[Doug64]

I stumbled across an interesting article on FiveThirtyEight a while ago, where Leah Libresco was looking at Pew Research's 2014 Religious Landscape study, specifically the rate of change between denominations where Christians lost 15% (mostly Catholic) most of which Unaffiliated picked up. So she ran an equilibrium analysis and found the Evangelicals and Unaffiliated both picking up 6%, practically all of it taken from the Catholics, who nosedive from 21% to 8%. But then she factored in fertility and the results changed drastically (though I assume the second would take longer than the first to reach equilibrium):

[mikema63]

Harder to predict is possible resurgences and conversions. Atheism may become increasingly visible and popular in the future, or there could be a resurgence of evangelicals and their tent things.

[Doug64]

Harder to predict is possible resurgences and conversions. Atheism may become increasingly visible and popular in the future, or there could be a resurgence of evangelicals and their tent things.

True, this is an "if this goes on" analysis -- if shifts between the groups continue at their current pace and if fertility rates remain the same for the various groups then this is what the future will eventually look like. The chances of that happening is minuscule, but it does say interesting things about where the future might lie, doesn't it? And we ought to be due another religious revival in a few decades....

[KlassWar]

What the fuck is she smoking? Ain't no fucking way Mormons are gonna go from 2% to 22% in the foreseeable future. As far as I'm aware, the typical Mormon family has 2-4 kids, not a bloody dozen.

[Nets]

What is "equilibrium analysis"?

[Zamuel]

What the fuck is she smoking? Ain't no fucking way Mormons are gonna go from 2% to 22% in the foreseeable future. As far as I'm aware, the typical Mormon family has 2-4 kids, not a bloody dozen.

Mormon families average 5 Kids and the church is currently sponsoring adoption heavily too. When they re-legalize polygamy expect that number to jump to 12-15.

Zam

[mikema63]

People underestimate how hard it would be to legalize polygamy, a lot of the money and forces in the gay rights movement are really not fans of mormons in any way shape or form. Many on the left consider polygamy to be morally wrong as well. It'll be a couple of decades till there is even a viable movement in that direction.

[Doug64]

What the fuck is she smoking? Ain't no fucking way Mormons are gonna go from 2% to 22% in the foreseeable future. As far as I'm aware, the typical Mormon family has 2-4 kids, not a bloody dozen.

What is "equilibrium analysis"?

Equilibrium analysis is where you take the change rates and run them forward until equilibrium is reached -- each group gaining as many as it is losing.

Mormon families average 5 Kids and the church is currently sponsoring adoption heavily too.

That birth rate must be for the Church overall, Utah Mormons have a total fertility rate somewhere around 3. You're right about adoption, though.

[KlassWar]

The question is moot: Polygamy won't make them grow any faster than they would if the the Mormon females were in regular marriages with male Mormons, and I don't think very many non-Mormon women will want to be the nth wife of some crazy Mormon patriarch.

Numbers-wise, if the mainline Mormons were to reinstate informal polygamy it might well turn out to be a blessing in disguise: Births-wise it would have no effect, it would make the government very reluctant to let Mormons adopt kids and it would make it harder for them to convert women.

[Zamuel]

Mormon families average 5 Kids and the church is currently sponsoring adoption heavily too.

That birth rate must be for the Church overall, Utah Mormons have a total fertility rate somewhere around 3. You're right about adoption, though.

That's the figure I get from local Mormons (S. Az.) They were talking about a completed family (parents over 45). That -3- figure may be a current average, but around 50% of the church is under 40 years old and still breeding ?

As I understand it, the church is split about polygamy, but the younger men want it and they're the ones who will be moving into positions of authority. Given recent trends, they probably won't have to fight to hard to get it, especially with the women backing them.

Zam

[mikema63]

Given recent trends

If your reffering to gay marriage then you are mistaken, gay marriage advocates are generally very strongly against polygamy as sexist.

