dblagent007 wrote:Brian admits that Joseph Smith had sexual relations with women who were legally married to other men. However, Brian doesn't think the women practiced "sexual polyandry," which means they weren't having sex with both their legal husbands and Joseph Smith.
If Brian is correct, then wouldn't all the children born to Joseph's polyandrous wives be his children? Or am I misunderstanding what Brian is saying?
Here's what Compton wrote:
A common misconception concerning Joseph Smith's polyandry is that he participated in only one or two such unusual unions. In fact, fully one-third of his plural wives, eleven of them, were married civilly to other men when he married them. If one superimposes a chronological perspective, one sees that of Smith's first twelve wives, nine were polyandrous. So in this early period polyandry was the norm, not the anomaly. . . . none of these women divorced their "first husbands" while Smith was alive and all of them continued to live with their civil spouses while married to Smith (In Sacred Loneliness, pp. 15-16).
So according to Brian, they continued living with their spouses but did not have sex with them?
Madison54 wrote:So according to Brian, they continued living with their spouses but did not have sex with them?
No. According to Brian, most of them were not sexual with Joseph, but remained sexual with their first husbands. The ones who became sexual with Joseph (like Sylvia Sessions Lyon) had effectively separated from their first husbands beforehand.
"It seems to me that these women were the head (κεφάλαιον) of the church which was at Philippi." ~ John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 13
One of the things that Quinn points out is there have been errors in marriage and sealing dates. Often times people can easily remember the month and day that an event happened but mess up the year. I was very interested to see some of the changes the marriage dates made...meaning that it looks like Joseph was sealed/married to women before they went on to marry other men in several cases.
I really need to read both papers again. Lots of information.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden ~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
Madison54 wrote:So according to Brian, they continued living with their spouses but did not have sex with them?
With a few of them he argues that they were eternity only sealings, so Joseph wouldn't be sleeping with them. Although I don't think the case for the existence of 'eternity only' marriages is very good.
dblagent007 wrote:At first blush, I thought Brian's case was decent, but not too convincing. After reading Quinn's response (date June 2012), I don't think Brian's position holds any water.
Have you read Quinn's response? If so, how do you reconcile the points Quinn makes with Brian's conclusions?
I have not yet. I have only read the responses to Quinn that Brian has recently added in his manuscript.
I don't always agree with Brian, but I could never accuse him of ignoring evidence or making absolute assertions that he can't back up.
I would be interested to see if your opinion changes after reading Quinn's response. I think Hales should be commended for the tremendous amount of work he has done in bringing all these materials together. His argument is serious and thoughtful. He has done a lot of good work here. But having read Quinn's response, I think that Hales may be overstating the case against sexual polyandry with respect to Joseph Smith. Having said that, I do think that this issue tends to be oversimplified by both apologists and critics alike. Hales, Compton, Van Wagoner, Quinn (and others) have all made solid contributions to this fascinating segment of Mormon history which is still ripe for exploration.
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
I still am having a hard time understanding why it somehow doesn't count that Emma complained and was unhappy with the situation. Why are we only looking to see if other husbands complained or were unhappy about it?
Besides the fact that that environment did not foster public complaints or critisism. We have seen what the consequences of that were (in the cases where complaints were made).
For all we know the locked up pioneer journals are full of complaints! That is a lot of supressed evidence about the early days of the church and the Joseph Smith time period.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden ~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
Madison54 wrote:So according to Brian, they continued living with their spouses but did not have sex with them?
With a few of them he argues that they were eternity only sealings, so Joseph wouldn't be sleeping with them.
What does he say about the other ones (that weren't for eternity only)? Were there children born during the period of time that Joseph Smith was the only one having sex with them? If so, Brian must believe that Joseph is the father of these children. Or am I missing something here?
just me wrote:I still am having a hard time understanding why it somehow doesn't count that Emma complained and was unhappy with the situation. Why are we only looking to see if other husbands complained or were unhappy about it?
Besides the fact that that environment did not foster public complaints or critisism. We have seen what the consequences of that were (in the cases where complaints were made).
For all we know the locked up pioneer journals are full of complaints! That is a lot of supressed evidence about the early days of the church and the Joseph Smith time period.
I agree 100% with you!
I can send you a thesis (by Ehat, written in the early 80's when he had access to the church archives) that contains quite a bit of information regarding what Emma went through and what others overheard, etc. Just let me know if you'd like a copy.
Madison54 wrote:So according to Brian, they continued living with their spouses but did not have sex with them?
No. According to Brian, most of them were not sexual with Joseph, but remained sexual with their first husbands. The ones who became sexual with Joseph (like Sylvia Sessions Lyon) had effectively separated from their first husbands beforehand.
The ones Joseph was having sex with were either separated from their husband (but still legally married) or the husbands were just custodians (the wife was not having sex with the husband).
There is a chart in Brian's presentation that shows which ones he thought Joseph was having sex with. As MsJack said, Brian believes most of them did not have sex with Joseph.
It should be noted that Brian has expanded the list of Joseph's polyandrous wives from compton's 11 up to 14 (that alone is an amazing admission for any apologist to make).
Last edited by Guest on Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MsJack wrote:No. According to Brian, most of them were not sexual with Joseph, but remained sexual with their first husbands. The ones who became sexual with Joseph (like Sylvia Sessions Lyon) had effectively separated from their first husbands beforehand.
Quinn's response provides evidence that Joseph may have been having sexual relations with Flora Woodworth Gove, Elvira Cowles Holmes, Mary Heron Snider, Esther Dutcher Smith, and Hannah Smith Dibble. At this point, I don't see any reason to accept Brian's conclusion that "most of them were not sexual with Joseph."
"It doesn't seem fair, does it Norm--that I should have so much knowledge when there are people in the world that have to go to bed stupid every night." -- Clifford C. Clavin, USPS
"¡No contaban con mi astucia!" -- El Chapulin Colorado