Jason Bourne wrote:by the way, you sound silly when you accuse Smith of child molestation. Even as disturbed as I am over this subject I think it is more likely then not that his marriage to the Kimball girl was not consummated.
What would make you think that? Why would an eternal sealing in heaven be any different than a baptism if no sex were involved for poor Helen? Why did she go through such emotional trauma for something so uninvolved?
No, I think YOU sound silly for not believing it.
Compton, Vna Wagner and the authors of Mormon Enigma agree with me not with you, thus I think you are silly about this one.
Hmmm...perhaps I missed something. What were the reasons they dismiss this one? Do they think he didn't have sex with her, or do they believe there isn't enough evidence to plainly state that he did have sex with her? There is a big difference between the two.
I'm with Jason on this one, Scottie. First, there is no real evidence of sex between Helen Mar and Joseph Smith. It is accepted that Joseph Smith did not have sex with some of his much older wives, so there is reason to believe that some of the marriages were not consummated. I believe Joseph Smith would have indeed have consummated with Helen Mar when she got older, but was killed before that occurred. I believe this not just due to lack of evidence, but due to some of Helen Mar's own writings on the subject. I'm going by memory right now on the dates, so forgive me if I make a small error. If I recall correctly, Helen Mar and Joseph Smith were married in May. Helen Mar later wrote a poem (with some more explanation) that strongly suggests it was her not being allowed to attend the winter parties like other young people in Nauvoo that finally made her realize the marriage was not just for eternity, but also for time. Helen Mar was an intelligent woman, and I think it is extraordinarily unlikely she had been having sexual relationships with Joseph Smith for five months or more and didn't realize the marriage was for time as well as eternity.
It is not unknown in polygamist societies for older leaders to select and set aside, or horde, young women whom they can tell will be especially attractive, just to get them out of the socializing young people normally do. I think this is why Joseph Smith chose Helen Mar at such a young age.
If Joseph Smith were truly attracted to females as young as Helen Mar, he would have married more women in this age range. Judging from the age range of his other wives, he does not appear to be a pedophile in the strict sense of the word, ie, sexually attracted to prepubescent children.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
beastie wrote:I'm with Jason on this one, Scottie. First, there is no real evidence of sex between Helen Mar and Joseph Smith. It is accepted that Joseph Smith did not have sex with some of his much older wives, so there is reason to believe that some of the marriages were not consummated. I believe Joseph Smith would have indeed have consummated with Helen Mar when she got older, but was killed before that occurred. I believe this not just due to lack of evidence, but due to some of Helen Mar's own writings on the subject. I'm going by memory right now on the dates, so forgive me if I make a small error. If I recall correctly, Helen Mar and Joseph Smith were married in May. Helen Mar later wrote a poem (with some more explanation) that strongly suggests it was her not being allowed to attend the winter parties like other young people in Nauvoo that finally made her realize the marriage was not just for eternity, but also for time. Helen Mar was an intelligent woman, and I think it is extraordinarily unlikely she had been having sexual relationships with Joseph Smith for five months or more and didn't realize the marriage was for time as well as eternity.
It is not unknown in polygamist societies for older leaders to select and set aside, or horde, young women whom they can tell will be especially attractive, just to get them out of the socializing young people normally do. I think this is why Joseph Smith chose Helen Mar at such a young age.
If Joseph Smith were truly attracted to females as young as Helen Mar, he would have married more women in this age range. Judging from the age range of his other wives, he does not appear to be a pedophile in the strict sense of the word, ie, sexually attracted to prepubescent children.
Sounds like this is an area which I need to do more research. Thanks for the explaination.
And, for the record, I'll gladly don the "I'm silly" hat...
Sounds like this is an area which I need to do more research. Thanks for the explaination.
And, for the record, I'll gladly don the "I'm silly" hat...
No need for the silly hat. This is a hotly contested point. Many exmormons would - (and have on RFM) argue vociferously with me. They love tagging him with the pedophile label.
But I think, if people want to be fair at all, that it at least has to be admitted that the case for Joseph Smith having had sex with Helen Mar is fairly weak. And the case for real pedophilia is nonexistent.
Now, the case for Joseph Smith being a sexual predator - that's strong. And he certainly preyed on women who were too young to be able to handle his manipulations.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Is there any immoral act that Joseph Smith could have done, claiming that God commanded it, that would cause you to question whether it really came from God?
No.
After all, every atrocity that could possibly be committed is documented in the Bible somewhere.
That is why I said no. Obviously it is not immoral or an atrocity if God commands it.
He already committed child molestation, which in our "puritan" moral views is one of the most horrific things a man can do. And, I know, it was different back then. It was quite normal for mid 30's men to marry 15 year old girls. Uh huh.
English common law extant at the time has the age of consent at 10 years old.
That is why I said no. Obviously it is not immoral or an atrocity if God commands it.
That's the philosophy of religious terrorists, as well.
Saying that god gets a pass no matter what reminds me of the victims of kidnappers who rationalize away the behavior of their kidnapper after they're found. It's just the theistic version of the Stockholm syndrome.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
That is why I said no. Obviously it is not immoral or an atrocity if God commands it.
That's the philosophy of religious terrorists, as well.
Interesting that Tal Bachman is ridiculed for saying that he would have agreed to blow himself up for the church, but bcspace says essentially the same thing: if God commands it, it's right, no matter what it is.
That is why I said no. Obviously it is not immoral or an atrocity if God commands it.
That's the philosophy of religious terrorists, as well.
Interesting that Tal Bachman is ridiculed for saying that he would have agreed to blow himself up for the church, but bcspace says essentially the same thing: if God commands it, it's right, no matter what it is.
I wouldn't mind so much if terrorists were only blowing themselves up (although that would still be sad) because I feel that one has the right to sacrifice his own life for good (like soldiers and firefighters). It's who terrorists take with them that's really upsetting. Sacrficing other lives just doesn't jive with me.
Anyhow, I suppose that if God is the only one to judge then He it would make sense to please Him by doing what you think He wants. The question to ask yourself is whether or not it'd be worth it. Furthermore (and fortunately) I think most believers don't imagine that God would make such demands, and I imagine that if God did, that many would question the value of following such a being.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
asbestosman wrote:I wouldn't mind so much if terrorists were only blowing themselves up (although that would still be sad) because I feel that one has the right to sacrifice his own life for good (like soldiers and firefighters). It's who terrorists take with them that's really upsetting. Sacrficing other lives just doesn't jive with me.
Anyhow, I suppose that if God is the only one to judge then He it would make sense to please Him by doing what you think He wants. The question to ask yourself is whether or not it'd be worth it. Furthermore (and fortunately) I think most believers don't imagine that God would make such demands, and I imagine that if God did, that many would question the value of following such a being.
We already know that God has made such demands before. Why not now?
I think we all have our line that we won't cross. It just depends on the person. There are people out there who would do anything if they were convinced God required it. Apparently, Tal was like that in his believing days, and bcspace is like that today.