Brian Hale's FAIR Presentation on Sexual Polyandry

[_lulu]

Did Joseph Smith have sex with at least some of his "polyandrous" wives while they were sexually active with their "legal" husbands?

[_sock puppet]

My thoughts, with only reading the first couple paragraphs so far, is that it is sexist.

People are so sexist that they have a bigger problem with a woman having multiple husbands than a man having multiple wives.

Why???

Agreed it is sexist.

But really? In the name of religion and treating others respectfully, one can have a serious discussion that god sanctioned and commanded promiscuity in the first place?

Anyone who can stay on the Mormon reservation knowing what the historical facts reveal about JSJr is self-deluded, ... no, intentionally self-deluded soul. That's pretzel logic.

To paraphrase Alice in Chains lyrics, a historically-knowledgeable TBM's personal prayers must go something like this

Mormonism, I'm fine
Somebody check my brain

Mormonism's all right
Somebody check my brain

Check my brain

[_Joe Geisner]

Did Joseph Smith have sex with at least some of his "polyandrous" wives while they were sexually active with their "legal" husbands?

Lulu,

This is really the heart of the debate that is going on between Brian and Mike. I personally don't know. I don't think there is enough evidence for anyone to say with certitude that Smith did or did not have sex with his polyandrous wives while they were having sex with their legal husbands. I am not sure it really makes that much difference from a moral or historical standpoint.

From a believers point of view, if you believe Smith was a true prophet of God, and held God's authority in what we call "priesthood" than having sex with a married woman was not morally wrong, as long as God told those involved it was his will.

For me, I find the entire situation morally and ethically reprehensible. At its most basic level, it is not moral or ethical for God to have people do such a thing. No matter who is having sex with whom. But that is my moral compass.

Nauvoo polygamy has little history that we can feel absolute certainty about since it was done in secret and those who participated lied constantly about their participation. Most of the time people who have written about it have a vested interest in defending one position or another. This makes it difficult for the student to really get to the facts of the matter.

Spanner,

pm me if you need Brian's paper, Mike's response and Brian's response.

[_Joe Geisner]

I should also add that people were having sexual relations outside of what we would define as polygamy. Also, if you were not one of the insiders at the time, then you were called an adulterer or fornicator.

The line between adultery and polygamy gets crossed constantly as I see things. I would suggest Smith was one who crossed the line freely.

[_sock puppet]

I should also add that people were having sexual relations outside of what we would define as polygamy. Also, if you were not one of the insiders at the time, then you were called an adulterer or fornicator.

The line between adultery and polygamy gets crossed constantly as I see things. I would suggest Smith was one who crossed the line freely.

And this Mormon god is supposed to be no respecter of persons? But if it is JSJr and his cronies getting tail, it is righteous; others--its fornication or adultery.

Mormonism, somebody check my brain.

[_lulu]

Did Joseph Smith have sex with at least some of his "polyandrous" wives while they were sexually active with their "legal" husbands?

I don't think there is enough evidence for anyone to say with certitude that Smith did or did not have sex with his polyandrous wives while they were having sex with their legal husbands.

I think that's a sound statement.

In historical writing, there's no ultimate court of appeal, other than the reader, to rule on whom the burden of proof should fall. However, there are certainly legal situations where the burden of proof shifts once a proponent has made a prima facie case.

1. The D&C says the doctrine of plural wives was for reproduction.
2. Joseph Smith had sex with at least some of his plural wives.

Now in regard to any given wife, on whom does the burden of proof fall?

That's not original with me, if not in this thread, it's been posted elsewhere on this board.

I think Hale is being unduly reductionistic.

Do we need genetic evidence or a verifiable photo of the parties in flagrante delicto for each wife before we can say most likely yes? I don't think so.

So much about Mormon polygamy gets written as if neither the men or the women had a sex drive. That's naïve.