If Joseph Smith had Become President of the USA

[_Pokatator]

Joseph Smith had some great ideas and as I said, he wanted to create a foundation that would revolutionize the world. He also had a program of equality which he tried to put in place among the saints. It failed but the dream was there. Unfortunately, he knew that he couldn't succeed. But thinking about the saints and attempting to address the problems between the LDS community and the outside world was a good start for him.

Unfortunately, the posters here are a little prejudice against him. But FAIR shows that Joseph Smith's heart was in the right place.

Equality, my rear end, is this why we had the priesthood ban for more than a 100 years after this? Nothing in this "program of equality" shows me that Joseph Smith even had a heart.

[_Uncle Dale]

...Equality, my rear end, is this why we had the priesthood ban for more than a 100 years
after this? Nothing in this "program of equality" shows me that Joseph Smith even had a heart.

"Equal rights!" was the great populist slogan of the Jacksonians -- and of the
Mormons, who generally supported the Democrats against what was left of the
Federalists and the growing movement of the Whigs.

"Equal rights" did not mean freeing the slaves, or giving women the vote,
or building wheelchair ramps for handicapped people. It was more a cry
for an egalitarian society in which the "little guy" could share in national
prosperity and opportunity -- the abandonment of "classism."

Recalling that the first Mormons were largely from the poor, lower ranks of
the American people (later including lower class British, etc.), we can easily
see how Joseph Smith and his proclaimed principles might have appealed to
a certain segment of the voters in 1844.

But, by then Smith already had a solid reputation of putting the interests
of the Mormons above those of the "wicked Gentiles." Probably most people
who bothered to pay attention to reports of Smith's candidacy viewed him
as a rabble-rouser, straight out of John C. Bennett's "History of the Saints."

The "equality" he would have promoted would have been to the benefit of
his own position, and to the benefit of his higher level Mormon followers.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

UD

[_harmony]

Joseph Smith had some great ideas and as I said, he wanted to create a foundation that would revolutionize the world.

Yeah, right. And then he shed the prophetic mantle when he dropped his pants on the hay in the barn with Fanny. Not much else was legit from then until the end of his life.

[_Bond James Bond]

Joseph Smith's 1844 bid for the US Presidency was a "long shot." but not
an impossibility. Had the Democrat and Whig candidates somehow alienated
enough voters, Smith might have possibly made it into office as an unexpected
"dark horse" third-party leader.

Seems highly unlikely that he would have won. I'm not sure which voting constituencies were going to be alienated, as both candidates in 1844 (Polk from TN and Clay from KY) were from slave states, the most divisive issue of politics during the first half of the 19th century (although 1844 was a lull in the slave issue between the 1820 South Carolina secession claims and 1845-48 when the issue began to pick up steam again with the Mexican conquests). I'm not extremely familiar with 1840s US politics but I'm not sure that issue would drive such a wedge between voters and both political parties opening the way for a "dark horse" candidate.

As to Smith...who was he going to convince to vote for him and how? What political experience did he have beyond his leadership of the Mormons? He would run into the same problems that a Sarah Palin or whoever runs into, lack of experience (except far worse of course). And...he was a Mormon. Come on! Modern Christians wouldn't vote for him, do you think 1844 Christians would? He would catch the Mormon vote and then...what segment after that?

I ask my Mormon friends who might be reading this, whether the citizens of
the USA in 1845 could have trusted Smith after his inauguration?

If so, upon what basis would that popular trust been based? Common Sense?
Personal Divine Revelation? Smith's prior record as a leader? Mass Popularity?

My contention is that the people of the USA could NOT have trusted Joseph Smith
to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Neither could they have
trusted him to put the best interests and security of the nation above all other
concerns: social, religious and political.

You're probably right about this.

[_why me]

"Equal rights!" was the great populist slogan of the Jacksonians -- and of the
Mormons, who generally supported the Democrats against what was left of the
Federalists and the growing movement of the Whigs.

The "equality" he would have promoted would have been to the benefit of
his own position, and to the benefit of his higher level Mormon followers.

