Grant Palmer Is At It Again...

[Darth_Bill]

I think that Palmer's explanation is a bit fanciful, but it is well known that polyandry was a part of early Mormon polygamy. Smith married women who were already married to other men. That Smith might have considered including Emma in a polyandrous arrangement with William Law is not inconsistent with the early practice of Mormon polygamy. Obviously, by the time D&C 132 was recorded, the doctrine changed and polyandry was no longer permitted.

I thought so too, and Dehlin called him out on the quote but didn't pursue it. Something happened to the Law's and it affected them deeply. As LDS, we have been so conditioned to dismiss them that we don't even know or believe what their side of the arguement was. He pointed to some interviews with William Law but I don't know if we ever addressed their issues, other than "Don't believe the Laws". I have read the Expositor and I'm not sure if he was too far off in his criticisms, other than they were criticisms. It is only recently where I've heard LDS give any voice to JS possibly being, ahhhh, clumsy, in his relation to polygamy. RSR was a breath of fresh air when I read it the first time. Someone at least acknowledged that it was a serious issue.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Darth_Bill

[why me]

I do know that JS died indirectly because of polygamy. I am not sure it was dealt with honestly, or with what I consider honesty. Having grown up in a society where all religious leaders that fall, seem to fall because of their libido, it gives me a large deal of pause.

Actually, JS died because of what he did to the Nauvoo Expositor. Polygamy was a side issue. What we need to remember about JS and polygamy is this: he married all of these women except one during a two year period. He was a man in a hurry and I don't think that sex was the reason. There was something else going on behind the scenes for him to go crazy with sealings. My take is this: He was feeling pressured to marry. Was it an angel that got him moving? Was it something else? But it certainly wasn't sex. No women claimed he was lusty and a sexaholic. He seems to have the respect of the women he was sealed to. Fanny's parents were thrilled to have him sealed to fanny and fanny never said that it was for lust. And certainly if she wanted her parents out of the church, she just needed to say the word.

[why me]

.As to history, if I was a potential convert, the LDS Church history would keep me from joining, and if I leave the LDS Church, I wouldn't join the RCC because of their history. If I was catholic, I just wouldn't go because of their history.

No history is perfect because men and women make history and people are not perfect. All churches have imperfect histories to debate over. Is american history perfect? No. There is no perfect history because there are no perfect beings.

[Darth_Bill]

Actually, JS died because of what he did to the Nauvoo Expositor. Polygamy was a side issue.

And the Civil War was because of state's rights....to own slaves. The Laws were involved with the Expositor because of polygamy (one of their charges against JS) and the paper was destroyed because that would encite a riot. I know the story. It wasn't because the paper existed, it was because of what it was printing. What was the paper printing? Stuff about polygamy, as well as some other things. If they were printing election results, I doubt JS would have cared.

I don't know how one woman would classify JS as sex-crazed, considering he had other wives. I don't know what it was all about, and that isn't my beef. I'm more concerned with how it was dealt with, how it was kept under the radar, how these women were approached. Like I said before, Section 132 takes on a different view with me now. Emma was not treated well in it, nor did it seem that she mattered all that much.

[cinepro]

What do you think perspective catholics learn at RCIA? They are not learning all the nastiness in catholic history. How many catholics know their history? And who is teaching them history? I think that anyone is teaching them history at all. It is not important for them.

I agree that we shouldn't teach potential converts any "nastiness." The truth should be more than enough to manage their expectations.

Edited February 28, 2012 by cinepro

[altersteve]

Actually, JS died because of what he did to the Nauvoo Expositor.

I wouldn't say that the cause of his death can be traced ultimately back to that, but it was why he was arrested, although he didn't do anything to the Expositor. It was the Nauvoo City Council that collectively ordered its destruction, not Joseph by himself.

Edited February 28, 2012 by altersteve

[LeSellers]

It was the Nauvoo City Council that collectively ordered its destruction, not Joseph by himself.

