http://blog.fairmormon.org/2014/11/10/lds-org-essay-on-nauvoo-polygamy-what-did-readers-expect/

5. "A list of injustices suffered by Joseph’s plural wives and an exhaustive detailing of their pain and suffering."

In Sacred Loneliness was a hard read because of the emotions I felt reading it.

4. "A lengthy discussion of Emma’s trials because of the practice."

Mormon Enigma was a hard read because of the emotions I felt reading it.

3. "A defense of polygamy."

Yes, please.

2. "An apology for polygamy."

Yes, please.

And number 1.

1. "An explanation for why polygamy was not discussed openly in the past."

Yeah, I would like that more than whatever that essay was for in explaining anything!

Why are these unreasonable? Don't members deserve more than just the information with lame excusing explanations?

Don't they need their current prophet to clear a few things up for them?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/11/2014 08:39PM by Elder Berry.

IMO they need to apologize to every single member they've ever lied to. That would be ALL of them. They don't have the spine to do that though.

This is a good list, because just admitting Joseph Smith was a polygamist is like announcing that the sky is blue. It doesn't tell the world anything most people don't already know, or assume.

I knew Joseph Smith had many wives--even as a TBM. What I didn't know was how polygamy was practiced. In reading In Sacred Loneliness and other books, it became plainly evident that Joseph Smith and other church leaders had used their authority in spiritual matters to get more wives. This put women in an impossible position if they really believed he was a prophet. If they didn't accept his proposal they would have just squandered a chance to save their whole family. Men with lesser power, like Henry Jacobs, also lost out as more powerful LDS leaders would take or reassign their wives, and send the husbands or prospective husbands on missions to get them out of the way.

Then there's the OP's #1, which is what implicates the current leaders. They really have some explaining to do for all those lesson manuals, propaganda movies, art at Deseret Book etc. that dishonestly portrayed early LDS leaders, including Joseph Smith as monogamous.

The statue in front of the COB is a lie! JS and Emma! Where are the 39 other statues? They need to add about 40 extras for the ones we don't know about, half of which should be 14 year old girls and probably some boys.

It's a relief to hear your feelings. Not a few days have passed since I've been discussing this with friends, and then here comes the church with its "context" for the essays and Fair with they're accusatory "what did you expect?" They're right. what did I expect, except gas-lighting?

colddodger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "what did you expect?"

I love it. If you want to separate the wheat from the tares in Mormonism you insult questioning members. Then like magic (or The Spirit) members are leaving because they were offended.

The use of the term "wives" for the women that Joseph Smith seduced plays right into the MORG's PR ploy to whitewash the truth. There is no record that Smith ever had an actually marital relationship with any of these women other than bedding them. At least, the later polygamists acknowledged their other wives, had children with them and usually provided for them. Smith on the other hand took advantage of these women to seduce them for his own carnal purposes. Lets call this for what it really is, like a lot of men who gain power, Joseph Smith was a womanizer who preyed on the vulnerabilities of these women who looked up to him as a supposed prophet. For this, Joseph Smith was a despicable man and charlatin.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2014 04:10PM by merryprankster.

Man, that article just makes you want to kick the author in the nuts.

And then some.

rt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Man, that article just makes you want to kick the
> author in the nuts.

It is ironic that this man claims wanting to know simple things like a theologically sound explanation for something terrible (like Abraham being asked to kill his son) elicits such a response. Is this supposed to be a reasonable man writing this?

He looks like the opposite. He looks like a zealot attempting to dismiss obvious questions with a way of his irrational justifying.

Here is a simple question that will NEVER be answered by LDS Inc. - why the essays? Why now?

"the marriage with Alder ended with separation"

Doesn't that sound like a breakup between equals? That fact is that Fanny was a girl employed by the Smiths. She was run off by the jealous wife of her boss. It was a scandal then and would be today.

Yeah. It was throw out the victim and protect the predator.