New Gospel Topic Essays - Polygamy

[strappinglad]

Would it be morally acceptable to expect a 6 year old to harness and drive a team of horses? Would it be morally acceptable to expect an 8 year old to be in charge of a large grain truck or a big tractor? Is it a moral problem to assign a preteen to shovel cow manure all day? 100 years ago, heck, 50 years ago it was common practice to see such work done by very young children. Today child protective services would be all over such situations and fines /jail time / family separations would swiftly follow. Do you call this moral relativism? I am reminded of the movie " Fiddler on the Roof" where all kinds of new thinking was "unthinkable".

We today have 35 year old " men" who live at home with their parents and spend an inordinate amount of time playing WoW .I guess the age of a child is relative.

[Tacenda]

If it is true that Joseph Smith did not have sexual relations with Helen Kimball, does that make the situation any more morally acceptable?

IMO, no. Apologetics aside, it robbed her of a normal youth. She lived at home, while her husband lived elsewhere. She sacrificed and I don't think a just God would do that to a daughter. This was a mistake on Joseph's part, no matter if Helen accepted the marriage proposal or not. She soon moved on after Joseph's death and never held ill will towards him, so I guess all's well that end's well.

[Scott Lloyd]

Actually the title of the yahoo news article that we were discussing is what used the term "teen bride". To clarify. See Video Game Junkie's post back on page 10(?).

Joseph Smith did, in fact, live in the same world as us. But he lived in a different time and culture. If it is that time and culture that made it morally acceptable for a 37 year old man to marry a 14 year old girl, than that is moral relativism.

If God commands it or approves it, it is OK. There's moral relativism for you

[Scott Lloyd]

Pahoran, I have you on ignore. Just letting you know so you don't get ruffled about me not responding to your posts. Also, perhaps you missed the IIRC, which stands for "If I recall correctly" aspect of my statement.

I'll try to keep you informed of what he says to you, though I can't guarantee I won't miss a post now and then.

[rockpond]

If God commands it or approves it, it is OK. There's moral relativism for you

Good dodge, Scott

As the author of morality, I don't think God can be a moral relativist.

Also, I'm not aware of any evidence of God commanding Joseph to marry Helen Mar.

[Storm Rider]

IMO, no. Apologetics aside, it robbed her of a normal youth. She lived at home, while her husband lived elsewhere. She sacrificed and I don't think a just God would do that to a daughter. This was a mistake on Joseph's part, no matter if Helen accepted the marriage proposal or not. She soon moved on after Joseph's death and never held ill will towards him, so I guess all's well that end's well.

 

Tacenda, if this the standard we use - "it robbed her of a normal youth. She lived at home, while her husband lived elsewhere. She sacrificed and I don't think a just God would do that to a daughter." - then I have difficult time understanding those in the world who truly endure horrible conditions.  Relative to what has occurred and what does occur in the world today, Mar's situation is not something that should exercise people's emotions too much.  

 

Sometimes it seems like we use very different standards for different people for different things.  I am not aware of examples in the Bible where men were condemned for marrying a girl.  In fact, I don't think many people after the Civil War were very bothered or people in the 1920s were bothered by it.  

 

I don't understand some of Joseph's choices.  I know that some parents were very eager that Joseph should be sealed and/or marry their daughters.  Would our feelings change if he were sealed or married only widows over the age of 40?  In the eternities what does age mean?  

 

I think if we get offended or exercised over some things that really mean very little in the eternities. 

Edited October 28, 2014 by Storm Rider

[Kenngo1969]

Of course, it is more data than Kevin presented in his post, which nobody seemed to call out or question.  Which, for me, shows the bias here... one can theorize as long as you are criticizing those who are having faith crises.  But, if you theorize in a way that supports those having faith crises and is the least bit critical of the church, then you get called out on it and mocked.  It's sad that this board keeps becoming more hostile for those who struggle, I had hoped it would be something different.

I was neither passing judgment upon nor mocking anyone else.  I was supporting Cal's valid criticisms of Dehlin's "research" "methodology."

[Ham Clam]

If online Newspapers could not use scandalous click-bait titles on their reports that would be great ... 

[Ham Clam]

I started listening to the Mormon Stories discussion of these polygamy articles but the tone became way too negative the panelists criticizing

everything.

The church had a very difficult task with this topic. They had to discuss the most bizarre episode of Mormon history in one article.

Guess I wouldn't be listening to that discussion then.

I hopefully that leaders will make more official statements about it in the coming months/years. 

[rockpond]

I was neither passing judgment upon nor mocking anyone else. I was supporting Cal's valid criticisms of Dehlin's "research" "methodology."

I understand. Any chance to tear into Dehlin is relished on these boards. Maybe every now and then we could acknowledge the good intentions he had behind that research. And that even though it isn't statistically valid, it offers important insights into a group of church members.

[Tacenda]

Tacenda, if this the standard we use - "it robbed her of a normal youth. She lived at home, while her husband lived elsewhere. She sacrificed and I don't think a just God would do that to a daughter." - then I have difficult time understanding those in the world who truly endure horrible conditions.  Relative to what has occurred and what does occur in the world today, Mar's situation is not something that should exercise people's emotions too much.  

