Dr. Peterson, why no mention of Joseph Smith's other wives on website?

[_The Nehor]

My point is LDS Inc has you by the short hairs that stick through your bottom garmies that you continue to wear.

I think you and the rest of the civilized world disagree on what constitutes a 'point'.

[_Inconceivable]

whereas the story of the relationship of Joseph and Emma is much more clear, much more public, and much more relevant to and integrated into the overall historical narrative of Joseph's biography and of formative Church history.

Yet polygamy is a huge issue in Smith's life. To leave it out leaves a huge hole as well as a gap in one of the basis for the doctrine of eternal marriage. Such pass over comments about polygamy, like the one in the intro in the current priesthood/Relief Society manaul seem to border on disingenuous at best.

And I have no doubt that, for good or for ill, the Church website was trying to escape controversy -- which, apart from some small websites such as this one, it has probably largely succeeded in doing.

And preserve tender testimonies that are built on less then full information about the person we are supposed to have a testimony about.

Without all of the extramarital affairs, the relationship between Mr. & Mrs. Smith has never been what it is portrayed as. It was disfunctional at best, built upon the sandy foundation of mistrust, betrayal, immorality, illegality.. This is a twisted love unfit for a proper example to teach the next generation.

How would we describe a company that places their label over the little black hole in their apples in order to get top value?

[_harmony]

My point is LDS Inc has you by the short hairs that stick through your bottom garmies that you continue to wear.

I think you and the rest of the civilized world disagree on what constitutes a 'point'.

PP has a problem with "points".

[_Jason Bourne]

My point is LDS Inc has you by the short hairs that stick through your bottom garmies that you continue to wear.

Wow. Such profundity is so underwhelming.

[_Yoda]

My point is LDS Inc has you by the short hairs that stick through your bottom garmies that you continue to wear.

Wow. Such profundity is so underwhelming.

Again...this is a wonderful example of PP killing a thread that had an interesting dialogue developing. I was actually enjoying the research and commentary of Inconceivable, DCP, Jason, and others, who were providing intelligent debate.

[_solomarineris]

One or more of several reasons might be at play.
For one thing, Latter-day Saints on the whole and the institutional Church in particular are uncomfortable with, even embarrassed and hypersensitive about, the topic of polygamy, and particularly with pre-Utah polygamy. They find it awkward. (Partly, I suspect -- but not entirely -- because of the on-going problem of schismatic polygamist sects.) My own personal preference would be that we be, within the strong constraints of the historical data, more open and forthright about this topic. I think we would be better off all around if we were so.
usual.

DCP & Jason Bourne Fake....
You just reap what you sow.....
We know, for fact what joseph Smith's intentions were....
I personally find nothing wrong with it.
Your history will screw you...
Truth is out there...

[_Yoda]

Truth is out there...

Do I detect a fellow X-Files fan? ;)

[_MsJack]

I am not sure if you have answered this before, but why do you think the church has chosen to omit mention of Joseph Smith's wives other than Emma on the official Joseph Smith website at http://www.josephsmith.net?

I just wanted to point out that if you want to get technical, the web site does mention some of Joseph Smith's plural wives.

Eliza Snow
Zina Diantha Huntington

Of course it doesn't give any hint that Smith was married to them, so that's not a defense of the site.

Those were the only ones I could find, but I didn't bother to do the whole list, only the well known ones.