Brother Crockett vs...?

[_beastie]

Why distinguish? A wife is a wife.

This is why I keep repeating my questions, to no avail.

To droopy and crocket:

If it were proven, through DNA, that Josephine was the biological daughter of Joseph Smith, what would that mean to you? Would it alter your opinion of Joseph Smith's prophet-hood? Would you feel that he was justified in having sex with Sylvia because he was married to her? Would you think he had sinned? I really want an answer to this question.

[_Chap]

See this thread for another example of crocket's erroneous reference claims:

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... php?t=6302

He chastised mercury for dishonesty while claiming the Helen Mar quote did not exist in Mormon Polygamy, page 53. I own the book, and the quote does exist on that page.

Oh yes - this is what he said there:

That quote does not exist in page 53 of Van Wagoner's book on Polygamy.

That quote exists on page 294 of Van Wagoner's book on Sidney Rigdon, and it is a third-hand account from a Catherine Lewis. Lewis joined the church and then apostatized, writing a famous expose of the temple endowment ceremony.

I could write a book on Van Wagoner's excesses.

Helen wrote her own book on the subject, and never mentioned anything like this.

But, go on using the quote. It makes you look informed.

However, since as I have already explained Mr Crocket is a good and truthful man, I think you must either be lying or delusional about the Mormon Polygamy book having the Helen Mar material on page 53.

I am sure that Coggins/Droopy has this book and will be able to confirm that you are wrong.

[_truth dancer]

But sex with a woman who remains married to her her other husband, or sex with a 15 year old when the man is almost 40, well that is tougher pill for many to swallow.

The thing these folks don't realize is that to Joseph Smith, civil marriages meant NOTHING. Only HE had the power to perform marriages.

When Joseph Smith married these already married women, he considered them only married to him, they were HIS, period.

Sure his women may have lived with other men so as to hide the practice but he considered them HIS wives in every sense.

To Joseph Smith, these marriages to already married women were no different than his marriages to single women.

Moving on, we still haven't heard an answer as to why some men don't care if their wives and families were taken away by Joseph Smith for eternity. I seriously do not get this.

~dancer~

[_Chap]

Any minute now Mr Crocket will get to his office desk, and then you critics had better watch out!

Boy, will your asses be sore when he has given you the whupping you deserve! You watch it too, Mercury. Don't think you are safe over there on the other thread ...

And when Mr Crocket is done with you, Droopy will be around too. You'll be so sorry ...

[_the road to hana]

It seems apparent that the great fear is that Joseph had sex with multiple women. But isn't that what you'd want him to do, if he restored a principle you believe to be correct and eternal, even if some of those women were already married to other men? Wouldn't that be his right, and prerogative? Why would you care if a woman confessed to her daughter on her deathbed that she had sex with her husband?

I do not think anyone is arguing the Smith was not sexual with his plural wives. Just that he was not sexual with the polyandrous ones and the younger ones.

Why distinguish? A wife is a wife.

I am simply pointing this out. For some reason it seems in your debate here you think Droopy is arguing Smith did not have sex with any of his wives. I see no such argument. Indeed Droopy has clarifies himself.

No, I don't think that and I've never argued that.

Why distinguish? Well it seems that some are ok if Smith had 10, 15 or so wives that had not been married to anyone else and so for them sex is just a ok in that situation. God commanded it. They think ancient Bible patriarchs did it.So whoopie dee doo it is a ok. But sex with a woman who remains married to her her other husband, or sex with a 15 year old when the man is almost 40, well that is tougher pill for many to swallow.

Least that is how it seems.

So you're suggesting that should be a deal-breaker for faithful Mormons?

What about Joseph of Nazareth having sex with Mary (Jesus' mother) after she'd given birth to Jesus? Don't Mormons regard her as having had a child by God the Father and being sealed to him? Doesn't that put Joseph of Nazareth in the same situation as Joseph Smith? (Just musing here. . . how is one adultery and the other one isn't?)

Thus I would like to see Droopy or Bob answer Beastie's question. If it could be shown that Joseph Smith was sexual with polyandrous wives or his teen wives what would their conclusion be about JSs prophetic call?

My argument is that if he was truly a prophet, does it matter whether those women were already married or not? Isn't it just as bad that he took women who were married to other men and sealed himself to them for the eternities, whether he had sex with them or not?

Honestly, it seems that Bob is very desperate to make sure that there was no sex with the polyabdruos wive's.

That does appear to be the case.

And certainly Josephine's statement does not prove things. But I think it a great leap to conclude that if her mother really said this that it was referring to some dynastic sealing.

Noted, and agreed.

[_asbestosman]

Half-serious question: how do men justify having more than one child? Doesn't the second child necessarily make them ignore part of their duties to the first? How many kids is too many? With that in mind, how many wives is too many (for safety's sake, I recommend that you state the numer is greater than 0 ;) )?

Personally I find any comparison of the husband/wife relationship to a parent/child relationship really odd.

However, to answer your question, How many wives is too many? More than one.

In context, I am talking about responsibilities of time, finances, etc. I am certainly not saying that intimacy between copules is equivalent to that between parents and children.

Is it inherently wrong for a person to have a job that keeps her away from family for long periods of time (buisness, military, etc.)? Is it wrong to have more than 2 or 3 children?

