Little did I know - Martha arranged to get tickets on her own. One for her, and one for Temple.

All year, Temple has been bemoaning the fact that she would miss the concert, and, all year, Martha has been gloating, because she knew that Temple would be going.

On Thanksgiving, Martha finally announced to Temple that they were going to the concert. Temple was literally in tears.

So last night, my wives left for Phoenix and left the kids with me. Tonight, Temple will have her dream fulfilled of seeing Celine Dion in concert - thanks to her sisterwife, Martha.

And there are some who strain to believe that two women can share the same man and still love each other...



.

Article from "The Orion"

Here is an article from California State University's magazine - The Orion. It is feedback from "Forbidden Love: Polygamy" on TLC:



Show sheds polygamy stigma, views positives
By: Kelly Chandler
Issue date: 12/3/08 Section: Opinion

Love is more than just a game for two. Try three, four or even five.

The simplest states of love are difficult to endure, so I can only imagine how much that difficulty intensifies in a forbidden love affair such as polygamy.

To make it clear, having multiple husbands or wives doesn't bother me as much as what's generally associated with polygamy: the abuse, the compounds, the brainwashing and the sense of powerlessness for women.

However, polygamy is no longer just a religious, male-dominated world of abuse. It has more positively become an individual's choice to live an alternative lifestyle full of love, commitment and strong family values.

After watching a TV series on TLC about polygamy I found there are quite a few positive points:

In a polygamist household, the husband commits to every wife and every child for life. Abandoning any of them isn't an option. With high rates of divorce and fatherless families in traditional marriages, it seems maybe polygamists can teach some of us a lesson in commitment.

More wives or husbands in the house means more helping hands. Household chores become easier because everyone shares the workload. Having more help cuts the tasks in half, allowing more personal time for the parents to relax.

Children are also never left unattended. In many conventional marriages both parents work outside the home, leaving children unattended. A National Youth Violence Prevention Resource Center report states that children and teens who are not supervised by adults during after-school hours are more likely to use alcohol, drugs and tobacco; receive poor grades or drop out of school; engage in risky sexual behavior; or get arrested and carry and use weapons. Having multiple sets of eyes watching the children at all times would help to prevent those things from happening.

Some people would argue that having sex with multiple wives is not love or a commitment at all. However, about 24 percent of men and 14 percent of women have had sex outside their marriage, according to a national study by University of San Francisco. Infidelity is prominent in a lot of relationships and a wedding ring and vows won't be enough to change the temptation to stray. It's hypocritical to condemn polygamy, because people have sex outside their marriages all the time with no remorse.

When people hear about polygamy they usually associate it with men having multiple wives, but it can also be women having multiple husbands. Why don't more women have multiple husbands? Well, since polygamist families generally have a lot of children, I figured the woman would be pregnant all the time, and that alone is probably enough to deter most women, not to mention that dealing with so much testosterone would be a full-time job in itself.

But the bigger question is: Why does America consider polygamy forbidden? It seems anything that threatens or challenges traditional marriage is seen as immoral. I don't see polygamy as a threat to traditional marriage. Marriage has in itself managed its own demise - polygamy wasn't an accomplice.

Loving multiple people and making a lifetime commitment to them is not immoral. What is immoral is the denial of a person's right to marry whom he or she loves.

When people date around it's easy to like multiple people, and it's very possible for those relationships to eventually turn into love. Polygamists consider those multiple relationships as additions to the family, which a lot of nonpolygamists don't understand. Traditional marriage may be the norm, but that doesn't necessarily make it the right way to live. Polygamy is a different lifestyle but it should still be accepted.

The definition of traditional marriage is outdated and discriminatory and should be changed to fit everyone's interests, whether that's between a straight couple, gay couple or between multiple people.

Marriage is about love, and love, whoever it's between, still maintains the same values: a strong affection based on admiration, devotion, benevolence and common interests. That happiness should be available to everyone.

Kelley Chandler can be reached at kchandler@theorion.com

.

Polyblogger Takes on DNews

The Salt Lake Tribune posted a blog and gave my blog a shout-out:

http://blogs.sltrib.com/slcrawler/2008/11/polyg-blogger-takes-on-dnews.htm



Polygamous blogger Moroni Jessop (his name, alone, is a road map of western polygamy) fires back at the Mormon church-owned Deseret News after its TV critic Scott Pierce slammed a documentary of Jessop's family.

Pierce says Forbidden Love on TLC is not only "laughably bad" television, but reporter Dawn Porter "is apparently incapable of spending 30 seconds doing research on the Internet."

Porter is also incapable of understanding that Mormons do not practice polygamy. That it was abandoned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1896.

What Porter says in the film that Pierce finds ridiculous is this:

Polygamy means one husband and lots of wives. It's a basic tenet of the Mormon Church. Now it's outlawed, but many fundamentalist Mormons hide out in the middle of nowhere in Utah and the states around it.

The issue here, of course, is who gets to define what "true" Mormonism is, the church headquartered in Salt Lake City, or the so-called fundamentalists like Jessop who are scattered throughout the West?

Jessop, who says he has "two wives and many happy children," (above) critiques the critic, calling Pierce a "Mormon Twit/Journalist," and his review of Forbidden Love simply LDS church propaganda:


. . . Maybe Dawn called us Mormons, because WE call ourselves Mormons. Arguably, we have more right to call ourselves “Mormons” than the ever-morphing LDS Church. We claim and teach all the old foundational teachings of the early founders of the Mormon church whereas the LDS Church has compromised their tenets to appear more mainstream and palatable to society.

The two articles are a point-counterpoint package that you might find more entertaining than the original film.


Here was one of the comments that an anonymous poster made:

"All I need to know about this show I can gather from the picture: A semi-literate polyg clan standing in front of a double wide.it's like something right out of "Deliverance".Wow. Nothing makes polygammy more atractive than mobile homes."


