What is your best evidence for Joseph Smith sleeping with his wives?

[_KimberlyAnn]

You see, the God I’ve learned about is quite inclined to do precisely something like what Joseph Smith was asked to do. And I think Brigham Young understood the reasons why. Brigham Young didn’t see anything unholy in marrying a 20-something girl when he was in his early sixties. And he and Amelia made a great couple for many years after that. And when I look back at that, I don’t see anything wrong with it at all. I do believe it was divinely sanctioned.

If God wants to take certain of his sons and have them mate with certain of his daughters, it’s up to him to command them. Otherwise they are obligated to stay with their lawfully-wedded spouse. But I’m not about to tell God that his system is flawed for occasionally sanctioning exceptions to his standard rules of chastity. My sense of rectitude is not so constricted as to be rigid in all circumstances.

Apparently you don’t feel the same way. And that’s fine, too.

I like you, Will, but the God you believe in is a monster in my opinion.

I'm sick of misogynistic gods! No god I could believe in would want a twenty year old girl to be the lonely polygamous wife of a sixty-something year old geezer. It's wrong. And I've little doubt nasty old Brigham didn't see anything wrong with it. What a pig! I don't see it as divinely sanctioned at all - it was the entirely selfish act of a power-hungry woman-hater.

Mormon God thinks men should have their own eternal harems. Islamic God feels the same way, with the added misogynistic opinion that womens' heads be covered and that they should be dominated and controlled by their husbands. Old Testament God feels it's fine to declare women "unclean" and that they be shunned during their periods and after giving birth, two of the foremost things that make them women in the first place, oh, and that they should be killed if they're raped in the city and a dozen other female-hating things. Those gods seem to reflect the basest of male thought and if any one of them are really in charge of the universe, then I'll go to hell rather than submit to their misogynistic bulls*it.

And Will, I noticed you said it took "balls" for Smith's wives to come out and admit they had sex with him. It didn't take balls at all! Why the need to ascribe male attributes to women to show they're brave or courageous? Try to see past the testosterone cloud that surrounds you. And it's not just you, Will, it's most men I know. Y'all just don't get it.

The fact that so many intelligent people can believe in such awful, female-hating gods pains me. I'm serious. It hurts my feelings that my husband thinks the O.T. god is at all worthy of worship. He feels compelled to worship a misogynistic @sshole. I'm certain that his willingness to buy that God would rightfully treat women so poorly indicates he thinks less of women than he does men. That he sees me as less than him. How can he think any other way and believe what he does? How can any man who worships the God of the Old Testament not believe women inferior to men?

Joseph Smith set the standard of misogyny in Mormonism. It continued with Brigham Young and continues, though to a lesser degree, to this day.

Of course Smith had sex with women behind his wife's back. God sanctioned affairs. Well, affairs sanctioned by the God who supposedly revealed himself to Joseph Smith and who just happened to support Smith's extraordinary lust for control and sex. Wasn't that convenient?!

KA

[_asbestosman]

How can any man who worships the God of the Old Testament not believe women inferior to men?

That may be true, but I have heard that women are more likely to be church-goers than men. If so, I'm not saying that means that women are OK with it. For all I know it could be that more oppression provides less opportunity to see things another way. Or could be that there's really something else that tends to attract women. Maybe it's a sense of community and perhaps men tend more to be lone-wolfs by nature. I really don't know, but I think it is interesting--at least if it's true.

[_William Schryver]

You see, the God I’ve learned about is quite inclined to do precisely something like what Joseph Smith was asked to do. And I think Brigham Young understood the reasons why. Brigham Young didn’t see anything unholy in marrying a 20-something girl when he was in his early sixties. And he and Amelia made a great couple for many years after that. And when I look back at that, I don’t see anything wrong with it at all. I do believe it was divinely sanctioned.

If God wants to take certain of his sons and have them mate with certain of his daughters, it’s up to him to command them. Otherwise they are obligated to stay with their lawfully-wedded spouse. But I’m not about to tell God that his system is flawed for occasionally sanctioning exceptions to his standard rules of chastity. My sense of rectitude is not so constricted as to be rigid in all circumstances.

Apparently you don’t feel the same way. And that’s fine, too.

I like you, Will, but the God you believe in is a monster in my opinion.

I'm sick of misogynistic gods! No god I could believe in would want a twenty year old girl to be the lonely polygamous wife of a sixty-something year old geezer. It's wrong. And I've little doubt nasty old Brigham didn't see anything wrong with it. What a pig! I don't see it as divinely sanctioned at all - it was the entirely selfish act of a power-hungry woman-hater.