UD

Your post was based on fact until the last paragraph which I darkened. In your hypotheticals you usually come up with a negative interpretation. I do believe that Joseph Smith saw injustices in the US and wished to address them. The injustice that hit close to home was the treatment the Mormons were receiving at the behest of citizens and mobs. But if you take that injustice to the treatment of slaves as he did in his platform we can see a man who disliked injustice. And he does deserve some credit for this.

On a side note, lets say that he was a fraud attempting to start a new religion. I am sure that he never anticipated the backlash that his faith would receive in the United States since it was a country that allowed freedom of religion. He must have saw his experience has a great injustice.

He was murdered at 38 and he accomplished much and also failed. He was human. But...his potential was huge and he was cut down too early.

[_why me]

Joseph Smith had some great ideas and as I said, he wanted to create a foundation that would revolutionize the world.

Yeah, right. And then he shed the prophetic mantle when he dropped his pants on the hay in the barn with Fanny. Not much else was legit from then until the end of his life.

Well, Fanny left the settlement with her relatives and not long after married and had many children by her husband. She seemed to keep her experience with Joseph Smith to herself and when questioned about it by her son or brother after Joseph was murdered, she responded that it was her own business.

I don't think that Fanny had a problem with it. Also, on a side note, Americans were not the most sexually liberated nation at that time and a woman's virtue was important. But she didn't seem to have a problem marrying and living a respectable life. Something is amiss here.

[_Sethbag]

You don't think Fanny had a problem with it? Well, what do you expect her to have done? It looks to me more like she just wanted that part of her life behind her and done with.

On the other hand, her actions after she left the Mormons aren't exactly congruent with a belief that she was the Celestial plural wife of the Creator of the Universe's right-hand man. Do you agree? If that's what she was, in fact, she certainly doesn't seem to have acted like she knew it.

As far as a Joseph Smith presidency, all I have to say is that Bill Clinton would have had nothing on Joseph Smith as far as who wins as Philanderer in Chief.

[_why me]

You don't think Fanny had a problem with it? Well, what do you expect her to have done? It looks to me more like she just wanted that part of her life behind her and done with.

On the other hand, her actions after she left the Mormons aren't exactly congruent with a belief that she was the Celestial plural wife of the Creator of the Universe's right-hand man. Do you agree? If that's what she was, in fact, she certainly doesn't seem to have acted like she knew it.

As far as a Joseph Smith presidency, all I have to say is that Bill Clinton would have had nothing on Joseph Smith as far as who wins as Philanderer in Chief.

I have no information to the contrary that fanny suffered because of her sealing to Joseph Smith. I have seen no critic give any facts that she was upset by it or thought Joseph Smith was evil. And I see no evidence that her husband had a problem with her being a plural wife when she married him.

Also, was it legal to have two husbands? When she left the settlement with her relatives and soon married, was she actually married to Joseph Smith? It seems that it was more of a sealin than a actual marriage to Joseph Smith.

But it is wonderful that she has you to defend her.

I also see no evidence that Joseph Smith had terrible ideas has a candidate for president. It seems that he had a decent platform.

[_Sethbag]

Why Me, what evidence have you got that Fanny was actually "sealed" to Joseph Smith at all?

And by what power were they supposedly "sealed", when the "dirty, nasty affair" Oliver Cowdery spoke of between them happened at least two years before the "sealing power" is claimed to have been restored?

And where was the revelation authorizing the "plural marriage" in the first place? Sec. 132 didn't come out until the 1840s, and didn't become an accepted part of the canon till much later than that, so is this just Joseph Smith shooting from the hip, and justifying his actions with "because I said so"?

Show me any evidence that Fanny Alger considered herself "married" to Joseph Smith at all. Did she ever state to anyone that she was Joseph Smith's polygamous wife?

You say her future (real) husband doesn't seem to have had a problem with it, and I'm saying that the most obvious explanation for this is that he didn't know about it, because it never happened (ie: a sealing), and that this explanation was given after the fact by Joseph's partisans as an attempt to justify his affair.