Joseph Smith And Polygamy

[Tacenda]

Baloney. As I have posted elsewhere I came from a small Idaho town and a semi-active family and I knew. And I didn't even have to go searching.

ERayR,

Tell me, where and when was it that you first learned about JS polygamy and all that it entailed, including being sealed to other men's wives and that there were 33 wives total, maybe even more? And were you told the ages of the wives? Or were you told that JS practiced polygamy without the detailed story?

[CV75]

No one's suggesting the pageant should have been "an in-depth socio-political religious analysis," so that's a straw-man objection to my comment.

That doesn't fit my observation.

Is this supposed to explain why the pageant doesn't mention polygamy? Did it ever mention it, even before the evangelicals came to witness to Mormons there? I don't follow your reasoning.

I think I correctly represented your observation that the background of how polygamy created animosity and opposition toward the Mormons is missing from the pageant.

You use this onbservation to argue that no one would ever know that the practice of plural marriage was one of the main reasons for that opposition, meaning that it should be included in the pageant. I pointed out that such an expectation in unrealistic considering the context of a pageant, which you assert to be a “context where such information would be illuminating.” Furthermore, to say the problems were caused by polygamy would be ridiculous, requiring equal time to portray all the issues (hence the need for a more detailed analysis). So: You were indeed “suggesting the pageant should have been "an in-depth socio-political religious analysis," and my objection is not a straw man.

A lot of the obvious doesn't somehow fit your observation, at least for argument's sake; it should be appreciated that they get pointed out.

The reason the pageant doesn’t mention polygamy has been explained: context, venue, format, etc. (It. Is. A. PAGEANT!). The protesters bring up polygamy, they look and act like a mob of ignoramuses, so the connection between polygamy and animosity becomes quite obvious to even most casual observer.

[Nevo]

I think she is mentioned and the fact that she was Henry's wife and then Brigham young's wife is not unknown or unmentioned.

What does it matter if Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs Smith Young is ever mentioned in Relief Society? She was the third president. Presumably she is somewhat known and occasionally mentioned. Chances are there's even a picture of her in the Relief Society room. I'm saying that her polyandrous relationship with Joseph Smith is likely never discussed in Relief Society.

If you listen to the critics it sounds utterly disturbing. If you look at the historical evidences than it's nothing more than two people who loved each other, fell apart but still loved each other.

Uh huh. So you don't find Henry Jacobs's plight even a little bit tragic?

And terrible truths about them for the LDS Church to hide?

Well, Joseph did propose to Orson Hyde's wife while Hyde was off dedicating Jerusalem for the gathering of the Jews.

[Jaybear]

The complaint by the critics is Joseph's polyandry. It is not Joseph's polyandry. It is the wives of other men who consented to marry Joseph. They practiced polyandry. and their relationship was polyandrous. That was my point. It does not fall on joseph but the women who consented to take a second husband.

The one thing I know about polygamy is that you can't "practice" it all by yourself. Your point is driven by pure semantics,and even then, it fails.

[Damien the Leper]

To what end should the Church not de-emphasize polygamy in its history? It most definitely does not "hide it" but to what end would it serve to "emphasize" it in its cirriculum?

As forthe Adam-God theory...YIKES!!! Teach that in Church? No way. That would place somne legitimacy upon that idea. I want to go to church to learn of its doctrines; not what Brigham Young may have thought at one point in time about Adam being God. I go to church to learn of and reinforce my faith and wrship.

I don't mean for either to be taught as contemporary doctrine but fully recognized in church on Sundays for what they were and how the church officially views them. No disrespect and I'm not accusing anyone of doing anything. Just my thoughts on the matter.

[Damien the Leper]

"Unfounded"? WOW!!! Not only was Valentinus' observation of RLBaty dead on accurate but Valentius' response to him were utmost poignant. But, alas, i'm sure accusing Valentius of being "unfounded" will get him to take Baty's poll.

Definitely not.

[sunstoned]

Uh huh. So you don't find Henry Jacobs's plight even a little bit tragic?

Henry Jacob's plight is very sad indeed. After Joseph was killed, he no longer had to share his wife. That is until Brigham sent him to England on a mission and took Zina as one of his wives. Tragic indeed, and in my opinion, in-excusable.

[why me]

Henry Jacob's plight is very sad indeed. After Joseph was killed, he no longer had to share his wife. That is until Brigham sent him to England on a mission and took Zina as one of his wives. Tragic indeed, and in my opinion, in-excusable.

