CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 8004
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University
Contact:

CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Kishkumen »

This drops this evening at 10 pm MT.

https://youtu.be/2TLfE7Hrg58
Polygamy haunts Mormonism long after Official Declaration #1 put an official end to its practice. Some LDS people deny Joseph Smith initiated Mormon polygamy. Others deny that Smith slept with his wives. On the other hand, some critics of the LDS Church insist that the entire point of polygamy was sex. As a historian, I am committed to following the evidence, which contradicts all of these positions.
I am sure Markk won't like this one, but I think that is because he fundamentally does not understand what I am doing with this channel. In any case, I bring up Michelle Stone's polygamy denialism, and Brian Hales' denial that Smith even had sex with his plural wives.
Markk
Prophet
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:49 am

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Markk »

If I am that critic, keep in mind that my position was section 132 and the ELC was a mustache for Smith, for sex. I never said polygamy as a whole was for sex as it evolved.

And you might want to double check Brian Hales position....he conceded years ago he had sex with several of his wives. You may still have time to edit your assertion in the podcast.
Jesse Pinkman
Sunbeam
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:19 am

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Jesse Pinkman »

I’m looking forward to listening to this, Kish.

I think that there are several different lines of thinking on this. The sex may be the catalyst for what started this, but I do think that Joseph’s theology is much more complicated than that.

I also think that the polygamy was more about power than sex; not that sex wasn’t also a motive.

I also think that Joseph honestly believed what he was preaching.
"Yo 148, 3-to-the-3-to-the-6-to-the-9. Representin' the ABQ. What up, biatch? Leave it at the tone!" ;)
Markk
Prophet
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:49 am

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Markk »

LOL, Kish your podcast on this is maybe the most scattered mess I have ever seen. Focus ....Brian Hales conceded a decade ago that Joseph had sex with several his wives, that was a total fail, a joke. You claimed you were going to discuss M Stone...you did not past her name. You claim to be a historian and you do not even understand that Hales, on his website, admits Smith had sex with several of his wives.

You misrepresented what I asserted, that Joseph use the ELC as a mustache for sex...i.e. the partridge twins, HMK. Nancy Ridgeon, and the other twins to name a few. You did not get into the origins of the ELC, the Law of the PH, Claytons diaries...etc. Frankly it was a joke and just a scattered rant.

So focus...Joseph basically adopted orphaned twin sisters, married them secretly behind Emma's back, had sex with them, then married them again with Emma's permission without her knowing so....under the ELC. Do you care to comment on this?

I challenge any one that watched you podcast to put into any type of historical context in regard to the ELC, and early Nauvoo polygamy.
User avatar
Dr. Shades
Founder and Visionary
Posts: 2359
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:48 pm
Contact:

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Dr. Shades »

"ELC" = ?
.
"I think the idea of repairing a corpse does not work very well."

--huckelberry, 08-26-2024
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 6947
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Moksha »

Dr. Shades wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 7:57 am
"ELC" = ?
Evangelical Lutheran Church or Estee Lauder Company.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Markk
Prophet
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:49 am

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Markk »

Dr. Shades wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 7:57 am
"ELC" = ?
"Everlasting Covenant." In section 132 plural marriage it is called a new and everlasting covenant.

Also re-reading what I wrote the Partridge sisters, who were basically orphaned and taken in by the Smith's, who called Emma aunt Emma, while Joseph was secretly married to him having sex in their home, and Emily's home after Emma kicked the sisters out, no doubt after having the covenant of marriage explained to them.... were Not twins as I wrote, but sisters, as were Maria and Sara Lawrence.

To my point, section 132 or the ELC as I abbreviated it, was in my opinion and of many many others a way, or as I put it a mustache, to get women in bed. It is just a fact he used it and that it worked. Whether Joseph believed it or not is irrelevant. I don't believe he believed it, but who knows.

I'll have to go back and look, but I think it was maybe Nancy Rigdon?, the young daughter of Sidney, who was given a ultimatum of sorts in regard with the ELC, basically accept it and the exaltation that comes with it or it would be forever off the table. Something like that.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 8004
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University
Contact:

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Kishkumen »

Markk wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 4:57 am
LOL, Kish your podcast on this is maybe the most scattered mess I have ever seen. Focus ....Brian Hales conceded a decade ago that Joseph had sex with several his wives, that was a total fail, a joke. You claimed you were going to discuss M Stone...you did not past her name. You claim to be a historian and you do not even understand that Hales, on his website, admits Smith had sex with several of his wives.

