![FairMormon Logo](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021_fair_logo_primary.png)
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
< Criticism of Mormonism | Books | One Nation Under Gods | Use of sources(Redirected from Specific works/One Nation Under Gods/Use of sources/Brigham Young on thieves)
Poisoning myth | A FAIR Analysis of: One Nation Under Gods, a work by author: Richard Abanes
|
Boyd K. Packer on the truth |
Theft at this period had serious consequences for the victims and other innocents, and could have resulted in much loss of life. The lack of formal police forces or civil government meant that (as often on the frontier) justice and order was maintained by threat of community violence against those who broke moral codes. Summary execution for thieves was not unusual in the American west, and in the Saints' circumstances, in some cases it may have been the only viable option.
The author exploits the presentist fallacy to make Brigham's words seem violent and out of control, rather than simply the practical necessity forced by the harsh realities of nineteenth century frontier life.
The author provides no historical context for these remarks. In 1846, the Saints were under pressure to leave Nauvoo. Surrounded by hostile anti-Mormon settlers, they were constantly harassed by trouble-makers, thieves, and those who sought to do them harm. The Nauvoo charter had been revoked, removing all civil government from Nauvoo. The Saints were preparing feverishly for their exodus. The theft of food, animals, equipment, or other goods might mean the difference for some between a successful crossing of the plains and death. That which was stolen could not be easily replaced—if at all. Theft was a threat to the Saints' lives and health.
Furthermore, successful thievery would only encourage more of the same as surrounding trouble-makers decided the Mormons were unable or unwilling to defend themselves. This could lead to more thefts, or more violent crimes. A strong "zero tolerance policy" would act as a deterrent and, likely save lives and property in the long run. It could also prevent what the Saints feared most—a full-scale mob or military action to force them from their homes before they were ready.
These elements have been discussed previously in other cases where the author ignores these factors. (See: here.)
These difficulties were magnified as the Saints began to move west. In the History of the Church citation, we read:
The Saints were moving west into the wilderness. There was no government or legal authority within easy reach. If the Saints caught a thief, what should they do with him? There were no jails to which they could deliver him. Take him along and guard him, wasting manpower and taking a hostile element who did not wish to travel with them? Turn him loose only to steal again?
Some might have been tempted to steal out of want; Brigham was likely keenly aware that a functioning society could not be built without mutual trust and reliance. He was willing to meet want or deprivation; he was not willing to have the Saints begin stealing. Theft was especially serious because much of what they were carrying could not be replaced. Wagons or equipment might be damaged, food might be wasted. These actions were more than mere thefts in the twenty-first century—they could very literally be the difference between life and death for other innocents.
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now