Why does it matter if Joseph had relations with his wives

[_Drifting]

For ldsfaqs...

Joseph's teenage brides:
Sarah Lawrence 17 (Joseph Smith 37)
Nancy Winchester 18 (Joseph Smith 41)
Helen M Kimball 14 (Joseph Smith 37)
Lucy Walker 17 (Joseph Smith 37)
Sarah Whitney 17 (Joseph Smith 36)
Melissa Lott 19 (Joseph Smith 37)
(From FamilySearch.com)

[_MsJack]

I just will never understand why it's so important to insist that he didn't have sex with his wives. Hardly anyone in the church thinks Brigham Young did anything wrong by sleeping with his wives, but for some reason, all bets are off when it comes to Joseph Smith.

This used to baffle me as well, but I've since come to accept that there is simply something about Joseph Smith in particular that seems to require and demand that his behavior be defended and justified. It's just a fact that Latter-day Saints engaging in apologetics are much more willing to throw later prophets under the bus than they are Joseph Smith, and I don't think it's a logical course of action. I think it's more of an emotional one.

Except, of course, I don't think BY had any wives he married when they were still young teens. Maybe that's the real problem--although I doubt very many members even know that some of Joseph Smith's wives were so young.

Young's youngest wife was 15. There were also three 16 year-olds and one 17 year-old.

For ldsfaqs...

Joseph's teenage brides:
Sarah Lawrence 17 (Joseph Smith 37)
Nancy Winchester 18 (Joseph Smith 41)
Helen M Kimball 14 (Joseph Smith 37)
Lucy Walker 17 (Joseph Smith 37)
Sarah Whitney 17 (Joseph Smith 36)
Melissa Lott 19 (Joseph Smith 37)
(From FamilySearch.com)

Nancy Winchester was 14 or 15.

http://wivesofjosephsmith.org/33-NancyWinchester.htm

WivesOfJosephSmith.org gives the following ages for the young ones:

2 14-year-olds (one may have been 15)
2 16-year-olds
3 17-year-olds

I'm actually not all that disturbed by the ages of Smith's young wives. It's hard for us to grasp, but in the 19th century, girls that young were considered to be of marriageable age. People simply didn't look at the issue the way we do now. Some people looked down on such disparity in age; others didn't. But there was no universal contempt of such relationships like there is now. For example, 27 year-old Edgar Allen Poe married his 13 year-old cousin in 1835. Yet I would roll my eyes at any historian who made a serious attempt at labeling Poe a "pedophile" because of it.

I am disturbed by the secrecy from Emma. I have a measure of respect for polygamy when it's practiced with the knowledge and consent of all parties, and I even have respect for other forms of polyamory like open marriage. They aren't systems I endorse, but so long as people are being open and honest with each other, that much I can respect. But I just can't find any way of seeing honor in lying to one's spouse about who you're sharing a bed with. Saying that Joseph lied to "preserve Emma's feelings" doesn't help much, either. Most adulterers lie to their spouses, at least in part, to preserve the spouse's feelings.

I'm also disturbed by the coercion that was used to get some women to say "yes" to plural marriage. It would have been inappropriate to use on a woman of any age, but that some of the women were so young (and therefore less likely to be able to process the request critically) makes it that much worse.

[_sock puppet]

I'm bad at math, apparently. Lorenzo Snow fathered his youngest child at age 82.

Thank god. 98 was giving me mental image nightmares.

And 82 doesn't?

Good grief. And no Viagra!

82 does too, but compared to 98...well.

[_Stormy Waters]

But I just can't find any way of seeing honor in lying to one's spouse about who you're sharing a bed with. Saying that Joseph lied to "preserve Emma's feelings" doesn't help much, either. Most adulterers lie to their spouses, at least in part, to preserve the spouse's feelings.

The secrecy is probably the reason that apologists want the marriages of Joseph Smith to be platonic. If Joseph was having intercourse with other women without her knowledge it's hard to justify. Even for apologists.

[_Sethbag]

I think the primary reason so many members want for Joseph Smith not to have had sex with his fake wives is the secrecy.

Brigham Young would have looked you in the eye and said hell yeah I've got 50 wives (or whatever), I have sex with every one of them! (at least once) And Mormons don't have a problem with that.

But Joseph Smith was lying to Emma, was lying to most of the members of the church except for his innermost circle, was lying to the public, etc. about it. Lying about having all these women on the side, while having sex with them, just looks too much like adultery for most members. It stinks to high heavens, and the apologetics on the issue are so terrible I think even most members would be embarassed by them.

Take sex out of the relationships, and then they're something else, but not as adulterous as with sex. So the sex has to go.

[_Yoda]

I am disturbed by the secrecy from Emma. I have a measure of respect for polygamy when it's practiced with the knowledge and consent of all parties, and I even have respect for other forms of polyamory like open marriage. They aren't systems I endorse, but so long as people are being open and honest with each other, that much I can respect. But I just can't find any way of seeing honor in lying to one's spouse about who you're sharing a bed with. Saying that Joseph lied to "preserve Emma's feelings" doesn't help much, either. Most adulterers lie to their spouses, at least in part, to preserve the spouse's feelings.

