Your thoughts on Desiring multiple wives

[Bini]

Daughters of God have the right to say "NO".

The problem with this argument is that men are attempting to interpret on their own level the will of God!

In the latter days, women simply don't buy in to it.

I agree with this.

[Elphaba]

She wrote that she had "a desire to impress upon the world what Mormonism really is; to show the pitiable condition of its women, held in a system of bondage that is more cruel than African slavery ever was, since it claims to hold body and soul alike."

You can read about her here: Ann Eliza Young - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree Webb Young's book is compelling; however, we need to keep in mind that she had an agenda, i.e., educating everyone on the evils of polygamy, and to that effect, she was prone to pepper the truth with hyperbole.

I’m not saying she was necessarily wrong, in that she relates her experiences with Mormonism and polygamy quite well. Additionally, there is corroborating evidence for some of the things she relates.

But she tends to project her personal experience onto other women living "the principle," which gives the wrong impression of many of these women's lives.

A book I would recommend is Annie Clark Tanner’s “Mormon Mother.” Her autobiography is straightforward about her experience, as she has no agenda to disparage polygamy, even though it caused her great heartache.

Elphaba

[Dravin]

Daughters of God have the right to say "NO".

I don't deny it, in fact I've been affirming it. They have a right to say no to marriage, tithing, fidelity, loving their neighbor, fast offerings, church attendance and a host of other things, as do the Sons of God, they however (and I'm speaking of both sons and daughters) have no right to be free of the consequences of their choices.

So just as FunkyTown's hypothetical wife would have it upon her head for refusing to go along with God's will for him to marry another women so would I have it upon my head if my hypothetical wife was commanded to marry another man and I refused.

Lets use a less controversial commandment, lets say tithing. We have a member family, the wife wants to pay tithing, the husband refuses, lets say the husband makes all the money. Now is the wife going to be held accountable for not paying tithing because her spouse refuses to allow her to follow the commandment? The husband has a right to say no (it's called moral agency), but there are going to be consequences for not paying tithing, they'll be upon the husband's head not the wife's.

The problem with this argument is that men are attempting to interpret on their own level the will of God!

Funky said if he was commanded, the assumption is of the Lord. I think you'll find a lot less people saying there is an obligation to obey what some random guy thinks is a good idea verses there being an obligation to obey what God commands (considering that as members of the Church we've covenanted to do such).

L

Edited September 27, 2009 by Dravin

[MrsAri]

Here's the hitch...the women of the Church have the power to refuse to practice polygamy [in the hereafter].

At present, it's not an issue in the Church, as it is an unaccepted and unacceptable practice...resulting in excommunication...and let's not forget that it's illegal!

Again, men assume to translate the will of God according to their own understanding.

We fought the war in heaven for our free agency...and women reserve the right to reject the practice of polygamy...regardless of their husbands' coercion.

Incidentally, men don't have the power to control their wives...or else it's amen to the priesthood.

Edited September 27, 2009 by GrandmaAri

[Just_A_Guy]

Not in Joseph Smith's case, in fact when Emma said "No Way", Joseph then had another revelation telling her she'd be 'destroyed' if she didn't comply: "And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law" (D&C 132.54). So what are a woman's 'choices' in this situation? She really has no control over the fact that if her husband feels compelled to do so, he's going to 'take' another wife regardless of what she says. He just has to keep badgering and guilt-tripping her into accepting the idea until she gives in or leaves the marriage.

In Emma Smith's case, yes; because the woman's right to give or withhold consent to her husband's polygamous marriages (the "Law of Sarah") does not apply to a woman married to the man who holds the keys of the sealing power--i.e., the President of the Church. See D&C 132:64-65. For the rest of the Church, the Law of Sarah remained intact as long as polygamy was practiced; and a man who overrode the desires of his wife and took another was abusing his priesthood.

As for YFZ and the FLDS:

I note, first, that "Sarah" turned out to be a black Mormon in Colorado who (from the foregoing, one may easily deduce) had no connection whatsoever to the FLDS Church.

Moreover, I also read Carolyn Jessop's book. I found it extremely self-serving, and have been in contact with several FLDS who contradict not only Ms. Jessop's generalizations, but also her recollections of several specific events.

