To me, “cult” is a term used by the religions that get to define themselves as mainstream through previous power grabs, cultural movements, or demographic changes use to define some other groups as bad.

A “cult” is “the other guys, when they are small in numbers*” … It is a term of oppression within the religious milieu. There is no valid definition that is not a tool of power.

Therefore, I have no problem calling them all cults.

Correct. As it happens, I was just thinking about this while walking around behind the lawnmower.

I’d say a cult becomes a “religion” when:
a) it gets a little older;
b) it gets a little larger; and
c) it gains some acceptance in general society as a result of a and b.

That said, the LDS shares some major characteristics with some of the generally accepted cults:
Invented out of whole cloth by a self-described prophet? Check.
Truly bizarre beliefs and practices, compared to “main-stream” faiths? Check.
Extracts the maximum amount of cash from the faithful? Check.
Exerts undue control over the lives of the members? Magic underwear, anyone?

A “cult” is “the other guys, when they are small in numbers*” … It is a term of oppression within the religious milieu. There is no valid definition that is not a tool of power.

Therefore, I have no problem calling them all cults.

__________________
*except when they are really large in number.

Then, you have all the churches say vote republican (yeah i know illegal but hardly stops them) and then wholesale bus the congregation to the poling place (or have them walk down the stairs as the case may be). Throw in some illegal but also common voter caging, misdirecting robo-calls in minority districts (again illegal not that it stopped the (R) last pres election) and other related shenanigans (‘accidentally’ throwing democrats of the voter roles? hello Florida).

All this gets you +1.

Who now wins in this 50+1 world?

That is totally my backup plan.

And since I first read this as “LSD” instead of “LDS” it really works.

Ho hum.

There are still(LDS-derived) polygamist groups — cults, if you will — in Mexico, mostly co-located in northern Mexico in the area colonized by Mormons at the end of the 19th century.

And in the USA and Canada, as well.

The group that included Romney’s ancestors should probably not be considered a cult, unless you just want to categorize the LDS church as a cult.

Sounds fair to me. I’m quite on board with categorizing the LDS church as a cult.

The main group of Mormon colonists were those who thought they had a tacit dispensation to continue the practice of polygamy as well as those who accepted the church’s new position on polygamy but were unwilling to have long-established families broken up by U. S. laws. After about 1890 there were few “new” polygamists in the Mormon communities in Mexico, and as the children of the polygamists grew to adulthood, many migrated back to the U. S. and remained monogamous.

The polygamous splinter groups that are truly cults formed by those who disagreed with the church’s new position on polygamy also found refuge in the wilds of northern Mexico and exist there today, protected largely by the same sort of isolation that allowed groups like the FLDS to maintain a presence on the Utah/Arizona border.