A City Council, BTW, that included people who were not Saints.

Lehi

[Nevo]

That Smith might have considered including Emma in a polyandrous arrangement with William Law is not inconsistent with the early practice of Mormon polygamy.

I disagree. I think it would have been inconsistent for Joseph to offer Emma to William Law. And besides, Joseph Jackson's allegation of a "spiritual swop"—and Jackson is the sole historical source for this—is simply not credible in my view.

For starters, Jackson was a scoundrel and he had an axe to grind. Hyrum Smith had refused him permission to marry his daughter and Joseph Smith had refused to intervene, earning Jackson's enmity. (At one point Jackson was seen loading a pistol with the apparent intent to kill the Prophet. Another dissenter, Charles Foster, warned Smith of the plot and nothing came of it.)

William Law—who certainly would have publicized it had it actually happened—explicitly denied that such an offer was ever made: "Joseph Smith never proposed anything of the kind to me or to my wife; both he and Emma knew our sentiments in relation to spiritual wives and polygamy; knew that we were immoveably opposed to polygamy in any and every form."

Finally, as William Clayton's diary entries during this period attest, Joseph could be a jealous husband. At one point he asked Clayton point blank if he [Clayton] had ever "used any familiarity with E[mma]." When Emma later threatened to "indulge" herself too, Joseph warned Clayton that Emma "wanted to lay a snare for [him]." I just don't see Joseph handing Emma over to a subordinate as a plural wife.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Nevo

[mathilde]

Well, let's see. Richard Bushman, Claudia Bushman, Richard Turley, Ronald Walker, James Allen, Ronald Esplin, Grant Underwood, Jill Derr, Kathleen Flake, William Hartley, Steven Harper, Alexander Baugh, Richard Jensen, Robin Jensen, Mark Ashurst-McGee, Patrick Mason, Spencer Fluhman,... those are just a few off the top of my head.

Thank you!

[Freedom]

There is no evidence, to my knowledge, that Joseph had sex with any women who were married to other men and all the men, including non-members, remained loyal to Joseph. I suspect that his being sealed was an ordinance and not a marriage. The rush was to get people sealed and since some of the women did not have priesthood holders, Joseph sealed himself to them to be safe. Regardless, there will always be cause to attack the past with todays standards. I am confident that in 100 years, people will read discourses given by prophets today that will cause an uproar. We do not see it because we are blinded by the cultural tolerances of the day. I comment about driving the family car to church or taking a vacation to a distant land may be considered disturbingly irresponsible and a prophet should have known to treat the environment better.

People who reject religion reject it because of impossible standards. Christians who reject the church because of its history are either hypocrites or they are lying to themselves.

[Verum]

There is no evidence, to my knowledge, that Joseph had sex with any women who were married to other men and all the men, including non-members, remained loyal to Joseph.

What would you consider as evidence? In other words, what type of evidence what be required to validate any claim that he did have sex with women who were married to other men?

[LeSellers]

what type of evidence what be required to validate any claim that [Joseph Smith] did have sex with women who were married to other men?

A statement by one of the only two parties who were there would be pretty convincing, or one by someone who actually witnessed the immediate preceding or aftermath of the hypothetical encounter.

Hearsay isn't very good, especially when the one doing the saing is an enemy of the Church.

Any wife whose husband left the Church over the incident, even though an enemy, might qualify as a reasonable source for such a statement.

There are none of those.

What do you propose we should accept?

Lehi

[Freedom]

What would you consider as evidence? In other words, what type of evidence what be required to validate any claim that he did have sex with women who were married to other men?