[Zamuel]

If your reffering to gay marriage then you are mistaken, gay marriage advocates are generally very strongly against polygamy as sexist.

I'm referring to recent court decisions ... legitimized group marriages are right around the corner, and gender bias has been outlawed ... That = Polygamy any way you slice it. And as far as Mormon's are concerned ? There aren't many better catches than a middle aged Mormon who's established himself in the community and is looking to recruit a couple of extra convert wives.

Zam

[Doug64]

And as far as Mormon's are concerned ? There aren't many better catches than a middle aged Mormon who's established himself in the community and is looking to recruit a couple of extra convert wives.

Not happening. We Mormons are perfectly content as a monogamous religion. If it was to be reinstated, it would be as big a shock as it was the first time and I see no particular need for it.

[Zamuel]

Not happening. We Mormons are perfectly content as a monogamous religion. If it was to be reinstated, it would be as big a shock as it was the first time and I see no particular need for it.

And if the Prophet and the Apostles proclaimed it as God's Will ... you would decline to participate ?

Zam

[Doug64]

And if the Prophet and the Apostles proclaimed it as God's Will ... you would decline to participate ?

Right now I couldn't support one wife, much less two or more.

[Doug64]

One thing I forgot to mention in the polygamy detour that actually ties into this thread, and that's that polygamy actually depresses overall birthrates -- men practicing polygamy may have more children, but there are fewer children per woman. So IF the Supreme Court as actually consistent and mandates that states allow polygamous marriages, and IF those Muslims living in the US follow traditional Muslim practice, then that will slow the growth of Islam in the US.

[The Immortal Goon]

I would suspect that polygamy would just be decriminalized, but but legal, and stay like that for a very long time.

Too much or property law is built around the idea of a two-person marriage. That doesn't mean you can't sleep with other people, but the raids to break apart people that have a religion saying it's fine will eventually come to an end I think. And you'll effectively have it, even if it isn't legally recognized.

[Doug64]

That would require the five Supreme Court justices that rammed revisionist marriages down the states' throats to ignore their own opinion in that case. Not that that doesn't mean they won't, I doubt they think they could do more injury to the reputation of the Court in that regard than they already have. But I suspect that they are more likely to apply the same reasoning in that opinion to polygamy.

[Nets]

If your referring to gay marriage then you are mistaken, gay marriage advocates are generally very strongly against polygamy as sexist.

For what it is worth, the ACLU backs polygamy. I agree with Doug64 here.

[Zamuel]

I would suspect that polygamy would just be decriminalized, but but legal, and stay like that for a very long time. Too much or property law is built around the idea of a two-person marriage. That doesn't mean you can't sleep with other people, but the raids to break apart people that have a religion saying it's fine will eventually come to an end I think. And you'll effectively have it, even if it isn't legally recognized.

Property law is about the easiest thing there is to adapt to changing social circumstances ... it's a constant process in today's world.

Polygamy, or multiple marriage is pretty much a done deal ... just waiting for someone to push the button. The liberalization of marriage wrought by the "Gay Issue" provides the legal basis. It may be tweaked a little to iron out the wrinkles, but every thing a good Lawyer needs to win a multiple marriage case is already on the books. The SC decisions pave the way for the replacement of (old) conflicting statutes.

ie: Say you have a clinical "Bi-Sexual" of either gender. If you limit them to only one legal partner of one sex, you are denying them their civil rights.

That would require the five Supreme Court justices that rammed revisionist marriages down the states' throats to ignore their own opinion in that case. Not that that doesn't mean they won't, I doubt they think they could do more injury to the reputation of the Court in that regard than they already have. But I suspect that they are more likely to apply the same reasoning in that opinion to polygamy.

Not likely ... they HAVE TO ... that decision is now BINDING LAW. If they reverse themselves, then they have to reverse Gay Marriage. Presuming the lower courts righteously upheld the existing SC decision, they probably would just decline to even hear an appeal.

Zam