And yet, we have this:

In 1839, the Huntington family arrived in Nauvoo, along with daughter, Zina. Within months, Zina’s Mother died from the malaria epidemic which claimed the lives of many of the early Nauvoo settlers. About this same time, Zina met and was courted by Henry B. Jacobs, a handsome and talented musician. Sometime during Henry’s courtship of Zina, Joseph Smith explained to Zina the “principle of plural marriage” and asked her to become one of his wives. Zina remembers the conflict she felt about Joseph’s proposal, and her budding relationship with Henry: “O dear Heaven, grant me wisdom! Help me to know the way. O Lord, my god, let thy will be done and with thine arm around about to guide, shield and direct...” Zina declined Joseph’s proposal and chose to marry Henry. They were married on March 7, 1841.

Zina later wrote, that within months of her marriage to Henry, “[Joseph] sent word to me by my brother, saying, ‘Tell Zina, I put it off and put it off till an angel with a drawn sword stood by me and told me if I did not establish that principle upon the earth I would lose my position and my life’”. Joseph further explained that, “the Lord had made it known to him she was to be his celestial wife.”

Zina chose to obey this commandment and married Joseph on October 27. She later recalled, “When I heard that God had revealed the law of celestial marriag...I obtained a testimony for myself that God had required that order to be established in this church...I made a greater sacrifise than to give my life for I never anticipated again to be looked upon as an honerable woman by those I dearly loved...”. Zina continued, “It was something too sacred to be talked about; it was more to me than life or death. I never breathed it for years”.

Zina’s first husband, Henry, was aware of this wedding and they continued to live in the same home. He believed that “whatever the Prophet did was right, without making the wisdom of God’s authorities bend to the reasoning of any man.” Over the next few years, Henry was sent on several missions to Chicago, Western New York and Tennessee. Henry missed his family and wrote home often. One of Henry’s missionary companions, John D. Lee, said, “Jacobs was bragging about his wife and two children, what a true, virtuous, lovely woman she was. He almost worshiped her...”.

http://www.wivesofjo...ngtonJacobs.htm

The whole problem of "receiving a testimony for myself that God had required that order to be established in this church"...

God is funny at times.

Edited July 5, 2012 by why me

[ERayR]

ERayR,

Tell me, where and when was it that you first learned about JS polygamy and all that it entailed, including being sealed to other men's wives and that there were 33 wives total, maybe even more? And were you told the ages of the wives? Or were you told that JS practiced polygamy without the detailed story?

It has been so far back that I don't remember when. Sometime in my teens- 1950's. It was in a small rural south central Idaho town. Oh, and we didn't have a public library. One of my grandfathers came from central Utah from a part -member family. He used to tell me stories. His father was not a member and his mother died when he was young so I don't know where he got his information from. I have and idea it was from the man who brought him to Idaho when he was 13 years old trailing cattle for a ranch in Idaho. The man was a school teacher/rancher who later taught at BYU as I remember. Any way grandpa told me a lot that was later verified from other sources.

I don't remember ages coming up but then it has been a long time and it was not uncommon for young women 16 and up to get married then. O there were details I just don't remember all of them. Despite the ages I don't remember any of them saying they were forced into these relationships. My understanding is that most if not all of these young women were sealings and not marriages.

I have a hard time understanding why this is so troubling to you. The only thing I can think of is that you are looking at this through a twenty/twenty first century lens. i know that the difference between sealings and marriages has been explained to you, yet you continue to conflate the two. Why?

[treehugger]

Huh? Re-read the OP. It is definately about polygamy and Joseph Smith.

They should get out more. Rough Stone Rolling is a great source the church failed to suppress. Not surprising since the topic has been secreted into our official histories, our web site, our institute manuals and most shockingly our scriptures.

Kevin, perhaps you should read my statements in the context in which the statement was given.

Here is the time line, starting with TSS:

Anyone who doesn't know that LDS practiced but no longer practice polygamy is in serious need of eye glasses.

Here is my response to TSS statement

This is a deliberate diversion.

The OP is about Joseph Smith, who translated the plates which translation is know today as the "Book Of Mormon".

Many members of the LDS Church do not know of Joseph Smith's polygamy nor the uncomfortable accepted details (polygamist marriages to women who were legally married to other men) of the polygamist marriages.

