Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _harmony »

Some Schmo wrote:Tiger Woods had sex with several women behind his wife's back...

OMG, did you see the major smack down I just put on Tiger Woods? That was one vicious, underhanded attack!

I bet some of you are thinking that I was full of crap when I said it, too.


The state of your colon isn't germane to the discussion. ;-)

Tiger Woods claims to be a prophet? Tiger Woods claims an angel made him do it?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Aristotle Smith
_Emeritus
Posts: 2136
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _Aristotle Smith »

Rambo wrote:Question Runtu,

What is your source for your example of the Partridge sisters. Is it from the journals or a third party?
I ask this because church leaders and bishops will say we don't really know what happened in the past.
I don't know to much about Joseph's polygamy but I do plan on getting "In Sacred Loneliness"


"In Sacred Loneliness" is a good resource but it is incredibly long and detailed. If you just want the highlight reel I would suggest "Mormon Enigma" which is a biography of Emma.
_Polygamy-Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8091
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:07 am

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _Polygamy-Porter »

Some Schmo wrote:Tiger Woods had sex with several women behind his wife's back...

OMG, did you see the major smack down I just put on Tiger Woods? That was one vicious, underhanded attack!

I bet some of you are thinking that I was full of crap when I said it, too.
No excuses left.. at least where god will take the hit as the Gospel™ has already been restored.. Like God would have the Gospel Restored® by a Black man who is married to a white woman. C'MON!
New name: Boaz
The most viewed "ignored" poster in Shady Acres® !
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _Runtu »

Rambo wrote:Question Runtu,

What is your source for your example of the Partridge sisters. Is it from the journals or a third party?
I ask this because church leaders and bishops will say we don't really know what happened in the past.
I don't know to much about Joseph's polygamy but I do plan on getting "In Sacred Loneliness"


Eliza Partridge married Joseph on February 28, 1843, and her sister Emily married him four days later. Eliza wrote, “I cannot tell all Joseph said, but he said the Lord had commanded [him] to enter into plural marriage and had given me to him and although I had got badly frightened he knew I would yet have him.... Well I was married there and then. Joseph went home his way and I going my way alone. A strange way of getting married wasen’t it?”

Emily said that she and Joseph "roomed" together the night of their marriage and had "carnal intercourse." (Temple Lot case (complete transcript), 364, 367, 384; see also Foster, Religion and Sexuality, 15.)

Benjamin Johnson wrote that in April, 1843, "The Prophet again Came and at my house occupied the Same Room & Bed with my Sister [Almera Johnson] that the month previous he had occupied with the Daughter of the Late Bishop Partridge.” (Zimmerman, I Knew the Prophets, 44. See also "The Origin of Plural Marriage, Joseph F. Smith, Jr., Deseret News Press, page 70-71.)

So, it appears that Joseph consummated both of those marriages in March of 1843. Two months later, Joseph convinced Emma that she could not receive her temple endowment until she accepted plural marriage. She consented, as long as she could choose the wives; she chose Emily and Eliza, unaware that they had already married Joseph. Both sisters swore in published affidavits that they were married a second time on May 11, 1843 (see the Historical Record, Vols 5-8, p. 223).

Emily wrote, "To save the family trouble Brother Joseph thought it best to have another ceremony performed...[Emma] had her feelings, and so we thought there was no use in saying anything about it so long as she had chosen us herself.... Accordingly ... we were sealed to Joseph Smith a second time, in Emma’s presence.”

I don't think the facts here are in dispute.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_dblagent007
_Emeritus
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 6:00 pm

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _dblagent007 »

Rambo wrote:Question Runtu,

What is your source for your example of the Partridge sisters. Is it from the journals or a third party?
I ask this because church leaders and bishops will say we don't really know what happened in the past.
I don't know to much about Joseph's polygamy but I do plan on getting "In Sacred Loneliness"

You can also find an account of this in Rough Stone Rolling, which was written by a faithful member of the church (Richard Bushman).
_Brackite
_Emeritus
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:12 am

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _Brackite »

You beat me to it, Runtu. Good Job! Rambo, here is an introduction to this book.
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter
_Phaedrus Ut
_Emeritus
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:55 pm

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _Phaedrus Ut »

Runtu is leaving out what I consider the worst parts of the story of the Lawrence sisters.

In June, 1841, Joseph was appointed guardian of the minor heirs of the Edward Lawrence and trustee for them and of an estate of $3,831. In 1842 both girls began living with Joseph and Emma in their home. In May of 1843 Joseph married both girls. He was 37 and they were 19 and 17 years old.

At the time Joseph would have been their foster father, executor of their parents estate, landlord, prophet, mayor, commander in chief of the militia, and husband.

Therefore if he approached the prophet for a spiritual marriage or the mayor for a civil marriage he could have granted himself permission as their legal guardian. Pretty tricky eh?


Phaedrus
_Nimrod
_Emeritus
Posts: 1923
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:51 pm

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _Nimrod »

Phaedrus Ut wrote:At the time Joseph would have been their foster father, executor of their parents estate, landlord, prophet, mayor, commander in chief of the militia, and husband.


This proves it. The Mormon God could not have inspired the U.S. Constitution. This shows that He does not believe in checks and balances.
--*--
_zzyzx
_Emeritus
Posts: 1042
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:31 pm

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _zzyzx »

"In May of 1843 Joseph married both girls. He was 37 and they were 19 and 17 years old."

But... Joseph did not have a naked hot tub pary with them so it is OK.

Joseph married Fannie Alger a couple years BEFORE the restoration of the keys for sealing in celestial marriage. Joseph married Orson Hydes wife after sending Orson on a Mission to Palenstine.
None of the plural/bigamy marriages were legal. Not one.

People get very defensive when they know there really isn't a defense to the crime and they are caught with nothing they can really defend with.
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: Why are some people so defensive about Joseph Smith and polygamy?

Post by _Runtu »

I'm now told that suggesting that Joseph married young girls, slept with them, and did so without his wife's knowledge and consent constitutes tabloid-style slander. I've provided firsthand accounts that Joseph did exactly that. If someone can show me how I'm being slanderous, underhanded or not, let's have it.

I do not believe that Joseph Smith was motivated by simple lust. From everything I know, his institution of polygamy was the result of a complex thought process, and may indeed have been motivated by "theological imperative," if I can steal a phrase.

That said, he did marry young girls, and he slept with them, and he did so without Emma's consent. Saying so doesn't constitute slander.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
Post Reply