You misrepresented what I asserted, that Joseph use the ELC as a mustache for sex...i.e. the partridge twins, HMK. Nancy Ridgeon, and the other twins to name a few. You did not get into the origins of the ELC, the Law of the PH, Claytons diaries...etc. Frankly it was a joke and just a scattered rant.

So focus...Joseph basically adopted orphaned twin sisters, married them secretly behind Emma's back, had sex with them, then married them again with Emma's permission without her knowing so....under the ELC. Do you care to comment on this?

I challenge any one that watched you podcast to put into any type of historical context in regard to the ELC, and early Nauvoo polygamy.
Markk, what is the difference between polygamy being cooked up for sex and “the ELC was a mustache for sex”? I think we went over the Hales thing in the other thread. It was a position he had. It is one he still clings to as much as he can in some form.

Yeah, the episode is a kind of rant, sure. A detailed response to you would frankly be boring, and very few people would want to see it.

Let me give you a tip here. The title of the channel is Coffee with Kish. It is a lighthearted chat from someone who is better than average informed but not a Mormon historian. So far your complaint is that I have not provided the history as you think it should be reported, and that I shared Hales’ former as opposed to current position.

Shrug.

It is supposed to be fun, guy. I say repeatedly that the idea is to “geek out about Mormonism.” This means chat about interesting stuff in a generally neutral way that will not put off LDS, ex-LDS, or Never Mo people. Maybe it’s just not for you, since you don’t seem to want that.
Markk
Prophet
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:49 am

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Markk »

Kishkumen wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 12:27 pm
Markk wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 4:57 am
LOL, Kish your podcast on this is maybe the most scattered mess I have ever seen. Focus ....Brian Hales conceded a decade ago that Joseph had sex with several his wives, that was a total fail, a joke. You claimed you were going to discuss M Stone...you did not past her name. You claim to be a historian and you do not even understand that Hales, on his website, admits Smith had sex with several of his wives.

You misrepresented what I asserted, that Joseph use the ELC as a mustache for sex...i.e. the partridge twins, HMK. Nancy Ridgeon, and the other twins to name a few. You did not get into the origins of the ELC, the Law of the PH, Claytons diaries...etc. Frankly it was a joke and just a scattered rant.

So focus...Joseph basically adopted orphaned twin sisters, married them secretly behind Emma's back, had sex with them, then married them again with Emma's permission without her knowing so....under the ELC. Do you care to comment on this?

I challenge any one that watched you podcast to put into any type of historical context in regard to the ELC, and early Nauvoo polygamy.
Markk, what is the difference between polygamy being cooked up for sex and “the ELC was a mustache for sex”? I think we went over the Hales thing in the other thread. It was a position he had. It is one he still clings to as much as he can in some form.

Yeah, the episode is a kind of rant, sure. A detailed response to you would frankly be boring, and very few people would want to see it.

Let me give you a tip here. The title of the channel is Coffee with Kish. It is a lighthearted chat from someone who is better than average informed but not a Mormon historian. So far your complaint is that I have not provided the history as you think it should be reported, and that I shared Hales’ former as opposed to current position.

Shrug.

It is supposed to be fun, guy. I say repeatedly that the idea is to “geek out about Mormonism.” This means chat about interesting stuff in a generally neutral way that will not put off LDS, ex-LDS, or Never Mo people. Maybe it’s just not for you, since you don’t seem to want that.
Again go back and read my first few posts here...you were the one that got butt hurt and took offense to my position and escalated the conversation. This is a discussion board, not the Coffee with Kish Board, correct me if I am wrong.
Markk
Prophet
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:49 am

Re: CWK #31: Just about the sex? Mormon polygamy.

Post by Markk »

Kish...So far your complaint is that I have not provided the history as you think it should be reported, and that I shared Hales’ former as opposed to current position.
LOL...my intent on the thread was to give my view of LDS deification, and answer and give my opinion to a question by Moksha...and I asserted that section 132 was a means to an end for sex, and that it was done so by promising deification to his prospective wives and there family. I stand by that and I feel I can prove it fairly easily.

In regard to Hales, he conceded Smith had sex with his wives a decade and longer ago, it is not like he just changed his mind. That is not a complaint, it is a observation to your claim that you were a historian and deal with facts.

It cracks me up that you want to give your views and put yourself out on a discussion board on LDS theology and history, which is very controversial....and now on a podcast, and then whine and call people names when they disagree with your positions.

I have no idea what you do/did for a living, and I doubt you ever played sports or entered into a competitive discipline, because your skin is certainly not very thick Kish. LOL...Maybe you should change your podcast name to "Agree with Kish, or I'll call you names."
Post Reply