that was used to keep atheists out of the Boy Scouts? The LDS church is a private organization. They can accept or reject whomever they damn well please.

perception and increased rancor from the inside.

Prop. 8. I remember how they have treated black people, too. I think that changed a bit, after a lot of public pressure.

But they still have rights. It isn't up to me to tell them how to worship.

Religious freedom doesn't entitle one to do whatever they please. If it is in the interest of the nation to ban a particular activity, and by incident happens to ban someone's religious practice, that's tough luck. In order for an exception to be made in the case of Mormons, they would have to demonstrate that there is no national interest in prohibiting polygamy (which would be tough), or demonstrate that polygamy was banned to target them specifically (and I'm pretty sure it wasn't).

I thought they had to agree to do away with polygamy if they (Utah) wanted statehood.

I can't believe I am taking their side here - LOL.

Polygamy was banned in the United States under the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act of 1862 (fun side note here: I have a tattoo on my right shoulder, put there by a direct descendent of the bill's author, Justin Smith Morrill). As Mormons were the only people in the United States practicing polygamy with any kind of regularity, you could argue the bill targeted Mormons in effect, but I think that would be a difficult case to make because it doesn't target Mormons in language.

Yes, Mormons were essentially strong-armed into abandoning the practice of polygamy, but not because of the statehood issue, as commonly perceived. Rather, the Edmunds-Tucker Act of 1887 (another anti-polygamy law) threatened the Church with disincorporation and authorized the federal government to seize its assets.

So, yeah. God Almighty commanded all men of the faith in a personal revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith to go forth and nail as many chicks as possible, and they followed this commandment dutifully and uncompromisingly... until the federal government threatened to take their money away. Then, conveniently, God changed his mind.

In any event, I wouldn't call this "sticking up" for the Mormons. You're thinking logically about the situation, questioning whether or not there is a good reason to ban a practice regardless of how you feel about it personally. That's cool in my book; I was just trying to shed some light on how freedom of religion has been interpreted to work in practice by the Supreme Court.

I knew parts of it, but not the whole timeline.

Got give the this, they are pragmatic. Their ability to change doctrine when it becomes in their best interest to do so is quite striking.

Yes, they have pulled 180-degree turns on several issues throughout their history, but they would argue they haven't changed... God has. Which means, ipso facto, they can't be held accountable for their past positions.

I think recognizing and admitting where one went wrong is just as important as setting one's self right. Yes, the church has changed some policies for the better, but they've really just kicked the can down the road. These kinds of issues will keep coming up again and again and again, so long as the church hierarchy maintains that it serves as the mouthpiece for a living, communicative God.

Also, the shift in their position on polygamy was not entirely without consequence. As it should happen, you can't tell people God has commanded them to behave in a particular way, and then expect everyone to believe you when, decades later, you tell them God was just pulling your leg the whole time.

you have prophets that can tell you that god changed his mind.

I don't anticipate that they are going anywhere or going to make any significant changes in their underlying beliefs. But I will support them when they make changes in their political positions.

The polygamy tale is a good one and, in the end, I think it's worked out pretty well for them.