Is there any concrete evidence that Joseph didn't consummate

[_Buffalo]

That's evidence for birth control or abortion, which is backed up by at least two other sources. Not evidence of abstinence.

The term "birth control" didn't exist until around the turn of the century--I think Margaret Sanger coined it. But yeah, contraception was far more ubiquitous in Joseph's time than people today realize. Old newspapers were full of advertisements for "elixirs for the restoration of the menses," i.e. a pharmaceutical abortifacient. People also had access to sponges, primitive IUD's, and condoms...which were carefully washed & stored after use so as to allow re-use. Kinda makes you wonder what else might be stored in the First Presidency vault, doesn't it?

I'd pay to see Joseph's old bit of lamb skin. Wouldn't want to touch it though. That thing would have seen more action than a country bar on a Friday night.

[_Corpsegrinder]

I'd pay to see Joseph's old bit of lamb skin. Wouldn't want to touch it though. That thing would have seen more action than a country bar on a Friday night.

Snippet of a convention overheard in the First Presidency vault: "Dammit, Spencer, I told you not the throw that away, that was the seed of the Prophet!"

for what it's worth, I think it’s silly to assume Joseph did NOT consummate most of his polygamous marriages, because the “angel with the drawn sword” is such an obvious metaphor for male sexual arousal.

To me, the “drawn sword” indicates that the revelation to enter into polygamy presented itself to Joseph in the form of strong sexual feelings toward the women who would become his future polygamous wives. In other words, when Joseph got the hots for a certain special little lady, he interpreted it (or rationalized it) as a revelation.

Jim Jones, David Koresh--they all followed a similar pattern.

[_Scottie]

There is 2nd hand evidence that Joseph had a Dr abort one of his pregnancies.

Also, the fact that Sylvia Sessions believed her daughter, Josephine, was the daughter of Joseph Smith is pretty hard to argue against.

Of course, I've heard apologists make the claim that she was speaking of her being a "spiritual" daughter. You have to strain the text pretty hard to come to that conclusion.

[_cafe crema]

Is there any concrete evidence that Joseph didn't consummate even one of his marriages? Or is this all apologetic wishful thinking? Because, you know, the default for marriage is consummation. Beyond that you'd better have some concrete evidence that it DIDN'T happen.

Well, according to Peterson, the fact that Joseph's polygamous marriages produced few children proves that they weren't based on sex...even though, as Peterson concedes, they may have had a "sexual component." So does this mean that Joseph and his wives restricted their physical activities to those that would not result in pregnancy, like oral copulation?

And, is it fair to say that Joseph wouldn't have entered into polygamy if Fanny Alger hadn't sucked him into it?

Mormon Lay in light cotton?

[_Sophocles]

I seem to remember reading that the LDS Church's own apologists have argued strenuously and presented evidence that Smith did consummate his polygamous marriages, in order to counter claims of the RLDS Church that he was not a polygamist at all.

Not sure where I'd have to go to dig up the actual arguments, but isn't it pretty common knowledge that the church was once on the other side of this argument?

[_Buffalo]

I seem to remember reading that the LDS Church's own apologists have argued strenuously and presented evidence that Smith did consummate his polygamous marriages, in order to counter claims of the RLDS Church that he was not a polygamist at all.

Not sure where I'd have to go to dig up the actual arguments, but isn't it pretty common knowledge that the church was once on the other side of this argument?

Yes, I believe that was the temple lot case. That's where the church dragged out Joseph's widows and had them testify to shagging Joseph.

[_moksha]

Yes, I believe that was the temple lot case. That's where the church dragged out Joseph's widows and had them testify to shagging Joseph.

This would be a great cue line to begin that wonderful song and dance routine from Best Little Whorehouse in Texas, "I Love to Dance a Little Side-step".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCDoBvG1HoI

[_Darth J]

even one of his marriages? Or is this all apologetic wishful thinking? Because, you know, the default for marriage is consummation. Beyond that you'd better have some concrete evidence that it DIDN'T happen.

Buffalo, rest assured that you do not have the burden of proving that it happened. Defenders of the faith have the burden of showing that it didn't.

"On the flip side, to rebut [the claim that Joseph Smith didn't have sex with his concubines], all it takes is some hypothesis of what could have happened to show the [idea that he wasn't having sex with them] ineffective."
--stemelbow, viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20001&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=63

"so long as we can plausibly defend the [presumption that Joseph Smith was having all kinds of sex with his many wives], our burden has been met."
--Scott Lloyd, http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/499 ... -decision/

[_DarkHelmet]

Why would it be an issue for TBMs if he did? Mormon polygamists had sex with their plural wives. If Joseph Smith didn't he would have been an exception. Besides, Joseph Smith could've been a flaming bisexual and TBMs would defend his behavior because god told him to do it. I can't think of anything he could have done that TBMs would not defend. So why would they care if he had sex with the wives that he claimed god gave to him?

[_bcspace]

even one of his marriages? Or is this all apologetic wishful thinking? Because, you know, the default for marriage is consummation. Beyond that you'd better have some concrete evidence that it DIDN'T happen.

Have you checked the children? Don't you think a 19th century horn dog like Smith would've knocked up a few of his wives along the way?

Buffalo, rest assured that you do not have the burden of proving that it happened. Defenders of the faith have the burden of showing that it didn't.

You guys are the ones making the accusations. The burden rests squarely on you.