Why is it impossible to fulfill marital responsibilities when having more than one spouse, but not when having 2 children? It is my understanding that children are much more demanding than spouses are. Even children get jealous of having siblings. In fact, even only children can have sibling rivalries with the family pets. I really don't see why having multiple spouses is inherently wrong. I can see why it's inherently undesirable for me. Since I am no alpha male, I would end up with zilch. For females, that might be a good thing, but certainly I wouldn't like it that way. Still, what I want is not always inherently right.

[_the road to hana]

Half-serious question: how do men justify having more than one child? Doesn't the second child necessarily make them ignore part of their duties to the first? How many kids is too many? With that in mind, how many wives is too many (for safety's sake, I recommend that you state the numer is greater than 0 ;) )?

Personally I find any comparison of the husband/wife relationship to a parent/child relationship really odd.

However, to answer your question, How many wives is too many? More than one.

In context, I am talking about responsibilities of time, finances, etc. I am certainly not saying that intimacy between copules is equivalent to that between parents and children.

Is it inherently wrong for a person to have a job that keeps her away from family for long periods of time (buisness, military, etc.)? Is it wrong to have more than 2 or 3 children?

Why is it impossible to fulfill marital responsibilities when having more than one spouse, but not when having 2 children? It is my understanding that children are much more demanding than spouses are. Even children get jealous of having siblings. In fact, even only children can have sibling rivalries with the family pets. I really don't see why having multiple spouses is inherently wrong. I can see why it's inherently undesirable for me. Since I am no alpha male, I would end up with zilch. For females, that might be a good thing, but certainly I wouldn't like it that way. Still, what I want is not always inherently right.

This is a little bit of a theological ramble here, and a divergence, but on that same note (of having more than one spouse/wife), I continue to wonder how that fits in theologically with the LDS view of the eternities, and becoming gods.

It seems to me that the recipe for a God in Mormonism is man + woman = God.

So, if a man is married/sealed to more than one woman in the eternities, is he one god with one of them, and another god with another?

Is it like salt and pepper shakers?

man = salt
woman = pepper

Regardless which woman is with the man, there's a complete set, which therefore, makes it "god?"

It seems to me in Biblical precedent there was generally a primary wives, and the rest were concubines or minor wives in terms of status. But the hole "one flesh" thing gets blown out of the water by multiple spouses simultaneously.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Abman,

Is it inherently wrong for a person to have a job that keeps her away from family for long periods of time (buisness, military, etc.)? Is it wrong to have more than 2 or 3 children?

It could be argued that it is wrong to have more children than one can appropriately care for.

Why is it impossible to fulfill marital responsibilities when having more than one spouse, but not when having 2 children? It is my understanding that children are much more demanding than spouses are.

The two are nothing alike. NOTHING. Parents care for, teach, and love their children; they help them grow to become healthy, stable, contributing, decent human beings. (Parents should not treat their young children as an intimate friend).

This is NOT what a marriage is.

in my opinion, a marriage (or committed intimate) relationship is about sharing one's life with another in the deepest sense, connecting intimately, exploring one's most vulnerable, honest self, opening one's heart and soul to another, accepting the totality of another. It is finding one's soul mate (I don't mean this in the sense of looking around and picking a person, but finding where two souls come together as one). This is impossible in polygamy.

I have come to believe that those men and women who believe a harem lifestyle is similar to having multiple children are those who truly do not understand what a marriage can be. It is almost as if they think of marriage as two neighbors living together or something. I don't get it.

As I have said before, the sexual strategy of the harem lifestyle turns men into sperm donors and women into chattel. It takes fathers out of the picture while the emotion connection and intimate component of the relationship is absent.

In response to The Road to Hana,

I totally agree...

The universe is one of balance and harmony. When we are out of balance we suffer the consequences until we return to a place of harmony (homeostasis). The universe just was not set up to be Yang/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin. :-)

I say it jokingly but I feel it very deeply.

~dancer~

[_the road to hana]

In response to The Road to Hana,

I totally agree...

The universe is one of balance and harmony. When we are out of balance we suffer the consequences until we return to a place of harmony (homeostasis). The universe just was not set up to be Yang/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin/Yin. :-)

I say it jokingly but I feel it very deeply.

~dancer~

Same here.

You and I feel it, and it doesn't even make sense in the context of purported Mormon theology.

[_asbestosman]

I have come to believe that those men and women who believe a harem lifestyle is similar to having multiple children are those who truly do not understand what a marriage can be.

It's no secret that I view life quite differently from many people I know, but I honestly don't see what I'm missing from my marriage. I'm not sure I appreciate the insinuation that I am missing something just because I happen to have a different world view. My dreams are different, but I don't think that makes me defective, less happy, or what have you. I think I'm just able to better divorce myself from my emotions at times than others I know. Is that a bad thing? I don't see why.

It is almost as if they think of marriage as two neighbors living together or something. I don't get it.

No, that's not how I view marriage. I view it as much like two best friends living together and doing things together. The big difference I see, though, is that I was never sexually intimate with other best friends, but I did have emotional connections with them--sharing personal worries, dreams, etc. The marriage connection is deeper because of sexual intimacy, but my experiences with best friends of the past is in my opinion analogous. Similarly, I hope that my children can be a lot like my best friends of the past were, but closer. I just don't want the sexual aspect to be there. I really don't see why I can't have a close, deep emotional connection with my children as well as with my wife. My brothers are some of my best friends too.

Again, no, I do not want to be a polygamist. I simply see no a-priori reason that it's wrong or takes away from intimacy. The one reason I see is because of jealousy--which I admittedly have too. However, I don't see why jealousy is necessary. That does not mean I can overcome such jealousy--I can't and besides, I don't really want to.