This is what I have never been able to resolve, or receive a satisfactory answer to. Even if God really did sanction polygamy, which I am not convinced that he did, there was no excuse for hiding the marriages from Emma. Also, some of the marriages were hidden from Emma even after the revelation in D&C 132 came out. If that revelation really did come from God, then there was no reason for Joseph to have hidden the marriages. Also, his hiding marriages was inconsistent.

I'm also disturbed by the coercion that was used to get some women to say "yes" to plural marriage. It would have been inappropriate to use on a woman of any age, but that some of the women were so young (and therefore less likely to be able to process the request critically) makes it that much worse.

Yes, this disturbes me as well. There seems to be quite a bit of manipulation happening. It is curious that he does not use this "technique of persuasion" on the women who are older.

[_MsJack]

The secrecy is probably the reason that apologists want the marriages of Joseph Smith to be platonic. If Joseph was having intercourse with other women without her knowledge it's hard to justify. Even for apologists.

I think the primary reason so many members want for Joseph Smith not to have had sex with his fake wives is the secrecy.

Brigham Young would have looked you in the eye and said hell yeah I've got 50 wives (or whatever), I have sex with every one of them! (at least once) And Mormons don't have a problem with that.

But Joseph Smith was lying to Emma, was lying to most of the members of the church except for his innermost circle, was lying to the public, etc. about it. Lying about having all these women on the side, while having sex with them, just looks too much like adultery for most members. It stinks to high heavens, and the apologetics on the issue are so terrible I think even most members would be embarassed by them.

Take sex out of the relationships, and then they're something else, but not as adulterous as with sex. So the sex has to go.

Stormy Waters and Sethbag just won the thread.

[_Yoda]

The secrecy is probably the reason that apologists want the marriages of Joseph Smith to be platonic. If Joseph was having intercourse with other women without her knowledge it's hard to justify. Even for apologists.

I think the primary reason so many members want for Joseph Smith not to have had sex with his fake wives is the secrecy.

Brigham Young would have looked you in the eye and said hell yeah I've got 50 wives (or whatever), I have sex with every one of them! (at least once) And Mormons don't have a problem with that.

But Joseph Smith was lying to Emma, was lying to most of the members of the church except for his innermost circle, was lying to the public, etc. about it. Lying about having all these women on the side, while having sex with them, just looks too much like adultery for most members. It stinks to high heavens, and the apologetics on the issue are so terrible I think even most members would be embarassed by them.

Take sex out of the relationships, and then they're something else, but not as adulterous as with sex. So the sex has to go.

Stormy Waters and Sethbag just won the thread.

The apologetic that Seth brings up opens another can of worms. If Joseph did not have sex with his plural wives, why was Emma so intensely angry about it, and why did he go to lengths to hide the marriages from her in the first place? If they were simply posthumous sealings, I would hardly think that Emma would be overly concerned.

[_Yoda]

Another thought here...if Joseph's initiation of plural marriage was with strictly posthumous sealings, then why was Brigham Young compelled to establish plural marriage as he did?

I am sure that the Saints would have been much more accepting of plural marriages being established in the posthumous sense.

[_Runtu]

I'm actually not all that disturbed by the ages of Smith's young wives. It's hard for us to grasp, but in the 19th century, girls that young were considered to be of marriageable age. People simply didn't look at the issue the way we do now. Some people looked down on such disparity in age; others didn't. But there was no universal contempt of such relationships like there is now. For example, 27 year-old Edgar Allen Poe married his 13 year-old cousin in 1835. Yet I would roll my eyes at any historian who made a serious attempt at labeling Poe a "pedophile" because of it.

I am disturbed by the secrecy from Emma. I have a measure of respect for polygamy when it's practiced with the knowledge and consent of all parties, and I even have respect for other forms of polyamory like open marriage. They aren't systems I endorse, but so long as people are being open and honest with each other, that much I can respect. But I just can't find any way of seeing honor in lying to one's spouse about who you're sharing a bed with. Saying that Joseph lied to "preserve Emma's feelings" doesn't help much, either. Most adulterers lie to their spouses, at least in part, to preserve the spouse's feelings.

I'm also disturbed by the coercion that was used to get some women to say "yes" to plural marriage. It would have been inappropriate to use on a woman of any age, but that some of the women were so young (and therefore less likely to be able to process the request critically) makes it that much worse.

Exactly, it's not the ages but the deceit and coercion, the promises of families' exaltation in exchange for their daughters, the men sent on missions only to have Joseph approach their wives when they were safely gone.

None of it makes sense unless sex was involved and Joseph was afraid of getting caught. I can't imagine anyone not being disturbed by all of this.