I would echo LeSellers comments and add a request for an apples to apples comparison. What transpired in other communities throughout recent history, say between 1800 and 2012, in western Europe and North America with similar practices. You fill find that, consistently, there was a breakdown in relationships, that the women later denounced the relationship, and the man was vilified. If this occurred time and time again in every other such community, why did it not occur with Joseph? Why did the criticisms leveled at him only concern being sealed without permission but never about sexual relations? In fact, to my knowledge, there is only one such criticism from Orson Hyde and I believe and he later reconciled. Even the women that eventual left the church or did not follow the saints to Salt Lake never expressed any regret or suffered any social consequences. This is the problem with Palmer, he has no evidence so he relies on the same tools that politicians use in their attack adds. Innuendo and distortion.

[Jaybear]

What do you propose we should accept?

Lehi

Its not really my business, but in the absence of emotional/physical issues, I assume that all couples that are married have sex.

[why me]

I wouldn't say that the cause of his death can be traced ultimately back to that, but it was why he was arrested, although he didn't do anything to the Expositor. It was the Nauvoo City Council that collectively ordered its destruction, not Joseph by himself.

If The Nauvoo Expositor was not destroyed, JS would not have gone to jail at that moment. Thus, the destruction of the expositor lead to his death. Not polygamy. If the paper were allowed to hit the streets, and polygamy was mentioned and mobs came to nauvoo and burned the city and JS were killed because of the mob which came to Nauvoo, then polygamy would be blamed.

[why me]

Why did Joseph marry so many women in such a short period of time? I think that that needs to be discussed.

Edited February 28, 2012 by why me

[Freedom]

Its not really my business, but in the absence of emotional/physical issues, I assume that all couples that are married have sex.

You are assuming two things. You are assuming that they were married rather than just sealed, and you are assuming that polygamous relationship have the same social standing and reaction upon breakup as all other forms of marriage. The evidence is that the women remained with their husbands.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Freedom

[Verum]

I would echo LeSellers comments and add a request for an apples to apples comparison. What transpired in other communities throughout recent history, say between 1800 and 2012, in western Europe and North America with similar practices. You fill find that, consistently, there was a breakdown in relationships, that the women later denounced the relationship, and the man was vilified. If this occurred time and time again in every other such community, why did it not occur with Joseph? Why did the criticisms leveled at him only concern being sealed without permission but never about sexual relations? In fact, to my knowledge, there is only one such criticism from Orson Hyde and I believe and he later reconciled. Even the women that eventual left the church or did not follow the saints to Salt Lake never expressed any regret or suffered any social consequences. This is the problem with Palmer, he has no evidence so he relies on the same tools that politicians use in their attack adds. Innuendo and distortion.

The burden of proof should be on whether Joseph Smith did NOT have sexual relations with his polyandrous wives given the context of the doctrine, history, and just nature of what constitutes a "marriage". There’s definitely evidence that Joseph Smith had relations with at least his polygamous wives as Todd Compton has verified. Also, the law of polygamy as it was revealed by Joseph was to have sexual relations. In addition, we know Brigham Young was married to a few women who were married to other men and these women even lived (slept with) with Brigham Young (see Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs Smith Young).

So given the context that Joseph was having sex with his polygamous wives, that the doctrine of polygamy necessitated that people enter these relationships to procreate, that Brigham Young saw no problem with having sex with his polyandrous wives, and even the existence of a few second hand accounts of women claiming that while married to their husbands they had relations with Joseph, what evidence is there that Joseph did NOT have sexual relations with the women who were married to other men?

Edited February 28, 2012 by Verum

[Jaybear]

You are assuming two things. You are assuming that they were married rather than just sealed,

i have been led to believe that Smith was a polygamist who married some 33 women. When you say "just sealed." What do you mean? Are you "just sealed" to your wife?

and you are assuming that polygamous relationship have the same social standing and reaction upon breakup as all other forms of marriage.

Not at all. Its my understanding that then, and today, polygamists are looked down on by much of society., as are gay married couples and in some places interracial couples, and couples where there is great age disparity. Society can be quite judgmental and intolerant. .

The evidence is that the women remained with their husbands.