TSS diversion is to take the thread away from a discussion about the knowledge of Joseph Smith and his polygamist marriages and try to turn it into a general discussion about polygamy.

Many members, I wager a good lot of them, can't be bothered with FAIR, FARMS, SHEILD, MI or any other "scholarly" outlet concerning the History of the Church.

This being the case, many members - if not the vast majority - are only taught the history of the LDS Church via the curriculum offered in Sunday School.

That the Church has something published on a website - which website has existed for barely a decade, does not address the notion that many of the Church are dumbstruck when they learn that Joseph married teenagers, and other men wives.

I suppose if any one could produce Official Church curriculum or other Official LDS Church publication that covered the topic of Joseph Smiths polygamy, which was published prior to1994, then whyme would have a good case.

what is interesting, is that you deliberately and gleefully insult the vast majority of the LDS faith with "They should get out more".

Edited July 5, 2012 by treehugger

[ERayR]

Henry Jacob's plight is very sad indeed. After Joseph was killed, he no longer had to share his wife. That is until Brigham sent him to England on a mission and took Zina as one of his wives. Tragic indeed, and in my opinion, in-excusable.

And Zina was an unwilling mind numbed silly woman that didn't know better and let it happen?

[why me]

And Zina was an unwilling mind numbed silly woman that didn't know better and let it happen?

Not according to my link that I provided on page 8. She received her own testimony about the principle of plural marriage after she first refused joseph.

In 1839, the Huntington family arrived in Nauvoo, along with daughter, Zina. Within months, Zina’s Mother died from the malaria epidemic which claimed the lives of many of the early Nauvoo settlers. About this same time, Zina met and was courted by Henry B. Jacobs, a handsome and talented musician. Sometime during Henry’s courtship of Zina, Joseph Smith explained to Zina the “principle of plural marriage” and asked her to become one of his wives. Zina remembers the conflict she felt about Joseph’s proposal, and her budding relationship with Henry: “O dear Heaven, grant me wisdom! Help me to know the way. O Lord, my god, let thy will be done and with thine arm around about to guide, shield and direct...” Zina declined Joseph’s proposal and chose to marry Henry. They were married on March 7, 1841.

Zina later wrote, that within months of her marriage to Henry, “[Joseph] sent word to me by my brother, saying, ‘Tell Zina, I put it off and put it off till an angel with a drawn sword stood by me and told me if I did not establish that principle upon the earth I would lose my position and my life’”. Joseph further explained that, “the Lord had made it known to him she was to be his celestial wife.”

Zina chose to obey this commandment and married Joseph on October 27. She later recalled, “When I heard that God had revealed the law of celestial marriag...I obtained a testimony for myself that God had required that order to be established in this church...I made a greater sacrifise than to give my life for I never anticipated again to be looked upon as an honerable woman by those I dearly loved...”. Zina continued, “It was something too sacred to be talked about; it was more to me than life or death. I never breathed it for years”.

Zina’s first husband, Henry, was aware of this wedding and they continued to live in the same home. He believed that “whatever the Prophet did was right, without making the wisdom of God’s authorities bend to the reasoning of any man.” Over the next few years, Henry was sent on several missions to Chicago, Western New York and Tennessee. Henry missed his family and wrote home often. One of Henry’s missionary companions, John D. Lee, said, “Jacobs was bragging about his wife and two children, what a true, virtuous, lovely woman she was. He almost worshiped her...”.

Shortly after Joseph Smith’s death in 1844, Zina married Brigham Young. In May of 1846, Henry was sent on a mission to England. In Henry’s absence, Zina began to live openly as Brigham’s wife and remained so throughout her life in Utah. Henry seemed to struggle with this arrangement and later wrote to Zina, “...the same affection is there...But I feel alone...I do not Blame Eny person...may the Lord our Father bless Brother Brigham...all is right according to the Law of the Celestial Kingdom of our God Joseph.”

[why me]

The critics seem to portray these frontier women as numbed and dumbed. Far from it. They had their own minds and sought god's help in deciding about plural marriage and they received a witness that it was a true principle. How could they deny their very powerful witness that plural marriage was ordained by god?

[Closet Doubter]

The priesthood manual on Joseph Smith listed his wife "Emma", no additional wives and no mention of Joseph's polygamy. When my 17 year old son (who is now a return missionary) asked our bishop (who had previously served in a stake presidency and had been a gospel doctrine teacher for many years) about Joseph's Polygamy the answer he got was Joseph had one wife, Emma, and that polygamy was started by Brigham Young. It turns out the bishop was only inadvertently lying because he knew nothing about Joseph having more than one wife.