And here is my glorious response:

"I enjoyed your blog. But I especially enjoyed being called "semi-literate" by someone who cannot even spell "polygammy". The sad fact that I live in a trailer has nothing to do with how literate I am."

Merry Wives' Blog - "Why Is My Life 'Forbidden Love'?"

This is a blog post written by Ruth, one of the wives from Centennial Park featured on "Forbidden Love: Polygamy":

http://merrywives.wordpress.com/2008/11/28/why-is-my-life-forbiddin-love/



WHY IS MY LIFE “FORBIDDIN LOVE”?
November 28, 2008 by natalie
The “Forbiddin Love” polygamy show with Dawn Porter aired in the USA. Very interesting indeed, since we were told that this show would only show in the UK. However after alot of venting, I have decided to be at peace with whatever message was supposed to go out.

It is true, Dawn Porter came at a very heated time, the week after the raid in Texas. All of us were feeling oppressed with dark clouds following us everywhere. Even though we are not part of the FLDS, the blow to these people were deeply felt. Heartsick, we watched the atrocities and civil right violations played out in a disgusting inhumane way. The helplessness that we felt intensified. Tabloided and scandalous remarks were made by irresponsible media, making the damage irreparable. Taking all of this into consideration, canceling the Dawn Porter interview was our first knee jerk reaction. Instead, we decided it might help demystify and normalize our lifestyle. It was a gamble, but we went for it.

There are many lessons to be learned when participating with media. We are too trusting and are usually disappointed with the end product. Nevertheless there were enlightening conversations and debates that took place. My children loved participating in these conversations and became fond of Dawn and her film crew. We may have challenges and interesting complexities, but the unique fabric of our family is what makes our life so great! My family is not perfect, but at the end of the day, I am grateful for each one of them. I don’t call this “forbidden love”, I call this true love.

-Ruth

Moroni Jessop, Monkey Jumping Up & Down

As I mentioned, there has been much activity in my life since “Forbidden Love: Polygamy” aired on TLC a couple of weeks ago. (It is supposed to rerun a couple of times in December as well.)

Most of it has been positive. People from across the States have emailed me out of the blue, thanking me for my example. Some have stated that their wives struggled with the concept of plural marriage until they watched the show or read the blog.

There has been some negative response, but, surprisingly, most of it has come from my own community – the people that I am supposed to be closer to than anyone else. Mostly, the negative response is found in their stony stares and silent disapproval.

First of all, I must state – I did not make the decision to participate in this show alone. I presented the idea to the priesthood leadership of our community, and no one objected. There was some concern as to the motives of the producers, but we all were in agreement that it might be a good thing.

However, this did not prevent one lady in our group (whom I respect very much) from telling my wife (they never tell me to my face – always to my wives) that I am “a monkey jumping up and down, saying, ‘Look at me! Look at me!’”

Ouch. And this is supposed to be from the people that love me?? Is this what they think of me?

First of all, in 2001, I discovered that the Internet might be a good place to find more wives. After a couple of years of failed attempts, a couple of crazy cat ladies and a few fake personas later, I came to the conclusion that the Web was NOT a good place to meet wives. But it was an excellent place to network with people who believe the same as I do, or to answer the questions of those who are wanting to know more.

So I stared a furious campaign of putting myself onto the Net. I started posting on discussion boards and talking about my family, how we lived and what was working for me. I did it with such a passion. I felt driven, even to the point that I knew that I was being driven, but not exactly to what end. Even when my community suffered a division a couple of years ago, I still felt driven, and that amazed me, because our community was being pulled apart and I still felt the drive.

Even then, there were many in our community who criticized my activity on the Internet. People would get up in Priesthood or Sacrament Meetings and unequivocally state, “We should not be preaching on the Internet.” No names were mentioned. But EVERYONE knew who the speaker was talking about.

This attitude was not unique to MY community, but belongs to most Mormon fundamentalists. One item that I got from a good source (and I am pretty proud about this one) was that the Allred Group (AUB) developed their “No Internet Preaching” policy based completely on my omnipresence on the Internet. And this is because of my complete willingness to discuss taboo subjects – plural marriage, endowment ceremonies, garments, second annointings, etc. If someone tells me to shut up, generally, I will shout louder.

(However, I have always been consistent in keeping people’s identities secret and respecting privacy.)

And doing the show was merely an extension of this insatiable “drive”. In July, 2007, I prayed for an opportunity, and in July, 2007, I was approached by the producers at Incubator.

This fear/ loathing that Mormon fundamentalists have for the media stems from the poor treatment that the media has afforded polygamists. And polygamists who go to the media are also maligned by us. I used to think that Tom Green was such a loser until my recent experience. I recently read his paper entitled “Why We Talk To The Media”, and his arguments sound a lot like mine. I have a kinder view towards him now. (Although I never married a thirteen year-old, and I never went on Jerry Springer, shouting, “Your just mad, because I get more than you.”) (On second thought, I DID say a couple of stupid things myself.)

In Tom Green’s paper, he talks about viewing Alex Joseph (polygamist icon of the 70s) with contempt. Tom even uses the same argument that I myself have used:

“Don’t hide your light under a bushel, but let your light so shine before men that they will see your good works and glorify your Father in Heaven.”

The paranoia and fear that polygamists have goes even deeper. At the root of it is that we, as a people, have had our civil rights violated. In the 1940s, the FBI (encouraged by the Mormon Church) busted down the doors of dozens of polygamist men and drug sleeping husbands out of their beds while wives and children looked on in horror. These men rotted in prison for years simply for living their religion. In 1953, the whole community of Short Creek was arrested, and women and children – like at the YFZ Ranch earlier this year – were carted away by the busload.

Government is supposed to protect people in their rights. Is it any wonder that the polygamists distrust the government or the media? These people would not even talk amongst themselves who was married to who. Marriages took place in secret behind closed doors, and you never divulged who performed the marriage. Children were taught not to talk about the other wives. There was no cake, no reception. The identity of your husband was a secret, and your husband would sneak in through the back door to see you, or he would risk going to jail.

