Brother Crockett vs...?

[_rcrocket]

http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/08-SylviaSessionsLyon.htm

On January 27, 1844 her only surviving child, Philofreen, also died. At this time, Sylvia was eight months pregnant with her fourth child, Josephine Rosetta Lyon. Josephine later wrote, “Just prior to my mothers death in 1882 she called me to her bedside and told me that her days were numbered and before she passed away from mortality she desired to tell me something which she had kept as an entire secret from me and from all others but which she now desired to communicate to me. She then told me that I was the daughter of the Prophet Joseph Smith”.

Josephine was 38 years old at the time of her mother's death. Deathbed confessions are normally regarded as quite reliable.
It is extremely doubtful that Sylvia would lie about this to her daughter on her deathbed. So if someone was lying, it was Josephine. Why would she lie about such a thing?

Even more troubling, the elephant in the corner is the implication that these women could have been having sex with more than one man, when paternity is in question.

Even more troubling is Beastie's almost total misquote and mispunctuation of the last sentence of the Josephine quote; had she set it forth accurately the explanation would have been clearly against an implication of cohabitation. I can' t believe it.

[_beastie]

Even more troubling, the elephant in the corner is the implication that these women could have been having sex with more than one man, when paternity is in question.

The fact that her mother's admission would, indeed, present her as a woman having sex with two men in the same time frame, is another factor to weigh in the reliability of the affidavit.

in my opinion, the factors that weigh heavily in favor of the testimony:

1. Sylvia, a faithful Mormon, made a deathbed confession.
2. The daughter, Josephine, would most likely not desire to present information that would make people view her mother's morals as problematic.
3. Josephine was interviewed by a friendly witness, church historian Andrew Jenson.
4. Josephine was willing to give an affidavit affirming this information.
5. Josephine remained an active, faithful member all her life.
http://www.bountifulutah.gov/historical ... rJR01.html

[_rcrocket]

I have given you a famous example of where a child's testimony has not resolved disputed paternity -- the Hemmings' family. Perhaps you can give me an example where a child's testimony alone has resolved disputed paternity. Maybe one?

How many people have tried to explain to you that paternity is not the issue? The issue is that Sylvia believed that Joseph Smith was Josephine's father. Hence, she had had sex with Joseph Smith.

All this babbling of yours about paternity is smoke and mirrors.

No, the fact continues to remain that the evidence is coming from a child, which is totally untrustworthy evidence when a mother tells a child the mother's claim to paternity. Here, Sylvia does not claim sexual relations; she claims paternity.

And you would have understood the distinction in the context of Mormon sealing theology had you correctly quoted from Josephine. I won't trust you again with any quote.

You're off my radar screen, sister. Don't garble your sources in such a way as to turn the meaning around 180%.

[_beastie]

Even more troubling is Beastie's almost total misquote and mispunctuation of the last sentence of the Josephine quote; had she set it forth accurately the explanation would have been clearly against an implication of cohabitation. I can' t believe it.

This man is desperate, and hoping no one will follow up on his accusations.

Here's a FARMS article:

What is left to our imaginations, and Compton's speculations, is the nature of these "polyandrous" marriages. Were these unions simply dynastic sealings—the practice of sealing women to certain senior priesthood leaders for eternity only, with little or no temporal relationship—or were they relationships including intimacy and offspring? Compton points to about a half-dozen marriages to single women where physical intimacy is documented. But arguing parallels does not establish such relationships. There is a logical chasm between single and married sealings, and, for the latter, there is no responsible report of sexual intercourse except for Sylvia Sessions Lyon. In 1915, her daughter, Josephine Lyon Fisher, signed a statement that in 1882 Sylvia "told me that I was the daughter of the Prophet Joseph Smith, she having been sealed to the Prophet at the time that her husband Mr. Lyon was out of fellowship with the Church" (quoted on p. 183). The Fisher document is somewhat supported by Angus Cannon's recollection of hearing that Patty Sessions said the Prophet fathered Sylvia's child (see p. 637). Compton acknowledges Sylvia may have meant that her 1844 child was conceived during Windsor's four years out of the church, from 1842 to 1846 (see p. 183). Though he thinks it "unlikely" that Sylvia denied her husband cohabitation during this period (p. 183), that is a serious possibility. This is implied in the family tradition of her daughter some three decades later.

http://farms.BYU.edu/display.php?table=review&id=290

[_beastie]

No, the fact continues to remain that the evidence is coming from a child, which is totally untrustworthy evidence when a mother tells a child the mother's claim to paternity. Here, Sylvia does not claim sexual relations; she claims paternity.