 

Sometimes it seems like we use very different standards for different people for different things.  I am not aware of examples in the Bible where men were condemned for marrying a girl.  In fact, I don't think many people after the Civil War were very bothered or people in the 1920s were bothered by it.  

 

I don't understand some of Joseph's choices.  I know that some parents were very eager that Joseph should be sealed and/or marry their daughters.  Would our feelings change if he were sealed or married only widows over the age of 40?  In the eternities what does age mean?  

 

I think if we get offended or exercised over some things that really mean very little in the eternities. 

 

Storm, I was only stating that I don't believe God commanded it be Helen.  That's all, and apparently she turned out fine, but I wonder if that was just luck, because she very well could have rebelled and made it an issue in her life.  It just goes to show that she was very faithful to the end.  Something that should be honored, but do women that lived this principle ever get that honor? Ha!!

 

BTW, if anyone on here cares to listen, this came up.

 

http://www.sltrib.com/blogs/tribtalk/1742980-155/com-essay-mormon-plural-sltrib-smith

 

C/P Intro: 

 

A new Mormon essay reveals more details about LDS Church founder Joseph Smith’s plural marriages, including the fact that he married young teens as well as women who were already married.

On Monday at 12:15 p.m., author Laura Hales, blogger Julie M. Smith and podcaster Lindsay Hansen Park join Jennifer Napier-Pearce to discuss the essays and how the faithful are interpreting the information. 

Watch this online video chat at sltrib.com. You can also join the discussion by sending questions and comments to the hashtag #TribTalk on Twitter and Google+ or texting 801-609-8059.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Tacenda

[stemelbow]

Storm, I was only stating that I don't believe God commanded it be Helen.  That's all, and apparently she turned out fine, but I wonder if that was just luck, because she very well could have rebelled and made it an issue in her life.  It just goes to show that she was very faithful to the end.  Something that should be honored, but do women that lived this principle ever get that honor? Ha!!

 

BTW, if anyone on here cares to listen this came up.

 

http://www.sltrib.com/blogs/tribtalk/1742980-155/com-essay-mormon-plural-sltrib-smith

 

Intro: 

 

A new Mormon essay reveals more details about LDS Church founder Joseph Smith’s plural marriages, including the fact that he married young teens as well as women who were already married.

On Monday at 12:15 p.m., author Laura Hales, blogger Julie M. Smith and podcaster Lindsay Hansen Park join Jennifer Napier-Pearce to discuss the essays and how the faithful are interpreting the information. 

Watch this online video chat at sltrib.com. You can also join the discussion by sending questions and comments to the hashtag #TribTalk on Twitter and Google+ or texting 801-609-8059.

As I understand it, Helen saw polygamy as a very difficult burden and wished it never was implemented. though she saw it as God inspired, at times she really really seemed to struggle with it.

In the other thread it was mentioned the gospel is the plan of happiness, reading from some of the stories back then, I can't find happiness in their lives at all. Many acknowledged it saying this life was never meant to be a happy time--I think Helen's father told her something along those lines. In part it seemed like they often thrived on making it through without joy.

[Scott Lloyd]

Good dodge, Scott

As the author of morality, I don't think God can be a moral relativist.

 

 

I believe that as the author of morality, God has a greater understanding of it than you or I.

 

 

Also, I'm not aware of any evidence of God commanding Joseph to marry Helen Mar.

 

I'm not aware of any evidence that God forbade it.

“Whatever God requires is right,” said the Prophet Joseph Smith (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1979, p. 256)

 

The reason for that, of course, is as I expressed above: that He knows better than any mortal person what is right. Our task, then, is to determine for ourselves what He does require and then to fulfill it.

 

And, at the end of the day, that's not moral relativism. That's as absolute as it gets.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

As the author of morality, I think God has a greater understanding of it than you or I.

 

Agreed though not at all relevant to the point.

 

I'm not aware of any evidence that God forbade it.

 

Is that the standard now?  God didn't forbid him from marrying a 14 year old girl so it must be the moral choice?

 

So, Scott, are you willing to go on record as to whether you approve of a 37 year old male marrying a 14 year old female?

[Scott Lloyd]

Agreed though not at all relevant to the point.

 

 

Nonsense. It's perfectly relevant.

 

Is that the standard now?  God didn't forbid him from marrying a 14 year old girl so it must be the moral choice?

 

 

For all I know, God may have commanded this union, which evidently was a sealing only.

 

And if it had been wrong, I'm confident God would have prevented it or subjected Joseph to punishment for doing it. I have a higher esteem for Joseph as the Prophet of the Lord than to think otherwise.

 

So, Scott, are you willing to go on record as to whether you approve of a 37 year old male marrying a 14 year old female?

 

I stand by what I've said.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[tonie]

I guess we have to ask is God the author of morality? Did God create morality? Or is God even bound to higher laws? 