When someone as knowledgeable as my old bishop doesn't know about Joseph's multiple wives, the only conclusion can be that the Church represents the facts in a way that gives an impression different than the truth. Our own gospel principals manual states that if something is represented in a way to make it appear different than it actually is, it is a form of lying (the quote is off a little but read chapter 31 and you can get the word for word quote). When knowledgeable people state the church doesn't lie about Joseph's polygamy, they may be technically correct but based on chapter 31 of the gospel principals manual, they are lying.

Please try and be a little more truthful because I am still trying to stay somewhat active in the church and you make it difficult.

[ERayR]

Not according to my link that I provided on page 8. She received her own testimony about the principle of plural marriage after she first refused joseph.

In 1839, the Huntington family arrived in Nauvoo, along with daughter, Zina. Within months, Zina’s Mother died from the malaria epidemic which claimed the lives of many of the early Nauvoo settlers. About this same time, Zina met and was courted by Henry B. Jacobs, a handsome and talented musician. Sometime during Henry’s courtship of Zina, Joseph Smith explained to Zina the “principle of plural marriage” and asked her to become one of his wives. Zina remembers the conflict she felt about Joseph’s proposal, and her budding relationship with Henry: “O dear Heaven, grant me wisdom! Help me to know the way. O Lord, my god, let thy will be done and with thine arm around about to guide, shield and direct...” Zina declined Joseph’s proposal and chose to marry Henry. They were married on March 7, 1841.

Zina later wrote, that within months of her marriage to Henry, “[Joseph] sent word to me by my brother, saying, ‘Tell Zina, I put it off and put it off till an angel with a drawn sword stood by me and told me if I did not establish that principle upon the earth I would lose my position and my life’”. Joseph further explained that, “the Lord had made it known to him she was to be his celestial wife.”

Zina chose to obey this commandment and married Joseph on October 27. She later recalled, “When I heard that God had revealed the law of celestial marriag...I obtained a testimony for myself that God had required that order to be established in this church...I made a greater sacrifise than to give my life for I never anticipated again to be looked upon as an honerable woman by those I dearly loved...”. Zina continued, “It was something too sacred to be talked about; it was more to me than life or death. I never breathed it for years”.

Zina’s first husband, Henry, was aware of this wedding and they continued to live in the same home. He believed that “whatever the Prophet did was right, without making the wisdom of God’s authorities bend to the reasoning of any man.” Over the next few years, Henry was sent on several missions to Chicago, Western New York and Tennessee. Henry missed his family and wrote home often. One of Henry’s missionary companions, John D. Lee, said, “Jacobs was bragging about his wife and two children, what a true, virtuous, lovely woman she was. He almost worshiped her...”.

Shortly after Joseph Smith’s death in 1844, Zina married Brigham Young. In May of 1846, Henry was sent on a mission to England. In Henry’s absence, Zina began to live openly as Brigham’s wife and remained so throughout her life in Utah. Henry seemed to struggle with this arrangement and later wrote to Zina, “...the same affection is there...But I feel alone...I do not Blame Eny person...may the Lord our Father bless Brother Brigham...all is right according to the Law of the Celestial Kingdom of our God Joseph.”

I know I should have warned of sarcasm.

[ERayR]

The priesthood manual on Joseph Smith listed his wife "Emma", no additional wives and no mention of Joseph's polygamy. When my 17 year old son (who is now a return missionary) asked our bishop (who had previously served in a stake presidency and had been a gospel doctrine teacher for many years) about Joseph's Polygamy the answer he got was Joseph had one wife, Emma, and that polygamy was started by Brigham Young. It turns out the bishop was only inadvertently lying because he knew nothing about Joseph having more than one wife.

When someone as knowledgeable as my old bishop doesn't know about Joseph's multiple wives, the only conclusion can be that the Church represents the facts in a way that gives an impression different than the truth. Our own gospel principals manual states that if something is represented in a way to make it appear different than it actually is, it is a form of lying (the quote is off a little but read chapter 31 and you can get the word for word quote). When knowledgeable people state the church doesn't lie about Joseph's polygamy, they may be technically correct but based on chapter 31 of the gospel principals manual, they are lying.

Please try and be a little more truthful because I am still trying to stay somewhat active in the church and you make it difficult.