Then along come performing monkeys like me, who have no fear of going to the media, talking openly about our lifestyle. Is it any wonder that I am viewed with contempt??

When my wife Martha argued with this respected woman about going to the media, Martha pointed out that Lyman Jessop had gone to the media back in the 1940s. This woman became irate and pointed out that Lyman’s case was different. Lyman was forced to do so.

“You have no clue what our family was going through when we made the decision to do this!” Martha insisted.

Lyman Jessop was one of the polygamists who was put in prison in the 1940s. Like me, he was a poor man. He had three wives and many, many children. In an attempt to show the world that polygamists are normal people, he (along with prominent doctor Rulon Allred) invited Life Magazine into their home for a photo shoot of life in a polygamist household.

My family also decided to do this out of fear. My brother was going through a highly publicized divorce case, and the media had already been to our home, to my former place of work, and we had a hate monger named Flora Jessop trying to dig up dirt on me. In light of the FLDS fiasco in Texas, I concluded that – if I did not speak for myself – someone else would. In retrospect, I still feel that it was the right decision, and I would do it all over again.

It is generally understood that Tom Green went to prison, because the government wanted to make an example of him. That is he had kept his mouth shut that none of this would have happened to him. I am aware that the same could happen to me. Do I want to go to jail? No! Do I want to have my children taken away from me?? No, no, NO!! The thought is terrifying to me.

But we come back to the “driven” part. I refuse to live in fear. I know that many people will hate me for speaking up. I also know that many people will listen. So to you polygamists who despise me for speaking up, to those of you who are embarrassed by me, I am sorry. I don’t mean to hurt you, and I love you.

But please put some distance between you and me if you fear what I am doing, because I have just begun to speak out. And I am not likely to be quiet in the future. I can’t.

Feedback From The TLC Show

Okay, having “Forbidden Love: Polygamy” air several days ago on TLC was a different experience from having Dawn’s show air in Great Britain. Mainly because all of our friends and families got to watch the show.

First of all, let me clarify something – “Forbidden Love: Polygamy” and “Dawn Porter: The Polygamist’s Wife” are the SAME SHOW. I got an email from one friend, asking me when I was going to give it a break. I am not becoming a media whore (yet), because this was the same show – one had one name in the UK, and the other version had a different name here across the Pond.

(Btw, there is another show that is an extension of this shoot that is due to air on History Channel sometime next year.)

There were some difference between the British and American versions, though. For instance, TLC thought that the “Moroni makes whoopee” and the “she’s humping my husband” comments were too racy.

The person who struggled most with the show airing here in the States was our daughter Sophie. It was one thing to have the show air in front of 1.8 million people in a country not your own. But to be seen by people that you go to high school with – Sophie was mortified. She did the whole teen girl bit and cried in her room, and when she came out, I told her, “Sophie, it’s on TLC, not ABC. How many people are going to watch it?”

The next day, there was a group of girls waiting at Sophie’s locker. One of them asked her, “Sophie, have you ever been on TV?”

“Um, yeah,” Sophie replied.

“What were you on TV for?”

“Because of my family.”

“That is so cool,” they said, and they walked away. Sophie said that she got funny looks all day. (As a consolation prize, I bought her the “Twilight” soundtrack.)

One of the teachers confronted Temple at school and jokingly asked for an autograph.

Every day, word is coming in to me about different friends and family who have watched the program. I got an email from a family friend whom I have not seen in over twenty years. I have heard that some of my extended family was really embarrassed by my appearance. I feel bad about this. Who wants to be an embarrassment?

Most of my family viewed it as a comedy, and Dawn did not make a good impression on my family, in general. The whole family laughed as Dawn went “deeper into the desert to meet a man named Moroni” as the screen showed a blowing tumbleweed and eerie music played.

I have heard that my sister moaned, “Moroni, why? Why??” when she watched me admit that I would have probably strayed in my marriage had I not been a polygamist.

The most painful comments are those from people in my own community. Virtually none of these comments are made to my face, but they end up floating back to me. The derision that my family has drawn is astounding. There was one man who told me to my face, and I really appreciated it. He thought that my appearance on TV might bring risk to his business, because of his associations with me. I don’t see how it would, though.

None of them understand my reasons. And my reasons have to do with not hiding your light under a bushel, but being a light on the hill.

It has been fun reading the comments. Here is one from a blog called “Media Sluts”. (I love the name.):

“Dawn spent a day with another family, who lived in a double-wide trailer in the middle of nowhere, she said with no water or electricity. There were two wives, and I think six children? The oldest daughter was 14, seemed relatively normal, and said she wasn't sure whether she'd like a polygamist marriage or not. The two wives were young and attractive-looking, and the girls were all wearing pants! However, husband Moroni (yes, his name sounds very close to "moron," but he says it's an old family name) admits that there was jealousy between his wives at first. He also says he's looking to add a third..! But he's apparently been turned down more than once, needing his other wives to console him. (Hmm, maybe they found out what the living arrangement was going to be.) After spending a night at this home, Dawn says her goodbyes and gets into a waiting truck with her camera crew. She seems really shaken/upset, and kept saying what an experience it was staying there. Well, I think there were some things about this situation that didn't make it into the show, but they are mentioned in this blog entry, written by the host. (She also mentions how she picked up her colorful, vintage wardrobe for the show.)”

Wow, Martha and Temple were wearing pants! *gasp* What will those women think of next? Polygamy aside, people forget that Mormon women were the first women in our nation to have the right to vote. We are not Amish! I guess this is not a good time to bring up thongs! Ha!

Most of the comments were fairly positive. There were a few about polygamy not being sanctioned in the Bible. Come off of it! Most of the prophets in the Bible were polygamists. No sane person would believe that polygamy is not biblical.

