Did Joseph Smith marry for love?

[_Jason Bourne]

With Fanny Alger, there's no mention of a restoration of anything, no commandment, no angel with a drawn sword. Just Joseph falling in love.

I really do not like the excuse that Joseph Smith was just in "love" with this young girl so decided to marry her.

Lets say their is a 37 year old married, with a few children ages 15, 11, and 7, male teacher at your neighborhood high school. And lets say the community finds out he is screwing a sophomore girl on the track team at his school.

How many people are going to excuse his behavior because he claims he is in love with this young girl?

How many people will even remotely believe he is in love with her?

Any thirty something year old man who claims to be in love with a sixteen year old has a serious, I mean serious problem.

The "I just love her, " excuse is not much better than the, "God said," excuse. Either way, a grown man taking sexual advantage of a young girl is disgusting and inexcusable.

(sigh).[/quote]

In 1831 Joseph was 26. Was Fanny 16? I thought she was older then that. Just trying to get the fact straight. I still call it adultery.

[_Runtu]

Hi Runtu... :-)

So, I guess you are using the term, "in love," rather than... "wanted sex"?

I have a difficult time with this because it completely disgraces and dehumanizes the idea of love. Rape of a girl, has nothing, NOTHING to do with love.

I wholeheartedly agree. The context for Fanny is pretty simple: Joseph Smith had a habit of taking very young women into his home as hired help. Sooner or later, most of them ended up as his wives, some without the knowledge or consent of his wife. Fanny fits the pattern quite well. Either way, Joseph was not sealed to Fanny. No sealing power had been restored as of yet, and no command given to enter into polygamy. Joseph seems to have been a free-lance polygamist in this case.

OK, so should we now start calling all rapists, sexual predators, men who screw young girls, and men who coerce married women to be with him.... "free-lance polygamists"?

If a grown married man coerced your daughter into sex would you excuse it as, "free lance polygamy"?

I know you are trying to be polite, (smile), but why give all the excuses to this man, when CLEARLY, no other man on the face of the planet would get such a free pass with all the accompanying excuses and justifications?

All the reasons, all the rationalizations, all the theories in the world do not take away from the facts regarding what Joseph Smith did indeed do.

I've worked with dozens and dozens of girls who have been raped. There is just plain NO excuse for this...and I do not think it does any good to downplay or minimize the reality of the situation.

I may be uncharitable when it comes to men sexually harming young girls... so be it.

~dancer~

Well, two things are at work. I prefer to be polite and let people read in what they will. But more importantly, I'm using the term because it was the stated reason. However you feel about Joseph's practice (and I'd say you and I are pretty much on the same page), with Fanny you can't palm it off on an angel with a sword (props to PP). This one seems like it was all his choice. The rationalizations came later. That's all I'm getting at. So far, no apologist has attempted to dispute what I'm saying, so maybe that means I'm right.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Jason,

In 1831 Joseph was 26. Was Fanny 16? I thought she was older then that. Just trying to get the fact straight. I still call it adultery.

It was fourteen year old Helen Mar whom Joseph Smith coerced into marriage when he was 36 or 37 years old.

~dancer~

[_Runtu]

Hi Jason,

In 1831 Joseph was 26. Was Fanny 16? I thought she was older then that. Just trying to get the fact straight. I still call it adultery.

It was fourteen year old Helen Mar whom Joseph Smith coerced into marriage when he was 36 or 37 years old.

~dancer~

What kills me is that some people don't see the coercion, or the general creepiness of the whole thing.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Runtu... :-)

What kills me is that some people don't see the coercion, or the general creepiness of the whole thing.

It baffles my mind.

The very thought of a fourteen year old, eighth grade middle school girl being manipulated by a nearly forty year old married man just seriously makes me want to vomit.

~dancer~

[_wenglund]

Since we're using the Old Testament to excuse polygamy, why isn't the Old Testament followed in other ways?

Since this was addressed to me, perhaps I should inform you that I wasn't using the Old Testament to excuse polygamy. In fact, I wasn't using it to excuse anything, nor was I trying to excuse polygamy.

Thanks, -Wade Engund-

[Gadianton]

I thought you made that clear as well. I just thought it might help to put the choice of marriage into greater context. I didn't put all of my thoughts to pen when considering marrying my girlfriend back then, but I think people may have gathered my motives and considerations by respectfully examining the whole of my life, particularly the life I lived at the time. I have no reason to think the same wouldn't prove useful when examining Joseph's decision to be sealed to Fanny.

But, that may just be me.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I wholeheartedly agree. The context for Fanny is pretty simple: Joseph Smith had a habit of taking very young women into his home as hired help. Sooner or later, most of them ended up as his wives, some without the knowledge or consent of his wife. Fanny fits the pattern quite well. Either way, Joseph was not sealed to Fanny. No sealing power had been restored as of yet, and no command given to enter into polygamy. Joseph seems to have been a free-lance polygamist in this case.

Yes that is a pretty simple context. Some might even consider it overlysimplistic. But, I suppose we each are free to expand or limit the context as we see fit, and perhaps use one or two instances to claim a trend with which to assassinate someone's character. It is not a tactic I find usesful (particularly given the Golden Rule), but I can accept that others may think differently.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Gadianton]

What kills me is that some people don't see the coercion, or the general creepiness of the whole thing.

Could their "not seeing" be because they may not be as quick as you to jump to certain conclusions about the nature of the relationship?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Hi Runtu... :-)

So, I guess you are using the term, "in love," rather than... "wanted sex"?

I have a difficult time with this because it completely disgraces and dehumanizes the idea of love. Rape of a girl, has nothing, NOTHING to do with love.

I wholeheartedly agree. The context for Fanny is pretty simple: Joseph Smith had a habit of taking very young women into his home as hired help. Sooner or later, most of them ended up as his wives, some without the knowledge or consent of his wife. Fanny fits the pattern quite well. Either way, Joseph was not sealed to Fanny. No sealing power had been restored as of yet, and no command given to enter into polygamy. Joseph seems to have been a free-lance polygamist in this case.

OK, so should we now start calling all rapists, sexual predators, men who screw young girls, and men who coerce married women to be with him.... "free-lance polygamists"?

If a grown married man coerced your daughter into sex would you excuse it as, "free lance polygamy"?

I know you are trying to be polite, (smile), but why give all the excuses to this man, when CLEARLY, no other man on the face of the planet would get such a free pass with all the accompanying excuses and justifications?

All the reasons, all the rationalizations, all the theories in the world do not take away from the facts regarding what Joseph Smith did indeed do.

I've worked with dozens and dozens of girls who have been raped. There is just plain NO excuse for this...and I do not think it does any good to downplay or minimize the reality of the situation.

I may be uncharitable when it comes to men sexually harming young girls... so be it.

~dancer~

We know that Joseph was sealed to Helen just prior to her 15th birthday. Beyond that, it is all pretty much speculation. Calling it "reality" does not make it so. And, if you think that speculation is sufficient grounds to rise up in self-righteous indignation and to proceed to assassinate people's character, then that is your choice. I just hope that others aren't as quick to condemn you on such flimsy and uncharitable basis. I certainly wouldn't think it right.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Runtu]

What kills me is that some people don't see the coercion, or the general creepiness of the whole thing.

Could their "not seeing" be because they may not be as quick as you to jump to certain conclusions about the nature of the relationship?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Yes, Wade, I admit that 15 years of pondering this question made me jump to irrational conclusions. ;)