Runtu wrote:Yep, a Mormon apologist has actually claimed on my blog that when Emily Partridge said she had "carnal intercourse" with Joseph Smith, she meant she engaged in an exchange of meat, such as passing him a platter of turkey.
Thanks for that link. Meg Stout seems to have some experience/intelligence/expertise in this field of investigation. I'm looking forward to listening to these audio presentations. Hey, she presented at Sunstone, she can't be totally off her rocker, right?
In reading her response on the blog, she seems to be saying that Emily was playing team ball and choosing to manipulate a court with her testimony in favor of her chosen branch of Mormonism. And that this was justifiable on the ground she wasn't TECHNICALLY lying in that she could claim that BS about passing the turkey.
Setting all else aside, (and that's a lot given the significance of Joseph's marital fidelity to Emma in the case for or against Mormonism, in my opinion) I find the manipulation of truth via "technically" not lying a very modern Mormon thing to do. It's insightful in what it says about how the author establishes what is ethical behavior and what is not.
I once had a fairly lengthy discussion with a group of LDS and LDS supportive NOM's over how LDS moral teachings are defective and fail to teach true morality. I think the woman's attempt to dismiss a person's sworn testimony about another person's morally bankrupt behavior by use of a lie guarded with a claim of being technically true is as good an example as any of the fruit of said teachings.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
It's also funny how her dealing with her decades' long struggles with Joseph's polygamy through attempts at fiction while simply willing herself to remain Mormon admittedly played a role in her developing a defense she could believe in.
That, and that while she states explicitly in her intro that she believes the women who testified to having intimate relations with Joseph Smith lied in attempt to prevent the Reorganized Church from acquiring the temple lots, she didn't reciprocate this in acknowledging that Emma's last testimony was published after her death by the Reorganized Church - the people interested in proving that polygamy did not originate with Joseph. And they weren't under oath.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
Seriously, though, her argument really seems to be Emily knowingly lied under oath during her Temple Lot testimony. The whole "meat commerce" thing is the out so she could still be considered honest because, you know, there are no lies anywhere else in the Joseph Smith polygamy controversy believers have to deal with or something.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
Runtu wrote:Yep, a Mormon apologist has actually claimed on my blog that when Emily Partridge said she had "carnal intercourse" with Joseph Smith, she meant she engaged in an exchange of meat, such as passing him a platter of turkey.
Runtu wrote:Yep, a Mormon apologist has actually claimed on my blog that when Emily Partridge said she had "carnal intercourse" with Joseph Smith, she meant she engaged in an exchange of meat, such as passing him a platter of turkey.
I keep coming back to this horrible thread. I could think of about 5K dirty jokes to use in response on this thread. Don't the people who came up with this crazy theory know what they're opening themselves up to?
Apparently, not.
So when someone says they have "carnal knowledge" of another person, does that mean that they know how much hamburger they have in their freezer?
That's like a food storage reference or something, right?
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Brackite wrote:Are there still a few LDS Apologists over on the MAD board that still argue that Joseph Smith didn't have sexual relations with any of his plural wives? I remember from several years that there were a few LDS Apologists over there that did argue that.
Wasn't that the default position, and still is for them?
- Doc
I thought Brian Hales had backed off that position in some way; maybe I'm wrong.
