Brian David Mitchel said, "...an angel would cut her down with a sword..."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/107018323.html

Joseph Smith said, "...an angel...with a drawn sword...commanded that he should enter into the practice..." of polygamy

http://www.i4m.com/think/history/angel_sword.htm

Two prophets of the same cloth using inocent belief in God to get laid...both showing their true colors by how they manipulated barely pubescent girls...disgusting. Our planet would be better off without these prophets.

In fact, that young girl knew enough French to keep a journal and make comments that showed she knew he was a nut.

if she knows of Joseph's revelations of love...if she thinks— or would think he is nuts as well.

I'll agree that Mitchell can be more easily and clearly identified as delusional but in reality JS was not too different in his marital practices.

SusieQ#1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I;m quite sure, from my reading about E. Smart, she was
> and is perfectly capable of understanding the HUGE differences.
> In fact, that young girl knew enough French to
> keep a journal and make comments that showed she
> knew he was a nut.

This almost smacks of a defense of Joe Smith as much as of E. Smart.

What do you really mean, SQ?

Jesus Smith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SusieQ#1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I;m quite sure, from my reading about E. Smart,
> she was
> > and is perfectly capable of understanding the
> HUGE differences.
> > In fact, that young girl knew enough French to
> > keep a journal and make comments that showed
> she
> > knew he was a nut.
>
> This almost smacks of a defense of Joe Smith as
> much as of E. Smart.
>
> What do you really mean, SQ?

Josepph Smith did some awful things, but he didn't kidnap and forcibly rape anyone as far as we know. That is a difference although the mode of operation is similar in other ways.

bona dea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Josepph Smith did some awful things, but he didn't
> kidnap and forcibly rape anyone as far as we know.
> That is a difference although the mode of
> operation is similar in other ways.


True. But after reading how Helen Mar Kimball went to Joe, I am not sure there is a significant difference except that Heber was complicit and the exchange was done without ropes.

bona dea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Josepph Smith did some awful things, but he didn't
> kidnap and forcibly rape anyone as far as we know.
> That is a difference although the mode of
> operation is similar in other ways.

Did all the children who married JS want to marry? Or were some doing it out of fear?

Perhaps fear of being responsible for the death of a beloved prophet when an angel strikes him dead with a sword if they don't marry him. They might not want to be responsible for that, and really feel that it could happen, and it would be their fault.

ES went along with it because of threats to the lives of her and her family, and she didn't want to be responsible for that, so when a cop asked about her right there in person two months after the kidnapping, she stayed quiet and went along with the abuse. JS's victim did it to protect themselves, and the "prophet" that their family loved from death by an angel. There are similarities.

In another thread about rape, you were pretty adamant that what the perpetrators motives were doesn't matter a bit. The only thing that matters is what the victim thought.

In both cases, the victim went along with their own abuse out of fear of harm to themselves or to other people they cared about. From the victims point of view, which is the only one you think we should consider, it'd nearly the exact same thing.