Joseph Smith vs Harvey Milk

[_Buffalo]

The context is this - bc criticized LDST for having Harvey Milk as his avatar, saying Milk was a sexual predator. I pointed out that by that standard, so was Joseph Smith. Predictably, bcspace made lame excuses for why it wasn't bad when Joseph did it.

So in your view Milk and Joseph Smith are sexual predators? disgusting evil and vile?

I would say that their behavior was creepy, bare minimum. Admittedly I know very little about Milk.

[_Buffalo]

The view is that you must measure both with the same yardstick.

H.

That's why I'm asking. I think BCspace would contest this on a few reasonable grounds. First presentism. Second, Joseph Smith didn't sleep with the underaged. So I ask what's the point here. Do you guys consistently see both as evil and vile people?

CFR

[_MrStakhanovite]

Pretty sure Joseph had sex with Fanny.

The question really isn't about moral judgements about Harvey or Joseph, but what manner of man must a Prophet be?

[_LDSToronto]

The view is that you must measure both with the same yardstick.

H.

That's why I'm asking. I think BCspace would contest this on a few reasonable grounds. First presentism. Second, Joseph Smith didn't sleep with the underaged. So I ask what's the point here. Do you guys consistently see both as evil and vile people?

I don't view Harvey Milk as evil and vile, nor do I view Joseph as evil and vile.

H.

[_stemelbow]

Pretty sure Joseph had sex with Fanny.

The question really isn't about moral judgements about Harvey or Joseph, but what manner of man must a Prophet be?

that doesn't make any sense, since the history of this whole thing is that BCSpace took issue with LDST using Milk as an avatar, claiming the use of him was disgusting, or something like that. The question wasn't what is a prophet.

[_MrStakhanovite]

that doesn't make any sense, since the history of this whole thing is that BCSpace took issue with LDST using Milk as an avatar, claiming the use of him was disgusting, or something like that. The question wasn't what is a prophet.

I think it’s the very heart of the issue Stem, the reason Joseph Smith is held in such close scrutiny is because of his claim to restore God’s own Church, and serve as a modern prophet for God.

The mainstream LDS Church rests on the claims made by Joseph Smith, and invite people to investigate the Prophet. Can a man be a prophet while having an affair with Fanny? If Joseph Smith is like everyone else, why should we trust his testimony?

[_stemelbow]

I think it’s the very heart of the issue Stem, the reason Joseph Smith is held in such close scrutiny is because of his claim to restore God’s own Church, and serve as a modern prophet for God.

The mainstream LDS Church rests on the claims made by Joseph Smith, and invite people to investigate the Prophet. Can a man be a prophet while having an affair with Fanny?

But it can be contested that Joseph Smith had an affair with Fanny as well. How old was she?

If Joseph Smith is like everyone else, why should we trust his testimony?

There is only one reason to trust his testimony, as Joseph Smith intimated, you should only trust his testimony if you have reason to believe it, have faith and through faith have reason to believe him.

[_Buffalo]

But it can be contested that Joseph Smith had an affair with Fanny as well. How old was she?

How so?

She was 16.

[_MrStakhanovite]

But it can be contested that Joseph Smith had an affair with Fanny as well.

Well, what some of us call affairs, others call a higher law.

There is only one reason to trust his testimony, as Joseph Smith intimated, you should only trust his testimony if you have reason to believe it, have faith and through faith have reason to believe him.

Right, but it’s hard to believe, even want to believe, Joseph’s claims in light of less than confidence boosting events.

[_bcspace]

Harvey had a touch of the gay. So that makes it all wrong.

Yes. Homosexuality is an additional sin.

That's why I'm asking. I think BCspace would contest this on a few reasonable grounds. First presentism. Second, Joseph Smith didn't sleep with the underaged.

Which I did do in the other thread and there's really nothing that can gainsay it. There is also the matter of marriage. Can one be guilty of fornication or adultery by having sex with one's spouse?

So I ask what's the point here. Do you guys consistently see both as evil and vile people?

There is actually quite the silver lining on the subject of Joseph Smith vs. Milk. People, in their unwarranted disgust for Joseph Smith, can't argue on this basis without also expressing well warranted disgust for Harvey Milk and those who, usually other sexual predators and their supporters, hold him up as some sort of folk hero.

Both had sex with teenagers. But according to bcspace, Milk was a sexual predator, while Smith was not. How does that work?

Someone is alleged without evidence to have slept with 16 year old girls is called a rapist and someone who actually does sleep with 16 year old boys is just a harmless gay man?