Oh. My. God. Have you gone off your nut?? Does someone really have to explain the birds and the bees to you?? Seriously. This is pathetic.

And you would have understood the distinction in the context of Mormon sealing theology had you correctly quoted from Josephine. I won't trust you again with any quote.

Oh, please, share the "correct" quote from Josephine. I am waiting with baited breath.

You're off my radar screen, sister. Don't garble your sources in such a way as to turn the meaning around 180%.

You are pathetic.

[_rcrocket]

As you can see from your curative quote, you intentionally garbled your quote but putting a period in where a comment existed, and by leaving out the final phrase.

A person is considered the son or daugther of another by reason of the sealing. I have two half sisters sealed to my father who predeceased their births by over 10 years. Thus, Sylvia was justified in claiming Josephine's daughtership by reason of the sealing, which is what she does, and not sex.

Plus, the Josephine quote got the chronology completely wrong in terms of the Lyon's fellowship in the Church, but I'll leave that you to garble and misconstruct.

Shame, shame, shame on your complete torture of the text by changing the punctuation and leaving a phrase out. For shame.

[_beastie]

As you can see from your curative quote, you intentionally garbled your quote but putting a period in where a comment existed, and by leaving out the final phrase.

A person is considered the son or daugther of another by reason of the sealing. I have two half sisters sealed to my father who predeceased their births by over 10 years. Thus, Sylvia was justified in claiming Josephine's daughtership by reason of the sealing, which is what she does, and not sex.

Plus, the Josephine quote got the chronology completely wrong in terms of the Lyon's fellowship in the Church, but I'll leave that you to garble and misconstruct.

Shame, shame, shame on your complete torture of the text by changing the punctuation and leaving a phrase out. For shame.

I can only hope your clients are better served by you than your performance here.

The FARMS quote I offered that you claim corrected my "complete torture" of the text (which I directly quoted from a site a linked repeatedly), does not support your pathetic apologia at all.

Note this inconvenient sentence:

The Fisher document is somewhat supported by Angus Cannon's recollection of hearing that Patty Sessions said the Prophet fathered Sylvia's child (see p. 637).

Moreover, Andrew Jenson was collecting information to prove that Joseph Smith actually practiced polygamy. In this context, there is only one meaning for Josephine's statement.

Once again, you are utterly pathetic. I would be somewhat taken aback by your complete inability to admit you're incorrect, but I've seen you do equally bizarre song and dances before.

[_rcrocket]

Shame on you for your terrible misquote. It does not impress me that you had access to the correct quote; even more shameful. No wonder you post anonymously.

And your attack on me for being a lawyer is seen for what it is; a personal attack with no basis. You have chosen to have no clue as to what kind of lawyer I am, nor my reputation. It has no relevance here whatsoever. Shame.

Gotta go for the day. The last garbled, misquoted, vulgar word is yours!

[_beastie]

Well, I'll just use the FARMS article for the last "garbled, misquoted, vulgar word". I'll help you out by putting the garbled, misquoted,vulgar part in really BIG LETTERS so you can't miss them.

What is left to our imaginations, and Compton's speculations, is the nature of these "polyandrous" marriages. Were these unions simply dynastic sealings—the practice of sealing women to certain senior priesthood leaders for eternity only, with little or no temporal relationship—or were they relationships including intimacy and offspring? Compton points to about a half-dozen marriages to single women where physical intimacy is documented. But arguing parallels does not establish such relationships. There is a logical chasm between single and married sealings, and, for the latter, there is no responsible report of sexual intercourse except for Sylvia Sessions Lyon. In 1915, her daughter, Josephine Lyon Fisher, signed a statement that in 1882 Sylvia "told me that I was the daughter of the Prophet Joseph Smith, she having been sealed to the Prophet at the time that her husband Mr. Lyon was out of fellowship with the Church" (quoted on p. 183). The Fisher document is somewhat supported by Angus Cannon's recollection of hearing that Patty Sessions said the Prophet fathered Sylvia's child (see p. 637). Compton acknowledges Sylvia may have meant that her 1844 child was conceived during Windsor's four years out of the church, from 1842 to 1846 (see p. 183). Though he thinks it "unlikely" that Sylvia denied her husband cohabitation during this period (p. 183), that is a serious possibility. This is implied in the family tradition of her daughter some three decades later.

[_the road to hana]

Even more troubling is Beastie's almost total misquote and mispunctuation of the last sentence of the Josephine quote; had she set it forth accurately the explanation would have been clearly against an implication of cohabitation. I can' t believe it.

One doesn't need to cohabit in order to have sex or impregnate, so cohabitation in and of itself is outside the point.