Mormon God thinks men should have their own eternal harems. Islamic God feels the same way, with the added misogynistic opinion that womens' heads be covered and that they should be dominated and controlled by their husbands. Old Testament God feels it's fine to declare women "unclean" and that they be shunned during their periods and after giving birth, two of the foremost things that make them women in the first place, oh, and that they should be killed if they're raped in the city and a dozen other female-hating things. Those gods seem to reflect the basest of male thought and if any one of them are really in charge of the universe, then I'll go to hell rather than submit to their misogynistic bulls*it.

And Will, I noticed you said it took "balls" for Smith's wives to come out and admit they had sex with him. It didn't take balls at all! Why the need to ascribe male attributes to women to show they're brave or courageous? Try to see past the testosterone cloud that surrounds you. And it's not just you, Will, it's most men I know. Y'all just don't get it.

The fact that so many intelligent people can believe in such awful, female-hating gods pains me. I'm serious. It hurts my feelings that my husband thinks the O.T. god is at all worthy of worship. He feels compelled to worship a misogynistic @sshole. I'm certain that his willingness to buy that God would rightfully treat women so poorly indicates he thinks less of women than he does men. That he sees me as less than him. How can he think any other way and believe what he does? How can any man who worships the God of the Old Testament not believe women inferior to men?

Joseph Smith set the standard of misogyny in Mormonism. It continued with Brigham Young and continues, though to a lesser degree, to this day.

Of course Smith had sex with women behind his wife's back. God sanctioned affairs. Well, affairs sanctioned by the God who supposedly revealed himself to Joseph Smith and who just happened to support Smith's extraordinary lust for control and sex. Wasn't that convenient?!

KA

Kimberly, I like you, too. I really do. But I don't think you're always fair when you start throwing around these condemnations.

I just don't interpret these things the same way you do. As far as Amelia Young is concerned, she chose to marry Brigham Young. She wasn't compelled to do it. She made a very conscious choice and was clearly happy with that choice for the remainder of her days. She adored Brigham Young. She loved him. And she loved being his wife. And, if you've ever read anything about her, you would know that she was no shrinking violet. She was an extremely intelligent, talented, and outspoken woman. She was anything but oppressed.

And the same thing could be said for the women who testified about being Joseph Smith's plural wives. Yes, I used the word cajones, but your interpretation of my reason for employing that word is not fair. I simply meant to say that they were extremely brave for doing what they did. I've done quite a bit of reading about several of these women. They were powerful, intelligent, independent women. They chose to do what they did because they believed in it, not because they were forced to do it. There is no comparison between most of them and the poor girls in Colorado City.

You throw around the term misogyny, but nothing could be more alien to my mindset when it comes to my view of women. My wife is a strong, intelligent, independent woman. If you suggested to her that she was oppressed, she would laugh in your face. She knows how things really are. I have fostered and supported her in everything she has done in her life, and if and when I'm out of line, she smacks me down real good. And I prefer it that way. We are a team. We are best friends. We are partners. We are equals. No, that's not right. Truth be told, she is my superior in almost every way.

I don't doubt that there are some absolute misogynistic jerks among LDS just as there are elsewhere in the world. But my experience is that, for the most part, women won't put up with that crap anymore. And that's good. If some man tries to exercise power and unrighteous dominion over his woman, he's a damn fool. It's a recipe for unhappiness in my estimation. It's a recipe for marital dissatisfaction. It puts one on the fast track to misery. It's a disastrous way to conduct a marriage.

Look, I don't pretend to understand all of the reasons for which a group of otherwise conservative and upright 19th century men and women chose to institute and live a system of plural marriage. If you examine the history closely, you'll see that there was nothing in their background to explain it except that they sincerely believed it was God's will. I simply cannot subscribe to the salacious interpretations that get overlaid on the practice so easily by many of those looking back on the era. I can understand why it's easy to do it, but I don't think it's justified. I think the issue is much more complex than that.

The bottom line is that I personally am anything but a "female-hater", and I know very few LDS men who could be accurately described by that term. I have three beautiful daughters. I love them dearly. I have taught them to be strong, independent, and to seek to become everything that they are capable of being. As far as I'm concerned, the female of the species is God's supreme achievement. Would that I might one day be able to be as great as my wife and daughters are by their very nature. And anyone who thinks any differently ought to be eternally deprived of the companionship of a good woman as punishment for his idiocy.

[_Mercury]

I think the most compelling argument that he slept with his other wives is;

What in the world is the point of marrying anyone if you don't have sex with them?

