Is there any real difference between Donald Trump and Joseph Smith?

[Moksha]

So a guy has himself crowned king of the kingdom of God on Earth and that pales in comparison to Trump? Very interesting.

We have yet to learn all the White House details in the final days of the Trump catastrophe. Most likely his staff urged him to postpone similar actions until he could stop the steal.

[Binger]

So a guy has himself crowned king of the kingdom of God on Earth and that pales in comparison to Trump? Very interesting.

We have yet to learn all the White House details in the final days of the Trump catastrophe. Most likely his staff urged him to postpone similar actions until he could stop the steal.

So on November 2, 2020 was there any real difference between Donald Trump and Joseph Smith?

[Moksha]

So on November 2, 2020 was there any real difference between Donald Trump and Joseph Smith?

Trump would have not have insisted on the High Priest of the earth title.

[SaturdaysVoyeur]

You're arguing like an apologist here, starting from a foregone conclusion that Joseph kept his hands off Helen Mar Kimball. No honest historian has ever claimed to know that. Even church apologists don't claim to know that. There is evidence to support both that he did or he didn't.

If indeed their marriage was sexual, then your argument that 14- and 15-year-olds in the 1840s were still children just makes Joseph more of a pedophile, not less. That's why apologists always try to claim that 14- and 15-year-olds in the 19th century were so much more mature and that marrying at that age was common (it wasn't).

Really, none of this matters. If Joseph had sexual contact with Helen (and your insistence that he didn't is pulled straight out of your ass), I agree it wasn't pedophilia, it was rape.

There are huge consent problems with all of Joseph's extramarital "marriages." How do you say no to the Prophet of God?? It's less unsettling if they were old enough that their brains had fully developed. But we know for sure he had sex with 16-, 17-, 19-, and 20-year-olds.

Calling him a pedophile is a distraction from the way he abused power to get what he wanted, including sex.

You've GOT to be kidding, right? Joseph didn't sleep with teenagers because he was tall and smart? That's possibly the dumbest argument I've ever heard.

14 year olds were NOT teenagers in the 19th century. Only sick people are attracted to prepubescent children, pedophilia doesn't make evolutionary sense.

It is unlikely Smith was attracted to prepubescent children.

"those who victimize prepubescent children are more socially reclusive, less likely to have lived independently and to have been married, less intelligent, and more likely to present cognitive deficits and psychopathology"
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10 ... =mfr&rss=1&

Even if such a correlation exists, there's no logical causal relationship, and it doesn't rule out that tall, smart people can be pedophiles, too

It doesn't, but it is statistically unlikely.

So if that's the equivalent of an 11-year-old, which is the typical age of female puberty onset today....

You said, "She didn't marry Joseph until she was 23, but we have it in her own words that Joseph was picking them out years before he actually married them."

We know he had sex with several girls who were 16 and 17. That's been established

There is a big difference between a prepubescent child and a 16 or 17 year old according to the medical literature[/b].

Several? Only Woodworth was 16 years old when she married Smith.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_J ... %27s_wives

The age of puberty onset is, at best, irrelevant.

It is not. Pedophilia is a brain disorder.

[Moksha]

14 year olds were NOT teenagers in the 19th century.

Doubting Thomas, your argument would be bolstered by pointing out that 14 is actually 1110 in binary. Middle-aged Joseph was actually robbing the grave by putting the moves on someone who is 1110. Just omit the binary part.

[doubtingthomas]

You're arguing like an apologist here, starting from a foregone conclusion that Joseph kept his hands off Helen Mar Kimball. No honest historian has ever claimed to know that. Even church apologists don't claim to know that. There is evidence to support both that he did or he didn't.

Of course nobody knows. I am not claiming he didn't. I am only saying it is unlikely that Smith was attracted to prepubescent children. Would you agree Kimball was almost certainly a prepubescent child?

