MormonFreeThinker Posted October 30, 2014 Author Posted October 30, 2014 I'm not sure I understand your question. As a purely secular thing, the church doesn't need to weigh in. I am completely in favor of it being decriminalized (as it was recently in Utah). You said that polygamy doesn't have divine origins, why do you think that?
rockpond Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) You said that polygamy doesn't have divine origins, why do you think that? The way I see it, our only evidence of divine origin is an 1831 "revelation" which...wasn't written down until 1843,wasn't shared with the church until the author was dead,doesn't command entrance into plural marriages,and wasn't even followed by the man who received the revelation. Edited October 30, 2014 by rockpond 2
HappyJackWagon Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Why not? What is so wrong about polygamy if the intelligent adults involved agree? I agree that today it is a sin, but I cannot find any secular reasons. And what if they're not adults?
cinepro Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 And what if they're not adults? And what if they're not intelligent? 2
cinepro Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Joseph also hadn't asked Emma which again breaks the standard you believe is divine. D&C 132:64-65 actually has a special exemption for Joseph on this point: 64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law. 65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take Hagar to wife. (To be clear, the "things" referred to are other women.) It might be argued that Joseph hadn't asked Emma before taking Fanny Alger and some of the earlier wives, but he probably knew Emma wouldn't be okay with it, so what would be the point? Edited October 30, 2014 by cinepro
MormonFreeThinker Posted October 30, 2014 Author Posted October 30, 2014 And what if they're not adults? Define adult The way I see it, our only evidence of divine origin is an 1831 "revelation" which...wasn't written down until 1843,wasn't shared with the church until the author was dead,doesn't command entrance into plural marriages,and wasn't even followed by the man who received the revelation Joseph Smith did practice plural marriage, the evidence for that is pretty strong.
rockpond Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 D&C 132:64-65 actually has a special exemption for Joseph on this point: (To be clear, the "things" referred to are other women.) It might be argued that Joseph hadn't asked Emma before taking Fanny Alger and some of the earlier wives, but he probably knew Emma wouldn't be okay with it, so what would be the point? What would be the point? Well the scripture you quoted mandates that Joseph teach her the law before entering into any marriages.
HappyJackWagon Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 D&C 132:64-65 actually has a special exemption for Joseph on this point: (To be clear, the "things" referred to are other women.) It might be argued that Joseph hadn't asked Emma before taking Fanny Alger and some of the earlier wives, but he probably knew Emma wouldn't be okay with it, so what would be the point?So the Law of Sarah requires the husband to get the approval of his first wife prior to a second marriage but if she doesn't approve he can ignore the disapproval and do it anyway. And if you're pretty sure the first wife won't like it...just don't mention it. These kinds of rules make it appear that JS was just a philanderer trying to cover his infidelity. It's very self serving and dishonest. Emma didn't know about many of his wives and the ones she did were mostly after the fact. Can you imagine the hell it would be for Emma to constantly be finding out about JS's affairs after the fact, and then being chastised for not accepting them as legitimate plural marriages. It's absurd. Anyone trying that today would be excommunicated and divorced in a heartbeat...as they should. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Define adult Joseph Smith did practice plural marriage, the evidence for that is pretty strong. Adult= Not 14 years old. Yes, JS practiced illegal polygamy where the marriages were not recognized, just like Warren Jeffs and the rest of his crew. ETA- Age of consent in 1830's was likely 21 except with parental permission. I know Helen Mar Kimball's parents consented, therefore granting parental permission, but that isn't really the same thing as an intelligent adult make the choice for herself. Warren Jeffs also had consent of parents before marrying young girls. Edited October 30, 2014 by HappyJackWagon
rockpond Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Joseph Smith did practice plural marriage, the evidence for that is pretty strong. What I wrote above was that he didn't follow the "revelation". Canard already spoke to some of the points regarding that in Post #343.
