Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

[_Sethbag]

Polygamy was a hot issue. No doubt about it. If a woman found it offensive some would go public and seek fame for 15 minutes. Such was Martha. She is no different than other women who seek instant fame. Martha went on a public tour seeking allies against the Mormons. Fine. But she had an agenda. Is she better than the women who accepted polygamy? I don't think so.

I think this is disgusting. Martha Brotherton was just seeking her 15 minutes of fame? Jeez Louise, your apologist buddies get all over Fawn Brodie for trying to get inside of Joseph Smith's head in her book, but you have no problem reading Martha Brotherton's mind, and coming to the most uncharitable conclusion possible about her.

How about this explanation instead? She came over as a new convert to this church with faith, but then discovered, first-hand, that it was being lead by lying, filthy, adulterous conmen. And her family was being sucked into it. So she spoke out in an attempt to warn others and reveal what she knew from firsthand experience. You don't find this scenario to be likely in the least? Instead, you think it's far more likely that Martha Brotherton refused BY's sexual advances behind closed doors and then recognized bashing BY and Joseph Smith as a great opportunity to "cash in" on her 15 minutes of fame? You really think that's more likely?

[_Sethbag]

Speaking of Joseph Smith as a hornie toad, Why Me, what do you think of William Law's statement that Joseph Smith had once mentioned that he'd enjoyed (sexually) a particular girl more than he'd enjoyed any other?

Or do you think William Law was just making that up, because he was an asshole, or because he'd sold his soul to Satan?

[_Pokatator]

I tend to look at Mormonism holistically and not piece by piece. The critics here take a defined stance: Joseph Smith was a horny toad. I cannot take that stance. Also if critics would hedge their bets a little and leave open the possibility that he wasn't a horney toad, the critics and I would find much to discuss. But this definite horney toadism that the critics have taken gets my backside up.

Walmart just for the record "horny toad" is your term, I don't see anyone else using it. I guess it's OK because everyone knows what it implies. I don't care if Joe was a horny toad for two years or twenty years I definitely believe that Joe had sex with all those women. At least once or he didn't fulfill the definition of marriage. He knew what marriage was and that it required a consummation.

In your argument against horny toadism I can see a point in that direction, Joe married married women and then turned them back to their husbands. The reasons for that could be many. Maybe they weren't a good lay. Maybe they weren't as pretty. Maybe he was afraid of the husbands but brave enough to lay with them at least once and taste the goods. I don't know the real reasons.

But I do know that no matter which way you look at this practice of polygamy and Joe's use of if it has every look of sinfulness and if that is horny toadism then it is horny toadism. I can take that stance. The stance I can't take is that all of this behavior is from God. There is no way that God sanctioned all this behavior. God, man, common sense, Mormon or Catholic knows what marriage is and what adultery is. This all makes more sense to claim this came from Satan masquerading as an "Angel of Light" than to say it comes from God.

The best and most favorable light I can shed on Joseph Smith was that he was insane.

I am sorry for you that you can't see what is plain and clear in front of your face.

Now as far as the catholics go well, just yesterday I got into a discussion as to whether Mormons were christian with a catholic friend of mine. This friend is rather dogmatic, opus deiish type. He was a little shocked that I considered Mormons to be christian. I have my ideas about faith. I see goodness in catholicism and in Mormonism. And at this moment I am more involved with catholicism. But I cannot say that the Mormons are wrong. I have no proof that they are wrong. And I cannot say that the catholics are wrong. I just know that I am more committed to the catholic church at this moment.

You have no proof that the Catholics are right. You have no idea where you belong. I don't know where you should be "more committed" but I have some ideas. I am sure that your Catholic leaders and friends would be more likely to agree with me on this issue than you.

As one nun said to me: We will know more when we die. And I agree with that.

This is the most sane thing you have written im this whole thread but yet it is something that is blatantly obvious to everyone.

[_Sethbag]

Actually, I find it infinitely more likely that we all will know less after we die - in fact, nothing at all.