Sex is nice and all, but a family friend just got married and he is a survivor of prostate cancer. He physically cannot have sex. So, I do believe its possible for people to get married and sex not be part of the equation. Furthermore, many relationships continue well past its ability to have sex (due to many different medical problems).

It is more likely that joseph liked to have his colon tickled than it being removed. To believe that if someone out there in the universe has a loving relationship while not being able to perform sexually (joseph had several children) equates to a platonic relationship with several dozen partners is beyond reason. A good portion of these women have come forward during the temple lot case stating they had sexual relations with joe. So...we have marriage acts placing joe the emotional rapist and the emotional rapee together forever...oh how sweet.

Do not try to justify the rape of these women Nephi. Of all your blatherings get it through your head that what that con man did was NOT COOL.

[_KimberlyAnn]

Will, I have thousands of words that I could type in reply, but I'll restrain myself.

Polygamy, by and large, put(s) women on the fast track to misery, and that's all I'll say, though I feel you missed the main point of my remarks. I feel so strongly about the issue of women in Mormonism that to reply with my true thoughts on the topic might possibly seem like an outright attack, and I don't want that to happen, so I won't share them in a reply to you. I've included them on other threads already, anyway.

I think you're all wrong about Mormonism, and you feel the same way about me, I'm sure. We'll just have to agree to disagree, and disagree strongly, it appears, at least on this issue.

KA

[_huckelberry]

I was glad to see Mr Schrivers response for the sake of some actual discussion on this board. A divergence from agreement is worth looking at. But for discussion I would like to reask the implied question which I think could use a further look. William, you state that you have learned something of God which make the idea of God requiring polygamy of Joseph Smith make sense. So what is it that you are thinking of?

It is worth something to at least try to put into words understandings one has of God.

Your comments sound a bit as if you may be thinking of Gods positive attitude towards human sexuality. I would not find that suprising from a Biblical point of view(or other views as well) After all God invented sexuality. He invented marriage and the entheusism humans have for it. Love which is to be found in sexuality between couples is understood to be important to Gods personal being.

I would not be suprised if God wanted men and women to pair off and have sexual intercourse. God commanded it. These observations do not imply polygamy to my mind. Why mess up a good thing by adding a lot of pain an misery?

You have observed that there were individuals who expressed positive experience about plural marriage. Perhaps sometimes but what does that say about God?

Myself I am one of those who do not believe God commands polygamy, now, in recient history or in Old Testament times. I believe respect for people is important enough to God that God would respect polygamous marriages people made as in Old Testament times but due to the problems with mutual respect and intamacy in such a system God would not pressure people to undertake such a thing.

[_Sethbag]

So yes, I take it Will Schryver does in fact believe that God not only approved of, but indeed commanded Joseph Smith to:

Call men on missions and then proposition their wives while they were gone, telling them it was God's will that they accept him as husband.
Secretly "marry" and have sex with these women
Do all of this while concealing it from his wife.
Do all of this while concealing it from the actual, legal husbands of these women.
Lie about it, not only to Emma, but in fact to others in the church, and to the general public.

Furthermore, I take it Will Schryver believes that God not only approved of, but instructed Joseph Smith to:

Tell young girls that they had already been "given" to him by God, creating a religious fait accompli.
Tell young girls that the penalty, if he doesn't marry them with his secret marriage ceremony, was for an angel to kill him. Note the corellary to this is that if the girls didn't marry Joseph, he would be killed, thus putting a very sick and coercive pressure on them.
Convince two young, teenage sisters, to marry him independently of each other, and do so.
Hold a second marriage ceremony in front of Emma, after she'd agreed to the marriages with these two sisters, in order to fool her, because in fact Joseph and the sisters had already been married for months.
Publish, or allow to be published, declarations claiming that plural marriage was not in fact being practiced, when in fact they were.

I take it that Will Shryver believes that these actions were Godly, were commanded by and/or approved by God, and that the only reason why Joseph Smith seems to so many of us like a selfish cad for having done these things is that we just don't understand the mind and will of God well enough.

I just want to be clear about this. According to Will Schryver, if only we understood the mind of God, what comes across as coercive, manipulative, dishonest, lying, scheming, caddish, brutish sexual predation, would actually be understood to be the stuff of which Celestial Gods are made. Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah! Praise to the man who f***ed Mr. Lyons' wife! Praise to the man who f***ed Henry Jacobs' wife, and several dozen others besides! Praise to the man who managed to get so much tail behind his wife's back! Praise to the man who was f***ing the entire Presidency of the Relief Society that his beloved wife was President of, without her even knowing! Praise to the man!