One of my favorite comments was from the YouTube site:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t502voADIaM


“This Brit broad is about as smart as a dung beetle… I almost hoped she’d be kidnapped and made to have 20 kids.”

First of all, since I know Dawn, I can say that there is nothing dumb about her. She is very, very bright. But the comment made me laugh and laugh.

Anyway, many comments deal with our living conditions. I have been planning on going into that, but have had little time. I will get to it soon.

Mormon Twit/ Journalist Writing For Mormon Churched-Owned Tabloid Calls Me Non-Mormon Because Mormon Church Paid Him to Say So

Okay, so the Deseret News wrote a review of tonight’s “Forbidden Love: Polygamy”. You can read it for yourself:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705263055,00.html


Polygamy show stinks
By Scott D. Pierce
Deseret News
Published: Saturday, Nov. 15, 2008 12:08 a.m. MST

Let's not pull any punches here. Dawn Porter is no journalist and cable channel TLC is beyond irresponsible to air her laughably bad program about polygamy.

"Forbidden Love" (Sunday, 11 p.m., TLC) is rather ridiculous to begin with. Porter tells viewers that she's been single for four years and she's looking for love. But first she plans to "experience some of the most extreme ways that women find love and live with men."

Next week: geishas!

But first up: polygamists! And, apparently incapable of spending 30 seconds doing research on the Internet, Porter is also incapable of understanding that Mormons do not practice polygamy. That it was abandoned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1896.

"Polygamy means one husband and lots of wives. It's a basic tenet of the Mormon Church," Porter intones. "Now it's outlawed, but many fundamentalist Mormons hide out in the middle of nowhere in Utah and the states around it."

Again, 30 seconds of research and Porter would have discovered that it hasn't been a basic tenet of the Mormon Church in 118 years.

Porter traveled to Centennial Park, Ariz., to visit a family of polygamists at the time Texas authorities were raiding the FLDS compound. "I couldn't have chosen a worse moment to try and get into a Mormon household," she incorrectly states.

And, reading a headline in the Cedar City Spectrum, she tells viewers about the "400 children taken away from a polygamous Mormon family in Texas. Basically, allegations of child abuse and underage marriage."

So, she not only misinforms viewers because there is no such thing as a "polygamous Mormon family," but she ties the Mormon Church to "allegations of child abuse and underage marriage."

It's flabbergasting.

There are examples throughout the hour of Porter's incompetence. Multiple uses of phrases like "Mormon polygamists" and raising polygamist children to have "true Mormon values."

The show itself is a bore. Porter meets and talks to polygamists and, through a series of interviews, reveals ... pretty much nothing. And, if her "reporting" weren't so amateurish and misleading, it would be almost funny.

It's not so much about the people she's "reporting" on, it's about Porter herself. How she feels about the prospects of entering a polygamous marriage. About how she'd be uncomfortable if her husband was sleeping with another wife.

Oh, and there's dramatic/eerie music playing in the background just to take this from cheesy to cheesiest.

There are moments that are so ludicrous you almost have to wonder if Porter is putting us on. It plays like a parody from "Saturday Night Live."

When she visits a polygamist and his two wives, Porter opines, "So Martha and Temple make house, while Moroni makes whoopee. Sounds like a good deal for a man. Time to take Moroni for a little walk."

Her analysis of the situation at Moroni's house?

"That was nuts. That was properly nuts," Porter says.

And, after discussing religious beliefs with one of the polygamist women, she actually says, "So there it is. The elephant in the room. God."

Profound and analytical she's not.

All of this would be laughable if Porter and TLC weren't so irresponsible. If this is the best TLC can come up with in the way of programming, just shut down the operation right now.


Okay, where do I start with this blatant piece of LDS propaganda other than to *expletive deleted*? Did you see that?? The whole basis for his criticism was that Dawn called us “Mormons”. Well, maybe Dawn called us Mormons, because WE call ourselves Mormons. Arguably, we have more right to call ourselves “Mormons” than the ever-morphing LDS Church. We claim and teach all the old foundational teachings of the early founders of the Mormon church whereas the LDS Church has compromised their tenets to appear more mainstream and palatable to society.

A decade ago, the LDS Church was trying to distance itself from the term “Mormon”. They came out with statements discouraging their members from using the word “Mormon” too often to describe themselves and to emphasize that they are Christians. Why? Because most people associate “Mormons” with practices deemed as bizarre according to modern standards – such as polygamy. And the LDS Church has been on a PR campaign for a while to “clean up its image” and distance itself from its controversial past. One way of doing that was to disassociate themselves from the appellation of “Mormon”.

Then a few years ago, “Big Love” comes out, and the LDS Church is mortified that the modern practice of polygamy is being associated with the Church – even though “Big Love” accurately depicted the current division between polygamist Mormons and mainstream LDS. They even show the discrimination and hostility that many (most) good Latter-Day Saints show to polygamists.

(Last night, my brother-in-law related to me that one of his good LDS neighbors in Utah told him that he wished their prophet would give the okay to kill polygamists, and then he would stock up on his ammunition.)

The LDS Church again issued further statements when the fiasco worsened in Texas this spring. This was due to the fact that polls revealed that most people assumed that the inhabitants of the YFZ Ranch had some connection to the Mormon Church. So in a move that made them look even more stupid, the LDS Church came out with press release after frickin’ press release stating that those who live polygamy today ARE NOT MORMON.

My question to the LDS Church is this: SO WHICH IS IT??? You don’t want to call yourselves “Mormons” anymore? But then you don’t want us to call ourselves “Mormons” either?? You can’t have it both ways. You can’t have your proverbial cake and then not expect me to have mine, too.

I have a couple of objections in the article:

“So, she not only misinforms viewers because there is no such thing as a ‘polygamous Mormon family,’ but she ties the Mormon Church to ‘allegations of child abuse and underage marriage.’”