[_why me]

Umm, Please Check Out and See Again This Post:

I would not call this overwhelming evidence. I have heard that as of this moment there is no proof that Joseph Smith fathered a child by any of his plural wives regardless if you think the evidence is overwhelming or not. What the mother implied is difficult to say. I just have to go on the evidence that is now available: no children as of this momemt.

[_why me]

How about this explanation instead? She came over as a new convert to this church with faith, but then discovered, first-hand, that it was being lead by lying, filthy, adulterous conmen. And her family was being sucked into it. So she spoke out in an attempt to warn others and reveal what she knew from firsthand experience. You don't find this scenario to be likely in the least? Instead, you think it's far more likely that Martha Brotherton refused BY's sexual advances behind closed doors and then recognized bashing BY and Joseph Smith as a great opportunity to "cash in" on her 15 minutes of fame? You really think that's more likely?

Or what this interpretation: She was approached to be a plural wife...became shocked at such a proposal and took it to the methodists for all that it was worth. To my understanding she went on a speaking tour speaking ill of the Mormons. Am I right? Thus, famous for 15 minutes.

Now of course some women will be shocked and pray about the proposal as many of the plural wives did. Martha on the otherhand chose a different road knowing full well what could have happened in such a climate of persecution.

[_why me]

Speaking of Joseph Smith as a hornie toad, Why Me, what do you think of William Law's statement that Joseph Smith had once mentioned that he'd enjoyed (sexually) a particular girl more than he'd enjoyed any other?

Or do you think William Law was just making that up, because he was an asshole, or because he'd sold his soul to Satan?

William Law had too many dogs in the fight to be trusted. I would think however that Joseph Smith would have been careful not to say such a thing to anyone knowing the consequences of such a statement.

Law may be responsible for Joseph Smith's death. I do think that his hands are just a little bloody. It would also be interesting when he made that statement, was it before or after Joseph Smith was murdered?

[_why me]

This is the most sane thing you have written im this whole thread but yet it is something that is blatantly obvious to everyone.

I will get to your post a little later. I am on a train and the signal is not that good. Stay tuned, either for the edit or new post related to your post.

[_truth dancer]

The bottom line is, why in the universe is God so freakin' concerned with human sex and mating?

Is God this hung up about the sex lives of dogs or lions, or spiders?

Is God watching to see who Joseph Smith is screwing? Did he dictate the various girls and women he wanted Joseph Smith to screw? (Seems so according to Joseph Smith).

Seriously, what is up with this?

Again, if the "principle" was only about eternal families and friendship then there was absolutely no reason for the secrecy and lies and coercion.

And, why would polygamy break the hearts of God's daughter if polygamy was only about the next life and uniting people in heaven?

The apologetic argument, in my opinion makes God out to be a really perverted and sick dude!


~td~

[_why me]

The bottom line is, why in the universe is God so freakin' concerned with human sex and mating?

Is God this hung up about the sex lives of dogs or lions, or spiders?

Is God watching to see who Joseph Smith is screwing? Did he dictate the various girls and women he wanted Joseph Smith to screw? (Seems so according to Joseph Smith).

Seriously, what is up with this?

Again, if the "principle" was only about eternal families and friendship then there was absolutely no reason for the secrecy and lies and coercion.

And, why would polygamy break the hearts of God's daughter if polygamy was only about the next life and uniting people in heaven?

The apologetic argument, in my opinion makes God out to be a really perverted and sick dude!


~td~

Well let me put it this way. Apologists have no problem with Joseph Smith's sex life. It is the critics who seem to have the problem and who are reading much into it. Apologists don't have a problem. And so, is god one sick dude? No. But certainly people with agendas who see horny toadism in Joseph Smith's action seem to be a little perverted.

Polygamy was instituted by god. He had his reasons. Joseph Smith during the period 1841 to 1843 began to marry many women. Why? To have sex??? I don't think so. But he seemed to be a man in a hurry. And I have a funny feeling that god may have been pissed off with Joseph Smith's delays. Joseph Smith was not that enthusiastic about polygamy.