moksha wrote:Excellent point. There is no reason that love cannot blossom between a 26 year old women and a 78 year old Prophet given enough patience and anesthetics.
Maybe he just wants a servant girl to attend to his other (nonsexual needs) such as a massage and other kinds of bodily treatments. She can primp him and bring him food at bedside. She can pose for him while taking her ugly Mormon garments off and he can thrill in her beauty. Yes, the possibilities of a dirty old man are endless.
I have a 25 year old daughter and would be quite unerved if she were to marry a 78 year old man for any reason. In fact, I'd be paying the old bastard a visit and tell him just what I think of him. Oh the Mormon pervert prophets! I'd probably wrap my hands around his goddman neck and tell him if he ever touches my daughter I'll break it next time I see him.
kamenraider wrote:John Taylor was ill with congestive heart failure the last year of his life, and severely so beginning in January 1887, so I doubt that there was much of a physical/sexual component to, or physical/sexual motivation for, their relationship. He had received a revelation about plural marriage while at his prior place of residence in Centerville the month before their marriage, which undoubtedly had something to do with it.
Sure, he wanted a personal nursemaid to attend his every need -- which may include gently washing his private partst, thus no shame because he's marriage. He knew how to take advantage of his power and position. I wonder how many gold coins he had under his mattress which he stole from the saints?
kamenraider wrote:If I recall correctly, the Josephine Roueche was 26, not 16. Why call them "dirty" just because there's an age gap? Must we assume that everyone who marries someone younger does it for sex, and that a genuine, loving relationship is not likely if there's a significant age gap?
Yes.
If that is the case, then what do you see the woman getting out of it?
kamenraider wrote:If I recall correctly, the Josephine Roueche was 26, not 16. Why call them "dirty" just because there's an age gap? Must we assume that everyone who marries someone younger does it for sex, and that a genuine, loving relationship is not likely if there's a significant age gap?
I seem to have made a math error. I will fix this straight away.
My sincerest apologies, I made a math error. [url]Here is the corrected image.[/url]
You have to admit that the OP infographic is pretty disgusting. These guys claim to be religious leaders and prophets of God. Yet they make Hugh Heffner look like a saint. Hugh Heffner at least had the good sense to take his wives one at a time, to marry women who wanted to marry him, and leave (most of) his ex-wives with a little something financially.
It is amazing that a lot of the LDS Apologists want us to believe that these "prophets of God" were acting in holiness and righteousness while they took these teenage girls as their wives to have sex with. However, most of these same LDS Apologists want us to believe that the teenage boys that masturbate are acting in evilness and wickedness.
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter
afterallwecando wrote:I seem to have made a math error. I will fix this straight away.
My sincerest apologies, I made a math error. [url]Here is the corrected image.[/url]
Don't bother. The church doesn't deserve it. Accuracy is not neccessarily a part of church practice, so who cares? Give the church a dose of its own medicine and see how it likes it!
Shulem wrote: Maybe he just wants a servant girl to attend to his other (nonsexual needs) such as a massage and other kinds of bodily treatments. She can primp him and bring him food at bedside. She can pose for him while taking her ugly Mormon garments off and he can thrill in her beauty. Yes, the possibilities of a dirty old man are endless.
Paul O
Paul, putting aside the dirty old man aspect, how many of us - men or women - would not like a nubile companion to fluff our pillow and feed us grapes?
Thank you for a well researched post and for setting the record straight. Look forward to your posting here more often, especially of you feel that unfair representations are being made.
Well done.
Thanks DrW.
M.
I'd rather be a could-be if I cannot be an are; because a could-be is a maybe who - is reaching for a star. I'd rather be a has-been than a might-have-been, by far; for a might have-been has never been, but a has was once an are. - Milton Berle
This is admittedly offensive to believers, but thought it was worth noting anyway
Neither here nor there. To be disgusted is to engage in Presentism. That culture was still under the influence of English common law in which a girl of ten could legally give her consent for marriage and sex. In Joseph Smith's and BY's day, it was becoming less common and sometime eyebrows would be raised, but still within the curve.
It's interesting to note that few seem to have any problem with say, Edgar Allan Poe's marriage to a thirteen year old. His works are still in the library and on your shelves despite that fact. He became engaged to a 15 year old shortly before his death.
bcspace wrote:That culture was still under the influence of English common law in which a girl of ten could legally give her consent for marriage and sex.
And yet the age of adulthood at common law was 21. It's almost like the age of consent and the age of maturity in society were, like, two different things or something.
It's interesting to note that few seem to have any problem with say, Edgar Allan Poe's marriage to a thirteen year old. His works are still in the library and on your shelves despite that fact. He became engaged to a 15 year old shortly before his death.
Pretty sure a lot of people then and now thought Edgar Allan Poe was screwed up.
And his works are still in the library and on your shelves because it is compelling, skillful writing that is interesting to read and has actual insights into the human condition. Yet another distinction between what he did and what Joseph Smith did.