There’s no such thing as a “polygamous Mormon family”? Dude! WE are a polygamous Mormon family!! We baptize our children. We study from the Book of Mormon. We may not have official manuals on what we are or aren’t allowed to teach, but at least we have the pure endowment with all the signs, tokens AND penalties still intact. If that’s not being Mormon, then I don’t know what is.

I was amazed at the level of support that the LDS Church gave to Arizona’s Proposition 102 and California’s Proposition 8. I was just speaking last week to a disaffected LDS man who said that the LDS Church TOLD their members how to vote, and that campaigning for it would count as a church calling. Conversely, those who campaigned AGAINST these propositions found that the Church took punitive action against them by revoking their temple recommends.

Why?? Is it because the Church is against gay marriages? Not so much as they are against polygamy. Proposition 102 put wording in the Arizona Constitution that defined marriage as between “ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN”. This is a definition that is intended to take away right from polygamists, and 90% of the campaign funds came from Mormons. Even though polygamy was once a practice of the Mormon Church, they now fight against those who practice it today, to the point that they are willing to campaign to have our rights taken away.

“Again, 30 seconds of research and Porter would have discovered that it hasn't been a basic tenet of the Mormon Church in 118 years.”

If it is not a tenet of the Mormon Church then why is Section 132 still in the Doctrine & Covenants. Take it out! Get rid of it! It teaches that polygamy is legal in the sight of God.

And the Church hasn’t practiced polygamy in 118 years? That is not true! Modern historians have shown that the Manifesto of 1890 that forbade the LDS from continuing polygamy was a sham, and that Church leaders continued living polygamy for 15 years after the fact. So it is more like 104 years, and they still teach it. I was taught in seminary when I was still in the LDS Church that polygamy was still a correct principle, just not one to be lived today, but in the distant future.

All in all, I would have to say that Dawn Porter is a far superior journalist than Scott Pierce. Dawn had no agenda in her reporting, and she is exactly who she presents herself to be. I respect Dawn and think highly of her for her integrity. Scott Pierce, on the other hand, is a journalist who has his leash and collar tied firmly to the LDS Church. That kind indentured servitude has no place in a free society that deserves unbiased reporting.

As far as whether or not I am a Mormon – I remember the day after my father was excommunicated from the LDS Church, the bishop and his counselors showed up at my house. They told my dad, that since he was no longer a member of the Church that he should take off his temple garments.

My dad looked them in the eye and refused to take off his garments. He told them, “I was a Mormon when I went to bed last night, and I was a Mormon when I got out of bed today.”

Forbidden Love: Polygamy

Dawn Porter's show is being aired in the States as "Forbidden Love: Polygamy" on TLC, tomorrow night, Sunday, November 16 at 10PM ET.

Just when I thought it was over...

BEARD

I have a new man in my life. His name is Beard. I kind of like him, even though he is itchy and hairy. I have not decided whether or not to keep him or not. But the way he is attached to me, the only way I will be able to get rid of him is to take a razor and scrape him off of me.

PREJUDICE - Alive & Well in St. Johns, AZ

So I am a discriminate consumer. If I like a place, I will shop there forever (until they give me a reason not to.) Even if they raise prices, I will keep shopping there. I am as faithful as a hound dog, and I never, ever cheat.

But mess with me, my family or my beliefs and I will boycott you forever. Take Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream. I love the stuff, but I will never again bring a spoonful of that creamy nectar to my lips. Why? Because they made a donation to Tapestry Against Polygamy. I cannot in good conscience patronize a business that supports a hate group.

Most of my early days in the workforce took place in retail, so the lost ethic of “customer service” was embedded in my psyche. I feel strongly about it. Even though it is virtually nonexistent here in the White Mountains of Arizona, I look for it, hope for it incessantly. And there is nothing like bad service to get me to shoot off a strong letter.

But combine bad customer with prejudice, and you will get not only a nasty letter, but a special mention in my blog.

Let me relate to you the incident in question:

Last Saturday, I was helping a buddy of mine with a project in Eagar, AZ. It is a small town about 60 miles from where I live, and I was planning on being there all day. But I forgot my insulin needles. So I called my wife Temple up and asked her to drive my needles out to me. I was already feeling the effects of being without insulin. So Temple drove all the way (with a new baby) and brought me some needles.

I took her to lunch, and then I signed a check and instructed her to fill up the tank at my favorite gas station in St. Johns. I have patronized this gas station for years, I know the owner, and even worked on her house a couple of years ago. I always write checks there, and this would not be the first time I had sent a check with Temple in this manner.

But on this day, there was a problem…

As Temple walked in to ask the attendant to turn on the pump, she saw the (female) clerk speaking with another customer. As Temple walked through the door, she heard the customer say to the clerk, “I hate polygamy! I could never live it.”

This was an awkward moment, but Temple gassed up and went in to pay with my check. The clerk looked at the check and asked her for her ID.

“This is not your named on the check,” the clerk said. “Who is this ‘Moroni Jessop’ listed on the check?”

Temple tried to explain the situation to her, that I had sent the check with her.

“Well, I don’t know who he is,” said the clerk. “What relation is he to you?”

Without thinking, Temple answered, “He’s my significant other.”

“Oh? And who is this ‘Martha’ lady that is also mentioned on the check?”

Temple was getting frustrated, because – besides it being a personal and private question – there were people in line behind her. But the clerk pressed on:

“Is this his ex-wife? Is this his current wife? Who is she?”

It is pretty damn obvious that the clerk knew who Temple was, who I was and what type of lifestyle we live, and that she was just trying to make life difficult for us. Temple was flustered and not sure how to answer the question.

“Why don’t you call him and ask him?” Temple asked desperately.

“Because there is no way that we could know it is really him on the phone,” the clerk snapped. “And you are not leaving until you find some way to pay this $55!”

