DiscussMormonism.com

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/joseph ... more-10422

So Brigham Young practiced polygamy and had plenty of children. Joseph Smith did the same and no children. Was Bennett providing his services?

Brigham Young practiced polygamy for 35 years and lived with his wives.
Joseph Smith practiced polygamy for 3 years and virtually never lived with his wives.

Additionally Brigham had children with only 16/51 wives, which should tell us something about the nature of these sealings as well.

I think the Bennett assumption is pure cynicism based on facts not in evidence. Bennett was sent packing by May of 1842 at which point Joseph had about 8 wives. He married around 25 more wives AFTER Bennett was gone.
Yet still no children.
There were only two plural children born in Nauvoo during the prophet's lifetime despite the 30ish men and 84 plural marriages during his lifetime. Joseph's lack of children was not unique nor does it need to be sinister in nature. It was more likely purely an issue of circumstance.

JLHPROF wrote:I think the Bennett assumption is pure cynicism based on facts not in evidence. .

You label the Bennett theory as cynical but do you know how the Nauvoo residents viewed abortion?

Fence Sitter wrote:

JLHPROF wrote:I think the Bennett assumption is pure cynicism based on facts not in evidence. .

You label the Bennett theory as cynical but do you know how the Nauvoo residents viewed abortion?

No, I suppose I don't. They weren't particularly positive when using the term "infanticide" etc.
But I label it cynicism because to assume it based on the facts in evidence would require cynicism.
Any evidence that early faithful member polygamists practiced abortion is beyond speculation.
The primary source for that speculation appears to be Orson Pratt's ex-wife over 40 years after the fact. And she was accused of adultery and abortion herself.

The whole idea of Joseph and abortion comes down to pure "he said/she said" with the she getting the final words in 1886.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Marinda_Bates_Pratt

JLHPROF wrote:But I label it cynicism because to assume it based on the facts in evidence would require cynicism.

I would suggest that without knowing how they viewed such a procedure that you're doing the same thing, that is making a judgement without the facts.

JLHPROF wrote:The primary source for that speculation appears to be Orson Pratt's ex-wife over 40 years after the fact. And she was accused of adultery and abortion herself.

Accused by who?

JLHPROF wrote:Additionally Brigham had children with only 16/51 wives, which should tell us something about the nature of these sealings as well.

Yes that sex was involved. No one is arguing Joseph was only interested in sex.

Joseph Smith practiced polygamy for 3 years and virtually never lived with his wives.

That's right. He was hiding it from most people including his wife.

I think the Bennett assumption is pure cynicism based on facts not in evidence. Bennett was sent packing by May of 1842 at which point Joseph had about 8 wives. He married around 25 more wives AFTER Bennett was gone.
Yet still no children.

Bennett wouldn't be needed to continue to have abortions.

There were only two plural children born in Nauvoo during the prophet's lifetime despite the 30ish men and 84 plural marriages during his lifetime. Joseph's lack of children was not unique nor does it need to be sinister in nature. It was more likely purely an issue of circumstance.

Yes circumstances of not living with them or having a lot of sexual access to them, but it does not mean abortions were not done to keep his activities hidden, and he was accused of it by Sarah Pratt who is shown to be credible.

Themis wrote:he was accused of it by Sarah Pratt who is shown to be credible.

And that's where we will have to disagree.

Fence Sitter wrote:

JLHPROF wrote:But I label it cynicism because to assume it based on the facts in evidence would require cynicism.

I would suggest that without knowing how they viewed such a procedure that you're doing the same thing, that is making a judgement without the facts.

If one judges a man they disagree with guilty without full facts that would be cynicism.
If one judges a man they admire and believe innocent full facts that wouldn't be cynicism.

I never claimed I don't have a bias. I merely pointed out that the negative bias requires cynicism.

JLHPROF wrote:
If one judges a man they disagree with guilty without full facts that would be cynicism.
If one judges a man they admire and believe innocent full facts that wouldn't be cynicism.

I never claimed I don't have a bias. I merely pointed out that the negative bias requires cynicism.

And I am pointing out you may not have any reason for labeling it as "negative bias" other then your own need to impose your current morality on Joseph Smith.

You need to show first this is a negative judgement. To do that you have to know how they viewed abortion. Was it considered as severe to Mormons then as it is now? I really don't think so but I have not seen much on the subject as it was a relatively new procedure at the time.

By the way if you are going for labels here you should change your sentence to this"

If one judges a man they admire and believe innocent [without] full facts that wouldn't be cynicism [it would be gullibility].