Nevo Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) And what if they're not adults? Out of curiosity, I looked up the ages of the wives of the Three Witnesses at marriage:Lucy Harris was 15 when she married Martin Harris (who was also her first cousin).Julia Ann Jolly was 15 when she married David Whitmer.Elizabeth Ann Whitmer was 17 when she married Oliver Cowdery.FWIW. Edited October 30, 2014 by Nevo 1
HappyJackWagon Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 I forget the name of JS's other 14 year old wife but he had a few others under the age of 18 as well.Of course his position of authority would have been another coersive factor to consider. Is there some presentism in modern outrage at the ages of some of these young girls? Yes. But it is wrong to assume that just because the time is different that it doesn't matter at all. 1
MormonFreeThinker Posted October 30, 2014 Author Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) . Edited October 30, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
rockpond Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Out of curiosity, I looked up the ages of the wives of the Three Witnesses at marriage:Lucy Harris was 15 when she married Martin Harris (who was also her first cousin).Julia Ann Jolly was 15 when she married David Whitmer.Elizabeth Ann Whitmer was 17 when she married Oliver Cowdery.FWIW. At the time of those marriages... Martin Harris was 24David Whitmer was 26Oliver Cowdery was 269-11 year gaps between them as opposed to the 23 year gap between Joseph & Helen Mar. But the age doesn't bother me as much as the coercion by men in authority telling her that the family's salvation was dependent on her decision and giving her a such a short time span in which to decide. * My source for those ages, by the way, was also the JS Papers site. Edited October 30, 2014 by rockpond 1
Tacenda Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 I forget the name of JS's other 14 year old wife but he had a few others under the age of 18 as well.Of course his position of authority would have been another coersive factor to consider. Is there some presentism in modern outrage at the ages of some of these young girls? Yes. But it is wrong to assume that just because the time is different that it doesn't matter at all.Her name is Nancy Winchester, not sure if it's been verified, I guess I'm going to have to reread Todd Compton's book. Nancy may have been 15, according to http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/33-NancyWinchester.htm .
teddyaware Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 So the Law of Sarah requires the husband to get the approval of his first wife prior to a second marriage but if she doesn't approve he can ignore the disapproval and do it anyway. And if you're pretty sure the first wife won't like it...just don't mention it. These kinds of rules make it appear that JS was just a philanderer trying to cover his infidelity. It's very self serving and dishonest. Emma didn't know about many of his wives and the ones she did were mostly after the fact. Can you imagine the hell it would be for Emma to constantly be finding out about JS's affairs after the fact, and then being chastised for not accepting them as legitimate plural marriages. It's absurd. Anyone trying that today would be excommunicated and divorced in a heartbeat...as they should. 16 Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine eyes, and which I commanded them. 17 But those who cry transgression do it because they are the servants of sin, and are the children of disobedience themselves. (D&C 121)
Calm Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 It might be argued that Joseph hadn't asked Emma before taking Fanny Alger and some of the earlier wives, but he probably knew Emma wouldn't be okay with it, so what would be the point?Just to be clear...are you arguing for this or not?
MormonFreeThinker Posted October 30, 2014 Author Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Adult= Not 14 years old. Please define adult, that is not a definition. and define Marriage also. Joseph Smith did not live with 14 year old Helen, No Sex, No romance, No court document, sounds more like a religious ceremony. Edited October 30, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
Calm Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Helen Mar Kimball's parents consented, therefore granting parental permission, but that isn't really the same thing as an intelligent adult make the choice for herself.It was her father's idea. Now he may have been blinded by his own desire to provide blessings for himself and his family through this connection, including what he probably thought would be no greater possible blessing for Helen, but he was also in a position to know if his daughter was mature enough to handle the situation (he may not have cared, but Helen's description of her relationship with her father is a very close and loving one where he treated her with respect and pride in her abilities). 1
Nevo Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Is there some presentism in modern outrage at the ages of some of these young girls? Yes. But it is wrong to assume that just because the time is different that it doesn't matter at all. I agree. I also agree that the main problem with these marriages is the disparity in age and power between the participants, as well as the coercive methods used to obtain consent. 3
rockpond Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Deleted. Snarky. I'm sorry. Edited October 30, 2014 by rockpond
HappyJackWagon Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 16 Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine eyes, and which I commanded them.17 But those who cry transgression do it because they are the servants of sin, and are the children of disobedience themselves. (D&C 121)Teddy,Are you saying I'm a servant of sin and calling me to repentance?
HappyJackWagon Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Age of consent in 1830s Ohio was 10.Yikes. What's your source on that. I was looking but didn't find anything that specific.
Nevo Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 It was her father's idea. Now he may have been blinded by his own desire to provide blessings for himself and his family through this connection, including what he probably thought would be no greater possible blessing for Helen, but he was also in a position to know if his daughter was mature enough to handle the situation (he may not have cared, but Helen's description of her relationship with her father is a very close and loving one where he treated her with respect and pride in her abilities). Here's a father's blessing from around the time of Helen's sealing to the Joseph Smith that provides some insight into Heber's hopes for his daughter: https://dcms.lds.org/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE2111786 1
Recommended Posts