Temple called me, in tears, and explained the situation to me. I was pissed. I called the gas station right away and got the clerk on the phone. The exchange went something like this:

Moroni: This is the “Moroni Jessop” that just sent a friend to write a check there.
What’s the problem?
Clerk: I don’t know who you are. The check isn’t in your “friend’s” name, and I can’t
accept it.
Moroni: Why not? I have written checks there for over a decade. The owners know me
and have always accepted my checks.
Clerk: Well, I don’t know who you are.
Moroni: I have written checks there for over a decade. I have done this before. I have
sent checks with people for over a decade. Right now, I am working in Eagar
right now. That’s why I sent the check.
Clerk: Well, I don’t know who you are. So I can’t accept this check.
Moroni: Call the owner. (I mentioned the owner by name.) Call the owner right now
and ask her if she’ll accept my check.
Clerk: There is no way that I am going to accept this check.
Moroni: Call the owner!
Clerk: Not a chance.
Moroni: If this is the way I am going to be treated after patronizing this gas station all of
these years, then you have lost a customer, and I am going to write a letter to
the owner to tell her how you have treated us.
Clerk : (yelling) Fine! Send a letter! I don’t care! (She hangs up on me.)

Temple wound up having to write a check out of her own account, which I was trying to avoid. This was not just an example of bad customer service, but an example of prejudice. It may not quite be Alabama of 1962. But it is pretty bad when someone goes out of their way to deny you a service simply because of prejudice against your lifestyle. I may be a polygamist, but I am also a consumer and a taxpayer. My money is just as good as anyone else’s.

You can bet that the owner will be getting a strong letter from me!

Sarine Sighting

My former sister-in-law Sarine was spotted cavorting at a polygamist dance at the RCA Building in Bluffdale, Utah recently. Even though she conspired with the anti-polygamist hate groups to create laws that would persecute polygamists in Arizona by shedding crocodile tears on camera, she is not above trolling for polygamist husbands in Utah whilst she dances the pat-a-cake polka.

Any takers? Apparently none. (Smart bastards.)

My Favorite Memory of Dawn Porter

My favorite memory of Dawn Porter was making small chit chat between takes. It went something like this:

Moroni: So what part of the UK are you from?

Dawn: I am from a small island called Guernsey. It’s off of the coast of France.

Moroni: Yeah, I know where Guernsey is.

Dawn: (surprised) Oh, you do?

Moroni: I’ve never been there, but I know where it is. So is this your first visit to the

United States?

Dawn: I’ve been here once before, a long time ago.

Moroni: And did you visit Arizona the last time?

Dawn: You know, I’m really not sure. Maybe you can tell me – is Arizona by Virginia?

Moroni: (pause) No.

Dawn: Then no, I’ve never been to Arizona.

Sophie, Ratings & Reruns

Our daughter Sophie was really mortified at having to participate in the shoot. It was this reticence that made her so enticing to the producers. They just had to interview her. So it was with glee today that I showed her some of the discussion on different blogs… just about her!

“I felt that she was trying to persuade the viewer that she was right and actually I remember at one point she asked one of the daughters what the benefits of having a family like that was, the camera showed a lot of err, hmm, etcs yet when she came up with reasons the video moved on from that before she could make on good point!”

And then:

“I remember the scene with the daughter (I initially thought she was a wife), and the girl looked uncomfortable about being interviewed, especially when asked if she would ever become involved in a polygamous relationship.”

Also, the ratings for the show was published by Broadcast, a British media journal, and they estimated that 1.8 million people watched the show. That’s 1.8 million people that I just invited into my tiny trailer!

The reruns have been drawing 110,000 people, and there is a rerun at 11PM this coming Tuesday.

Moroni Jessop's "Official" Review of "Dawn Porter: The Polygamist's Wife"

Yeah, you knew this was coming, didn’t you? I couldn’t watch the episode and then NOT comment on it. I downloaded it, and then Martha, Temple and I huddled around my laptop and watched it.

How was? Generally, I think it was pretty good. A dear friend of mine overseas watched it first and wrote me about it:

“I have just finished watching it. While ultimately Dawn decided polygamy was not for her, no surprises there... it was the most positive realistic documentary i have ever seen on polygamy. I think you are going to be really pleased! :)

“Nothing embarrassing was mentioned at all. I think you came across as very genuine my only disappointment was not hearing more from Temple and Martha.

“BTW...your kids are absolutely adorable!!!!!”

I agree. It was pretty positive, and I think that Dawn dealt with us pretty fairly. I do have a few points that I will criticize, however:

1. Centennial Park –

a. I really enjoyed this segment. I really don’t know that much about Centennial Park, only having been there a couple of times. I have had a few acquaintances from this town.

b. I found myself feeling a little bit jealous. They have such a nice home. I wish that I had a house like that, complete with my own “man cave”. LOL Their kids were so well-groomed and well-behaved. What an awesome family.

c. I really admired Ruth’s attitude and the fact that she was not afraid to express her opinions. She did not come across overly-zealous or kooky, either.

d. Come on, Boyd! You should have gone on air. Are ya chicken?? Did I have any less to risk? LOL

e. I was not aware that “gratisfy” was a word. That is kind of like the words “flustrated” or “ignernt”. They exist in the Utah vernacular, and nowhere else in the world.

2. Airtime –

a. The family in Centennial Park received much more airtime than my family.

b. That is because they are they are more what people envision when people imagine polygamists. They fit the stereotype, whereas there is nothing typical about my family.

c. My family, according to the producers, was more “standard”. In other words, if you took away the fact that we live plural marriage, there would be nothing remarkable about my family.

3. Chronology –

a. When Temple watched the episode, she was confused. “So they went to Centennial Park before they came here?” she asked. “They didn’t tell us that.”

b. “No,” I answered. “They came here before they went to Centennial Park. That is just something that they did for the storyline.”

c. The events at the YFZ/ FLDS compound took place AFTER our interview with Dawn. In fact, the raid in Texas happened the day after Dawn left our home.