 

I do not think there is anything wrong with referring to God as a moral relativist. Joseph Smith stated that what is wrong in one instance is not wrong in all instance. God told us "Though shall not kill", yet Saints believe Nephi was commanded to kill Laban. And we Saints, say "well better for one to perish, than an entire Nation", thus we see what could be the moral relativity of the Saints.

[Scott Lloyd]

I understand. Any chance to tear into Dehlin is relished on these boards. Maybe every now and then we could acknowledge the good intentions he had behind that research. And that even though it isn't statistically valid, it offers important insights into a group of church members.

The responses, as I recall, were fairly predictable, coming as they did from a group of disaffected Mormons.

[rockpond]

I stand by what I've said.

 

So the answer is that you won't go on record answering that question.  That speaks for itself.

[rockpond]

The responses, as I recall, were fairly predictable, coming as they did from a group of disaffected Mormons.

 

Um... the responses had to come from disaffected Mormons.  It was a study of disaffected Mormons.

[Scott Lloyd]

Um... the responses had to come from disaffected Mormons.  It was a study of disaffected Mormons.

And as such, they were quite predictable.

 

You were proclaiming how insightful Dehlin's study was. I saw nothing there that I had not seen repeated over and over again, ad infinitum, on Internet message boards, blogs, etc.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Kenngo1969]

I understand. Any chance to tear into Dehlin is relished on these boards. Maybe every now and then we could acknowledge the good intentions he had behind that research. And that even though it isn't statistically valid, it offers important insights into a group of church members.

I wasn't tearing into him personally, and frankly, I resent the implication that I was.  (I'll thank you in advance for retracting that implication.)  Yes, Dehlin's "research" says a great deal about the self-selected sample which participated in it.  I'll even grant Dehlin's good intentions. The problem (yes, I think there's at least one problem with Dehlin's research; if that makes me evil in your eyes, so be it: if so, to me, that says a lot more about you than it ever will about me, which, I'm sure, is simply more evidence in your eyes of how evil I am; after all, alas, no one has more difficulty seeing how evil he is than someone who is evil ) is that self-selected samples and certain "research" designs have limited generalizability and, hence, limited (if any) applicability to wider populations.  Yes, the population that responded to Dehlin's survey sees problems with various aspects of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  But even if 99% of Dehlin's self-selected sample believes that a particular aspect of Church doctrine, history, practice, et cetera is problematic, that tells us precisely nothing about how widespread such views truly might be because the sample is in no way representative of a larger population.

 

If someone suspects there's a widespread problem along the lines of those that Dehlin and those who agree with him have concluded exists, fine: Do an empirical, methodologically-rigorous study, the results of which are reproducible, in order to gauge the problem effectively so that it can be dealt with.  If those of us who have concluded that Dehlin's study of his self-selected sample doesn't fit that bill are evil, so be it. 

Edited October 28, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[Scott Lloyd]

So the answer is that you won't go on record answering that question.  That speaks for itself.

I think my responses speak for themselves.

[rockpond]

I wasn't tearing into him personally, and frankly, I resent the implication that I was.  (I'll thank you in advance for retracting that implication.)  Yes, Dehlin's "research" says a great deal about the self-selected sample which participated in it.  I'll even grant Dehlin's good intentions. The problem (yes, I think there's at least one problem with Dehlin's research; if that makes me evil in your eyes, so be it: if so, to me, that says a lot more about you than it ever will about me, which, I'm sure, is simply more evidence in your eyes of how evil I am; after all, alas, no one has more difficulty seeing how evil he is than someone who is evil ) is that self-selected samples and certain "research" designs have limited generalizability and, hence, limited (if any) applicability to wider populations.  Yes, the population that responded to Dehlin's survey sees problems with various aspects of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  But even if 99% of Dehlin's self-selected sample believes that a particular aspect of Church doctrine, history, practice, et cetera is problematic, that tells us precisely nothing about how widespread such views truly might be because the sample is in no way representative of a larger population.

 

If someone suspects there's a widespread problem along the lines of those that Dehlin and those who agree with him have concluded exists, fine: Do an empirical, methodologically-rigorous study, the results of which are reproducible, in order to gauge the problem effectively so that it can be dealt with.  If those of us who have concluded that Dehlin's study of his self-selected sample doesn't fit that bill are evil, so be it. 

 

Exactly.  And retracted.

 

And I think that the church has performed similar studies but hasn't released the results.

[rockpond]

And as such, they were quite predictable.

 

You were proclaiming how insightful Dehlin's study was. I saw nothing there that I had not seen repeated over and over again, ad infinitum, on Internet message boards, blogs, etc.

 

It was the first report that I ever saw to counter the commonly repeated notion that people who leave the church do so out of laziness and/or a desire to sin.  If you know of one before that, feel free to post it.

[Scott Lloyd]

It was the first report that I ever saw to counter the commonly repeated notion that people who leave the church do so out of laziness and/or a desire to sin.  If you know of one before that, feel free to post it.

People had been countering that in comments here and there long before Dehlin ever made his study. That such sentiments would be echoed in response to this self-selected study is hardly surprising.

 

 

And no, I'm not going to go on the Internet seeking out comments to prove what ought to be clear and self-evident.