You mean remained with their "other" or "first" husband. That makes sense. If you are going to keep the marriage a secret, probably not a good idea to move in with Joseph and Emma.

Your response puzzles me. If a women has two husbands, do you think its immoral for her to have sex with both of her husbands?

[noel00]

Why were the women sealed to Smith, rather than their husband? Would she be Smith's in the next life? But then Smith could take her to a higher section of the CK. I think the tackiest episode is that with Zina Huntington. All I can say she must have been a good looker as both Smith and BY wanted her,Like the apes the powerful get the better females.

Noel has left the building.

[Daniel Peterson]

A relevant little item:

http://dcpsicetnon.blogspot.com/2012/02/joseph-smith-and-early-mormon-polygamy.html

[Freedom]

The burden of proof should be on whether Joseph Smith did NOT have sexual relations with his polyandrous wives given the context of the doctrine, history, and just nature of what constitutes a "marriage".

A marriage has to act like a marriage to be a marriage. There were no children produced and no talk from any of the women of any sexual relations. In every other example of true polygamous marriage, at least some of the women got pregnant, at least some of them talked, and there is some evidence of co-habitation. Of course, it is not possible to prove a negative so your requirement is not possible; nevertheless I believe that the evidence is that there were no relations, particularly with those who were already married.

[robuchan]

The biggest problem I have with polygamy is the angel with flaming sword thing.

The best defense for polygamy is the infallible prophet defense.

But when you take into account the angel with flaming sword, it's not on Joseph. It's on God. So then you have a lot of head scratching why God decided to introduce it with the inconsistencies and weirdness and everything else that came with it.

Easiest to conclude Joseph lied.

[Duncan]

The biggest problem I have with polygamy is the angel with flaming sword thing.

The best defense for polygamy is the infallible prophet defense.

But when you take into account the angel with flaming sword, it's not on Joseph. It's on God. So then you have a lot of head scratching why God decided to introduce it with the inconsistencies and weirdness and everything else that came with it.

Easiest to conclude Joseph lied.

I have heard this before, where is it found? I don't know why God just didn't say "The wife or your Life!" without this image of an Angel with a flaming sword

[Freedom]

i have been led to believe that Smith was a polygamist who married some 33 women. When you say "just sealed." What do you mean? Are you "just sealed" to your wife?

Initially, sealing was seen as an ordinance like baptism. Although marriage came with it, based on the evidence, it does not appear that Joseph looked upon the sealing to the already married women as marriage. It was an ordinance that he understood to be necessary for eternal life. It may be that Joseph misunderstood the meaning and purpose of the sealing ordinance. I do not dispute the possibility that he had sexual relations with at least some of the many women he was sealed to but the absence of pregnancies and no mention by the women of relations suggests otherwise.

Not at all. Its my understanding that then, and today, polygamists are looked down on by much of society., as are gay married couples and in some places interracial couples, and couples where there is great age disparity. Society can be quite judgmental and intolerant.

.Well, the very nature of polygamous relationship produced a certain byproduct. Those who leave them do not look back at them as would a woman in a monogamous relationship. None of the women acted the way many other former polygamous women act. In all other examples, there are children, the women talk about the relationship, and many are either ashamed themselves, or shamed by their family. This never occurs with any of the former wives of Joseph Smith.

You mean remained with their "other" or "first" husband. That makes sense. If you are going to keep the marriage a secret, probably not a good idea to move in with Joseph and Emma.

Your response puzzles me. If a women has two husbands, do you think its immoral for her to have sex with both of her husbands?

I am not discussing morals, I am considering the pragmatic reality. There is no evidence he had sexual relations with any of the women that were already married. In all other examples of such relationship in other societies, the first husbands are pushed out or at least upset. These men remained loyal to Joseph, even the non-members. Despite the close scrutiny on Joseph, nobody witnesses him ever entertaining any of his wives. As stated, non of them got pregnant, and non of them ever even elude to any sort of sexual relationship.