4. Dawn went out to the “middle of nowhere” and had to “wait an hour” for me to pick her up –

a. Maybe it is in the middle of nowhere, but it is not THAT remote. We have gas stations, movie theaters and restaurant within driving distance, like everywhere else.

b. Dawn DID wait an hour while the producers made me wait in my car down the road, waiting for a cue to drive up.

c. The scene where I drive up, introduce myself and help her into the car – we did that in, like, five takes. It was all totally choreographed.

d. But the whole scene looks great – Joel is an excellent cameraman. I am glad, as he put it in his blog, that he got paid great. I, on the other hand, got paid hardly anything at all.

5. The Condition of the Trailer –

a. This is something that we were very self-conscious about. In fact, we almost didn’t do the shoot because of our living conditions.

b. I feel that this one deserves special mention, so I am composing a post about just this that I will post this weekend.

c. Dawn talks about how dirty our home is, and then they focus in on a pile of laundry in the kids’ room. The producers put that pile of laundry there.

d. The trailer is in bad condition, but it is very clean.

6. Sophie – I couldn’t have been more proud of my daughter and the way she handled her interview with Dawn.

7. My Interview with Dawn: Adultery –

a. Just imagine two days of filming, and the stupidest thing you said in those two days becomes the centerpiece of your interview.

b. Dawn asked me if I hadn’t become a polygamist and stayed married to only Martha – would I have strayed?

c. “That’s a good question,” I answer. “I’ve wondered that myself. I probably would have strayed. I’m a polygamist at heart.”

d. I intended this statement to be commentary on the natural polygamist inclinations of most men, but it really just sounded stupid and made me look like a philanderer.

e. I was married to Martha for 7 years before Temple ever came into our lives. I never cheated once. And I had the chance to many, many times. As a male social worker, many of my clients were single moms. I had women make passes at me on a couple of occasions, and once I was even propositioned. Adultery is a very serious thing to me, and something I never considered.

8. My Interview with Dawn: Sex as a Chore –

a. In an admission that goes against my latino machismo, I admit that trying to satisfy two women can sometimes seem like a chore.

b. I was in the doghouse for a while with one of my wives when she watched this.

9. My Interview with Dawn: Overall –

a. I gave a multifaceted view of why I am a polygamist including sex, the philosophy of sex, history of polygamy in Mormonism, social reasons, etc.

b. They cut out everything and left only the sex questions.

c. Which kind of makes me – and all polygamous men – look like lechers and very one-dimensional.

10. My Children – the part where my children are playing at the fire and getting ready for bed is my favorite part. I am so proud of my kids.

11. The Trailer Shaking – Dawn, you don’t know how true this is, much to my chagrin.

But still, it is largely a positive show, and it was largely a positive experience for me and my family. I have no regrets and would do it all over again. I also think Dawn is way better than Louis Theroux, whoever he is. And she is way better looking than Lilly Allen. (Although, before we met Dawn, Temple did ask me what Dawn looked like, and I said, “Kind of like Lilly Allen.” LOL)

Here is a final email that I received from Dawn yesterday:

Moroni, you have no idea how happy this makes me. I never set out to hurt you guys, and although i wanted to be really really honest in places, I always expected that you might not like the odd comment. But I set out to be honest, and I think I was. i am so glad you appreciate that.

Tell the girls that there were a MILLION things I wish made it to the cut, but you are right, editing makes it impossible, and I cant tell you how frustrating having to be so brutal with the footage is...

I care about you all, and I am glad the experience was positive for you...PHWEW!!!

There were things about your sitiuation that I think we could have slammed you on. We could have depicted you in all sorts of ways. But you didnt deserve to be slammed, and we thought you were a really good man. Which you are!

Please always keep in touch

Much love and many many thanks for your openness and honesty

Dawn x x

"ATTACK OF THE TRAILER PEOPLE" - Feedback On Dawn's Show

So I have been indulging in this exercise of narcissism, which consists of me scouring the Internet, looking for information about myself since “Dawn Porter: The Polygamist’s Wife” aired last Tuesday. There have been a few message boards and a couple of blog posts. But I have been surprised – there is not as much discussion on this episode of Dawn’s show than there was on “Free Lover” or even “Mail Order Bride”. I would have thought that polygamy would at least incite people’s opinions as much as being greased by a bunch of naked Germans. But I guess not.

Oddly enough, the responses were mostly positive. Most people thanked Dawn for her insight into a world that they knew nothing about. They thought that the polygamists shown were mostly normal. Okay, maybe a little weird, and something that they would not choose for themselves, but a legitimate lifestyle. In this sense, Dawn Porter and the producers of the program accomplished exactly what they said they wanted to do – which is to present plural marriage as a legitimate, alternative lifestyle.

Okay, some of the comments were negative, but that’s to be expected. I was called “nuts” (by Dawn herself, apparently!) and “the fat man”. But you know the proverb about negative press – it’s better to have that than none at all… or is it?

Here is what one woman on Dawn’s website said:

“Oh one thing i’d love to know regarding the trailer people who live in the middle of no where… where do the kids go to have fun, play out, shop etc etc? It seems so remote. Oh and I saw childrens beds in the wives bedrooms - do they have sex with the children in the room?”



And here is how I responded:

This is Moroni, one of the “trailer people”. LOL
We just introduced all of our children into the public school system this year, so all of our children are having alot more social interaction with other children.
But we have ALWAYS provided other extracurricular activities for our children - sports, martial arts, ballet, piano, etc.
They also have cousins (dozens) that live close-by, as well as a playground and trampoline at theu grandmother’s house (on the same ranch.) Plus they have acres and acres of land that they can roam on without fear of traffic or drugs or strangers.
Trust me. These kids are probably better off than most.
As far as sex in these tight quarters - Dawn did ask us about that (but it didn’t get aired.) I answered that you have to be an opportunist - like when the kids are out playing and such. Thank God for locked doors!


