That’s definitely true. And that’s why I assign p(LDS|US) > p(LDS). (I thought you would ask about that).
In current LDS thought, doctrines on the nature of the family are central—in a way that polygamy was in its day, but that the “black priesthood ban” wasn’t. That’s why (imho) it is less likely to change.
What it took to prompt the polygamy ban was basically the alternative of destruction at the hands of the federal government. The language afterwards was not that “God said it was bad to do this” but “God showed us what the government would do if we didn’t stop.”
That’s definitely true. And that’s why I assign p(LDS|US) > p(LDS). (I thought you would ask about that).
In current LDS thought, doctrines on the nature of the family are central—in a way that polygamy was in its day, but that the “black priesthood ban” wasn’t. That’s why (imho) it is less likely to change.
What it took to prompt the polygamy ban was basically the alternative of destruction at the hands of the federal government. The language afterwards was not that “God said it was bad to do this” but “God showed us what the government would do if we didn’t stop.”