It disgusts me to imagine that some LDS true believers believe the actions of Joseph Smith are the example of what Gods do, and what demonstrates worthiness to enter the Celestial Kingdom and inherit a seat on the right hand of God. It sure says a lot about the God at whose right hand they imagine they too might someday sit.

[_huckelberry]

I am going to continue a bit of reflection on the idea that in the Old Testament God respected the polygamous marriages that people made without any intentions of commanding such a thing as the ideal. It is always very odd to my ears to hear Mormons supporting the idea of commanded polygamy by reference to the Old Testament. I keep thinking, say what?

It is important to my understanding of God to see God assinging responsiblity for making rules and descisions out of respect God has for people. It is to my mind especially interesting in the context of the Old Testament where we are so obviously looking at a semibarbaric people make rules which are sometimes grotesquely overwritten and can reflect distorted concepts of respect as in the imbalance in womens rights. It is to my mind not a function of what God wants but of peoples shortcomming in fullfilling the assignement to develope rules. Yet I see God patiently respecting the efforts as steps along the way.

One thing about Mormon teaching which troubles me in particular is the reversal of this idea. Mormon teaching seems to see God reversing our efforts by making arbitrary commands people are to just accept such as polygamy. Behind the polygamy teaching in 132 is the statement that the covenenats such as marriage made previously are not in effect or limited effect. I do no believe such a view reflects Gods respect for people. Instead I think it is more accurate to see God respecting the marriages that people make in their own descisions.

That God would respect the marriage covenent that is such a natural part of our own descision making process by giving that normal marriage a sacramental status is a picture of God that I think shows who he is.

[_Inconceivable]

I love to read the testimonies of the women who claimed that Joseph had slept with them. It took cajones to do that back in the late 19th century. And they weren’t any too ashamed of it, either. They were downright honored to have shared a bed with Joseph Smith.

Us good TBM guys have that effect on our women. If you don’t believe me, just ask my wife.

;-)

William Schryver, Mormon man,

What arrogance! What effect are you speaking of? Your wife is not ashamed that you have legal marital relations with her? Non TBM lawfully wedded husbands have less of an effect on what??

Joseph Smith was ashamed. He was scared. He lied. He broke the most sacred of vows he covenanted with his wife. He practiced immorality in the darkness where God has said that He does not work.

I assume that you are referring to your first and only legally married wife. Emma was ashamed of her husband's immoral behavior. She was repulsed by the women that bedded her only man. Your bride, no doubt would discover much in common with Emma were you to behave with such disdain for her sacred marriage vow.

And yes, in spite of this repulsion, Joseph Smith had such an astonishing affect upon her that she was willing to engage in enough sex to become pregnant during his numerous extramarital affairs. Even after all of her miscarriages. Is this the type of effect you have on your wife?

So how much do you have in common sexually with this 18th century pirate? Please take another look at the definition of the word fidelity and honor before replying.

Emma was so entirely ashamed of his numerous adulterous laisons that she denied their existance to her dying breath. If your wife discovered you were secretly banging her visiting teacher would she lie to defend your honor?

Do you really believe that Joseph Smith had to go to Hell to fetch her after she died?

You manly man, you. What in God's name is this effect you are talking about??

[_beastie]

Let's also not forget that Joseph Smith told some of these young women that if they agreed to "marrY' him, they would be ensuring the exaltation of their entire family. These young girls - some still children, like Helen Mar - were spiritually coerced.

Also we can't forget that Joseph Smith allowed the worst type of defamation, slander, and libel, to be perpetrated against women who turned down polygamous proposals and then blabbed about it, like Martha Brotherton. Remember her? Called a whore from her mother's breast in the church newspaper? And still, after her death, Brigham Young had her sealed to him.

If a leader of some other religious group - like, say, the FLDS - behaved in this way, Mormons would be able to "see" the behavior for what it is. An abuse of power, manipulation, and spiritual coercion. But since it's their beloved Joseph who engaged in this behavior, Mormons engage in all sort of mental gymnastics in order to be able to live with it. Yet it is the same behavior. Both perps claim God sanctioned this behavior. Both perps have been able to convince their followers of the same. Yet Mormons are happy to condemn Warren Jeffs, while sanctioning Joseph Smith.

I know that believers like to refer to the public statements of polygamous women to prove they supported the principle and accepted it whole-heartedly. However, often the private journals of these same women tell a different story - a story of loneliness and heart-ache, in which they longed for monogamy and resented their spouse for basically being a sperm donor, leaving the wives to deal with a house full of babies. And often leaving the wives to financially support themselves, as well.

These same polygamous women who had "testimonies" of the principle also felt that it was their burden to bear in this life, and if God were just, he would mightily reward them for their suffering in the next life.