It seems your bishop was not as knowledgeable about history as you thought. This does not surprise me as most bishops I know are spiritual, caring men and their duties with family and their calling as bishop leave them very little time to become historians, archeologists, scriptorians and a host of other disciplines.

Edited July 5, 2012 by ERayR

[Tacenda]

It has been so far back that I don't remember when. Sometime in my teens- 1950's. It was in a small rural south central Idaho town. Oh, and we didn't have a public library. One of my grandfathers came from central Utah from a part -member family. He used to tell me stories. His father was not a member and his mother died when he was young so I don't know where he got his information from. I have and idea it was from the man who brought him to Idaho when he was 13 years old trailing cattle for a ranch in Idaho. The man was a school teacher/rancher who later taught at BYU as I remember. Any way grandpa told me a lot that was later verified from other sources.

I don't remember ages coming up but then it has been a long time and it was not uncommon for young women 16 and up to get married then. O there were details I just don't remember all of them. Despite the ages I don't remember any of them saying they were forced into these relationships. My understanding is that most if not all of these young women were sealings and not marriages.

I have a hard time understanding why this is so troubling to you. The only thing I can think of is that you are looking at this through a twenty/twenty first century lens. i know that the difference between sealings and marriages has been explained to you, yet you continue to conflate the two. Why?

I don't conflate the two, the information I read always says plural marriage not plural sealings. Okay back to your answer about where you first learned of JS's polygamy. I didn't have the luxury of having a family member discuss with me the stories, never not once. I think it was hushed around me. My anscestors were the Mellors, one of whom the story the "pie in the road" story was written. I learned of Mary Ann Mellor just recently in the book "The Price We Paid". My parents never mentioned her. They have both passed on, so now I don't even get to discuss my polygamist anscestor. Also, I didn't go all 4 years of seminary. So do you see how one might be in the dark, just a little?

[sjdawg]

The priesthood manual on Joseph Smith listed his wife "Emma", no additional wives and no mention of Joseph's polygamy. When my 17 year old son (who is now a return missionary) asked our bishop (who had previously served in a stake presidency and had been a gospel doctrine teacher for many years) about Joseph's Polygamy the answer he got was Joseph had one wife, Emma, and that polygamy was started by Brigham Young. It turns out the bishop was only inadvertently lying because he knew nothing about Joseph having more than one wife.

When someone as knowledgeable as my old bishop doesn't know about Joseph's multiple wives, the only conclusion can be that the Church represents the facts in a way that gives an impression different than the truth. Our own gospel principals manual states that if something is represented in a way to make it appear different than it actually is, it is a form of lying (the quote is off a little but read chapter 31 and you can get the word for word quote). When knowledgeable people state the church doesn't lie about Joseph's polygamy, they may be technically correct but based on chapter 31 of the gospel principals manual, they are lying.

Please try and be a little more truthful because I am still trying to stay somewhat active in the church and you make it difficult.

I've always wondered why polygamy isn't mentioned more when discussing the life and ministry of Joseph Smith. It seems like the restoration of a doctrine that caused such controversy and really challenged the conventional way we think about families would be the subject of much analysis in gospel manuals.

[why me]

The priesthood manual on Joseph Smith listed his wife "Emma", no additional wives and no mention of Joseph's polygamy. When my 17 year old son (who is now a return missionary) asked our bishop (who had previously served in a stake presidency and had been a gospel doctrine teacher for many years) about Joseph's Polygamy the answer he got was Joseph had one wife, Emma, and that polygamy was started by Brigham Young. It turns out the bishop was only inadvertently lying because he knew nothing about Joseph having more than one wife.

When someone as knowledgeable as my old bishop doesn't know about Joseph's multiple wives, the only conclusion can be that the Church represents the facts in a way that gives an impression different than the truth. Our own gospel principals manual states that if something is represented in a way to make it appear different than it actually is, it is a form of lying (the quote is off a little but read chapter 31 and you can get the word for word quote). When knowledgeable people state the church doesn't lie about Joseph's polygamy, they may be technically correct but based on chapter 31 of the gospel principals manual, they are lying.

Please try and be a little more truthful because I am still trying to stay somewhat active in the church and you make it difficult.