The following is an article that came out the day after the show:

http://www.tvscoop.tv/2008/10/tv_review_dawn_8.html

TV Review: Dawn Porter: Polygamist's Wife, Channel 4, Tuesday, 21 October, 10pm

Of all of Dawn Porter's new series on Channel 4, this was the one I was looking forward to the most. She'd covered free-love, which ticked the box for all those that just want to ogle our Dawn, as well as investigating the Geisha and mail-order brides. As meaty or flighty as the subjects were, the last in the current series, Dawn Porter: Polygamist's Wife (Channel 4, Tuesday, 21 October, 10pm) was always going to be the most revealing. Polygamists are often derided and seen as 'cultish', as testified by the opening bars of this show, showing clips of a 'sect' that was stormed by federal agents... but was Dawn going into a seedy den, or would she find the lighter side of Mormon living? Thankfully, it erred more on the latter, even if it was filled with weird.

As I mentioned, the show started with a raid on a polygamy camp, with claims of child abuse and the like thick in the air. It was hardly the best time for Dawn Porter to try to spend some time with a polygamist family. However, it was clear that Porter wanted to delve into the world to see if was as wrong as many think it is, or whether it was like any other family (dysfunctions and all), only with more parents.

In the initial meeting, where Porter was vetted, the board of Mormon wives were aggressive, awkward and prickly - not surprising really when you take into account that their way of living is forbidden by federal law. This sees families retreating to baron wastelands in the middle of sod-all, to live in peace. However, The Dawn Porter Charm works a treat and she's granted time with a family (with one lady giggling "You're as cute as a button!").

Dawn's first house tour was bewildering to watch, and bewildering for her. I think there were a million kids, and twice that in rooms. Of course, that's being a bit glib, but that's what it felt like. Even mum lost track of how many people come and went in her house. However, she was keen to point out that this was all about sharing, which on the surface, can't be that bad a thing. However, when that includes the sharing of sex between a husband and his various wives, Porter's (and mine to be honest) mind boggled - how can that ever be normal?

I guess it's understandably that everyone who Porter met was so defensive. I mean, people on the outside just keep saying that the whole thing is weird. I mean, you only have to look at the preconceived notion of what a Mormon family is, to understand why these folks can be so surly. It must also be immensely irritating to have people think of The Osmonds every time someone mentions your belief system. Thankfully, these notions are pretty quickly dispatched and dealt with by Dawn who clearly wanted to get deeper.

"Is it polygamy or just a really high sex drive?" Dawn asks Moroni, a husband to two wives. Through this line, jealousy reared its ugly head and was addressed. Thankfully, it was all honest and self-effacing. Again, you have to step back and note that many monogamous relationships suffer from jealousy just as much... but not quite so in-your-face.
So what makes someone want this lifestyle? For the men, it's obvious what the attraction is: You can have as many wives and girlfriends as you like. But what's in it for the woman. It's never addressed, presumably because it's reasonably well known to everyone but me, but the women aren't granted the same freedom with their bed. One of the reasons given for wanting to be a Mormon wife is to become a Goddess, in the spiritual sense of course.

One thing was clear at the close of the programme is that the Mormon polygamy lifestyle isn't all weird and full of drawbacks, and though you may not agree with it all, you can certainly see plus side. At times, it almost looked like people were living their lives in a hippie commune, all chipping in to help and offer advice. However, it's clear that there are those that abuse this way of living to abuse and control... but is that any different from any other way of life? Even though Porter's show didn't answer many questions, it did enable us to peer into a world seldom seen, and for that reason alone, she should be applauded.


All in all, this article was pretty open-minded.

There was this line: “So what makes someone want this lifestyle? For the men, it's obvious what the attraction is: You can have as many wives and girlfriends as you like. But what's in it for the woman.”

Obviously the question was not adequately addressed in the program, so, this morning, I decided to independently ask my wives: What is the benefit is plural marriage to the woman?

Temple was instantly prickly. “I answered that question in my interview with Dawn! Obviously they didn’t feel that my opinion was worth airing!”

They both said that a benefit was that they were never alone.

Temple said that the main benefit was for the children, being able to interact with each other.

Martha said, “It helps you to think outside of yourself. You are placed in a position where you have to think of others more than yourself, and to overcome your feelings.”

Here is a quote from a review that was not so nice:

What the film really needed wasn't a polygamist's wife but a polygamist husband. Dawn journeyed further into the desert and found one, "a dirt-poor construction worker" who lives, by the look of it fairly joylessly, in a shabby trailer with his two wives and their eight children.

Dawn didn't learn much here, either, and departed with the impression that polygamists are "properly nuts!" They are, Dawn, they are. And you, cute button, are a pain in the nuts.

Joyless?? How would you like a polygamist boot planted on your nuts, buddy? LOL

Here are a couple of more quotes from Dawn’s blog:

“Loved the last show. I was left wondering a couple of things really. How does the guy earn enough money to support so many people, do the wives work as well? And how does he find the energy to satisfy so many wives. I am married and i find it sometimes hard to keep up with one wife in my bed let alone 2+ wives. On the other hand they did seem quite happy and the children seemed the most happy of all. I find myself having the same thoughts as with your first program on free love though. It don’t think it would be for all and to be honest thank god we are all different.”

And:

“Children are brought up in far, far worse scenarios than in Moroni etc’s house. It would never be my choice, but no-one is forcing these women to live like this. And the eldest daughter, when questioned, clearly hadn’t have it rammed down her throat that theirs was the only way to live… she said she didn’t know what her future family set-up would be. As long as the children are loved, cared for and are happy, I don’t think we should judge. It wouldn’t suit me one bit, but I believe in the families’ right to be unconventional!”


Anyway, after thinking that I would never get chance to see the show, I actually downloaded a copy from a file-sharing website. I am not sure how legal it, but since it has my mug… So, I watched the show. Tune in next time for my official critique…