Really, none of this matters. If Joseph had sexual contact with Helen (and your insistence that he didn't is pulled straight out of your ass), I agree it wasn't pedophilia, it was rape.

I agree.

That's why apologists always try to claim that 14- and 15-year-olds in the 19th century were so much more mature and that marrying at that age was common (it wasn't).
philia is a brain disorder.

14 year olds in the 19th century were not much more mature according to science.

You need to get your facts straight, according to Syrett, "marrying at the age of fourteen was not at all uncommon … throughout the nation in the middle of the nineteenth century.”"
Syrett, Nicholas L. American child bride: a history of minors and marriage in the United States. UNC Press Books, 2016.

How do you say no to the Prophet of God?? It's less unsettling if they were old enough that their brains had fully developed. But we know for sure he had sex with 16-, 17-, 19-, and 20-year-olds.

I agree it is unsettling. But most Americans believe god impregnated young Mary.

Why are you comparing 17, 19, and 20 year olds to prepubescent children? 17, 19, and 20 year olds are not children, not even by modern standards in most parts of the developed world. And research scientists and doctors don't agree with you. I have the science to back it up.

The brain fully develops around 25 on average, but for many people it fully develops at 30. You don't need a fully developed brain to agree to a marriage. "Testosterone levels peak in women's mid-20s"
https://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships ... e-in-women

[doubtingthomas]

Doubting Thomas, your argument would be bolstered by pointing out that 14 is actually 1110 in binary.

[SaturdaysVoyeur]

I just think it's weird that you're this obsessed with "proving" that Helen didn't have boobs yet. I keep saying it doesn't matter. You supposedly agree. So why don't you just let this go? No one cares.

Also, Moksha's comment about 14 is 1110 in binary was a joke. At your expense, I think.

You're arguing like an apologist here, starting from a foregone conclusion that Joseph kept his hands off Helen Mar Kimball. No honest historian has ever claimed to know that. Even church apologists don't claim to know that. There is evidence to support both that he did or he didn't.

Of course nobody knows. I am not claiming he didn't. I am only saying it is unlikely that Smith was attracted to prepubescent children. Would you agree Kimball was almost certainly a prepubescent child?

Really, none of this matters. If Joseph had sexual contact with Helen (and your insistence that he didn't is pulled straight out of your ass), I agree it wasn't pedophilia, it was rape.

I agree.

That's why apologists always try to claim that 14- and 15-year-olds in the 19th century were so much more mature and that marrying at that age was common (it wasn't).
philia is a brain disorder.

14 year olds in the 19th century were not much more mature according to science.

You need to get your facts straight, according to Syrett, "marrying at the age of fourteen was not at all uncommon … throughout the nation in the middle of the nineteenth century.”"
Syrett, Nicholas L. American child bride: a history of minors and marriage in the United States. UNC Press Books, 2016.

How do you say no to the Prophet of God?? It's less unsettling if they were old enough that their brains had fully developed. But we know for sure he had sex with 16-, 17-, 19-, and 20-year-olds.

I agree it is unsettling. But most Americans believe god impregnated young Mary.

Why are you comparing 17, 19, and 20 year olds to prepubescent children? 17, 19, and 20 year olds are not children, not even by modern standards in most parts of the developed world. And research scientists and doctors don't agree with you. I have the science to back it up.

The brain fully develops around 25 on average, but for many people it fully develops at 30. You don't need a fully developed brain to agree to a marriage. "Testosterone levels peak in women's mid-20s"
https://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships ... e-in-women

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Fourteen wasn’t a teen.

-_-

- Doc

[doubtingthomas]

So why don't you just let this go? No one cares.

So why did you bring it up?

"There is no solid evidence of physical consummation of Helen and Joseph Smith's marriage, and later Utah practice suggests that it had no sexual dimension"

Hatch, Charles M., and Todd M. Compton. "A Widow's Tale: 1884-1896 Diary of Helen Mar Kimball Whitney." (2003).

But okay. Let it go.