And yet, it is on lds.org as I posted the link in my OP:

The Bible indicates that Abraham, Jacob, and others of the Lord’s servants had multiple wives (see Genesis 16:1–3; 29:23–30; 30:4, 9; Judges 8:30; 1 Samuel 1:1–2). Joseph Smith asked God why He had permitted this practice and was told that God had commanded it for specific purposes. One reason given by the Lord for plural marriage is mentioned in the Book of Mormon: “If I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall [have only one wife]” (Jacob 2:30; see also v. 27).

After God revealed the doctrine of plural marriage to Joseph Smith in 1831 and commanded him to live it, the Prophet, over a period of years, cautiously taught the doctrine to some close associates. Eventually, he and a small number of Church leaders entered into plural marriages in the early years of the Church. Those who practiced plural marriage at that time, both male and female, experienced a significant trial of their faith. The practice was so foreign to them that they needed and received personal inspiration from God to help them obey the commandment.

When the Saints moved west under the direction of Brigham Young, more Latter-day Saints entered into plural marriages.

http://www.lds.org/s... smith polygamy

But I don't blame your bishop either. I think that mormons should be proud of their polygamous history. It makes them unique. And the wives of Joseph Smith and the spiritual confirmations that they received about the principle are very faith promoting.

[Closet Doubter]

It seems your bishop was not as knowledgeable about history as you thought. This does not surprise me as most bishops I know are spiritual, caring men and their duties with family and their calling as bishop leave them very little time to become historians, archeologists, scriptorians and a host of other disciplines.

The Bishop gained his knowledge through the correlated lessons that are presented in Sunday School, Priesthood, Relief Society, and Seminary. It appears you are stating that if a person gains his knowledge of the Church through these official lessons, there is no reason to think he would actually know anything about Joseph's multiple wives. This being the case, the church is definately presenting the information in a way to make it appear other than what it is, and by the Church's own definition, it is therefore lying

[Calm]

Well, of course, the lds church would have to come out and say that some lds women engaged in polyandry with Joseph. That would do the trick. But polyandry falls on the women and not the men.

why me, I don't believe you are using the term as it is usually used. If possible, I will try and find a report I saw years ago on a polyandrous society in Tibet which applied, IIRC, the term to all those who participated in the practice.

[ERayR]

I don't conflate the two, the information I read always says plural marriage not plural sealings. Okay back to your answer about where you first learned of JS's polygamy. I didn't have the luxury of having a family member discuss with me the stories, never not once. I think it was hushed around me. My anscestors were the Mellors, one of whom the story the "pie in the road" story was written. I learned of Mary Ann Mellor just recently in the book "The Price We Paid". My parents never mentioned her. They have both passed on, so now I don't even get to discuss my polygamist anscestor. Also, I didn't go all 4 years of seminary. So do you see how one might be in the dark, just a little?

I didn't get seminary either.

I see how you might not have learned about it earlier but I still do not understand why it should affect you so adversely. I presume it is because you are looking and judging through the modern lens which has denigrated and demonized polygamous unions. It helps to get a 19th century perspective. I may have an advantage on you there because of my great age and connection to grandparents who were born more than a century ago. I understand young brides. Even when I grew up it was not uncommon. In fact I was married at 18 and my wife was even younger. In the 19th century young brides often married older men because they had the means to care for the needs of a family. In reading histories I often find an older man widowed by a wife dying in childbirth taking a young wife. Not uncommon. Try looking at through a different perspective than that of a dirty old man perspective. Understand the time.

I understand that all polygamous marriages were not harmonious and ideal. I also know that monogamous marriages are not always harmonious and ideal.

[why me]

This being the case, the church is definately presenting the information in a way to make it appear other than what it is, and by the Church's own definition, it is therefore lying

And yet, it is on the church's website as I pointed out. But you chose to ignore the lds.org link. Why?`

Where is the lie if lds.org clearly states it? And this brings up an interesting question. When and where should the lds church introduce polygamy to make you happy?

Edited July 5, 2012 by why me

[why me]

why me, I don't believe you are using the term as it is usually used. If possible, I will try and find a report I saw years ago on a polyandrous society in Tibet which applied, IIRC, the term to all those who participated in the practice.

I am just following the definition given by Stanford and others. What more can I do?

[Calm]

This is a deliberate diversion.

The OP is about Joseph Smith, who translated the plates which translation is know today as the "Book Of Mormon".

Many members of the LDS Church do not know of Joseph Smith's polygamy

Which is strange, if so, because it is there in the scriptures and thus as tss states, they are in need of eyeglasses...or something, at least if they claim to be reading their scriptures.