I have not read Brent Jeffs' book, but last I heard he was in the middle of suing his dear uncle Warren for a seven-figure sum. If I want to know what "really" happened to him, I suspect the trial transcript would be a far more enlightening document if and when it becomes available.

Ann Eliza Young's book is a valid source (subject to Elphaba's critique above), but you should be aware that it went through several editions and the later ones were apparently spiced up by publishers who had zero first-hand experience with the Mormons. If you want to read her experiences, make sure you've got a first edition (or an exact copy thereof).

Not trying to say polygamous communities don't have any problems--even grievous ones--but we, of all people, should know that ex-members of a religious community are, all-too-often, extremely poor sources as to what's "really happening" within that community.

Edited September 27, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[Elphaba]

When she left with her sons for the Reorganized LDS church after Joseph's death,

Emma did not join the Reorganized Church until 1860, when her son Joseph III had a revelation he was to lead the Church. In the interim, Emma and her sons did not attend any church at all.

As such the Re-og's have never preached polygamy and deny that Joseph ever practiced it.

The church is now called "The Church of Christ," and has sort of acknowledged Joseph did practice polygamy. From the church's website:

Research findings point to Joseph Smith Jr. as a significant source for plural marriage teaching and practice at Nauvoo. However, several of his associates later wrote that he repudiated the plural marriage system and began to try to stop its practice shortly before his death in June 1844.

I think there is some truth to the rumor that Joseph was going to try to stop the practice of polygamy, though I don't know about "several of his associates." According to Newel and Avery, "Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith":

. . . Willim Marks, who had never embraced the principle, said that Joseph approached him one day late in spring and invited him to a seculded place to talk. "We are a ruined people," Marks quote Joseph as saying. "This doctrine of polygamy or Spiritual wife system, that has been taught and practiced among us, will prove our destruction and overthrow. I have been deceived in reference to its practice. It is wrong, it is a curse to mankind, and we shall have to leave the United States soon, unless it can be put down.

I've also read that Emma threatened Joseph with divorce if he didn't stop marrying other women. It appears he might have done so around this time. However, I believe it is possible if Joseph hadn't been murdered, and continued practicing polygamy, Emma would have left him, though I doubt she would have divorced him.

When Emma took such drastic measures, Joseph usually came around.

Elphaba

[MrsAri]

Not trying to say polygamous communities don't have any problems--even grievous ones--but we, of all people, should know that ex-members of a religious community are, all-too-often, extremely poor sources as to what's "really happening" within that community.

Ex-cult members would provide the most reliable information. Take for instance, the "Moonies". The kids who find their way out must go through counseling in order to reverse the brainwashing techniques used to control them.

Ex-satanists have also given testimony as to what exactly occurs behind the scenes.

Ex-polygamists know firsthand what hardships they had to endure.

I'm not saying that some may not carry it to an extreme, but for the most part, how does one find out information except from the source?

[Just_A_Guy]

Ex-polygamists know firsthand what hardships they had to endure.

I'm not saying that some may not carry it to an extreme, but for the most part, how does one find out information except from the source?

I'm not saying the ex-es should be ignored. But they are only part of "the source"--the other part being the current polygamists.

Admittedly the FLDS haven't done themselves many favors, with their pre-2008 refusal to engage the outside world.

But they've been vocal lately; and other polygamous groups (like the Allredites) have always been willing to talk to a greater or lesser degree.

Are we listening?

[deseretgov]

My husband didn't really understand my fear and concerns about polygamy, until I asked him to imagine me being intimate with another man, in the same house, right under his nose. Trust me, that definitely helped him see my point of view! (Although he still doesn't quite "get it" fully, since that's not actually a threat to him...)

I've pondered the same thing. I would be ok with it if my wife had more than one husband. It would be hard sometimes but I could do it. But I would much rather the other husband having his own place where they could go when it was their time. Just as if I had more than one wife, they would each have their own home/apartment. I think that would really help alleviate jelousy.

[Bini]

My answer is and always will be "no".

[deseretgov]

My answer is and always will be "no".

So you don't believe that desiring polygamy is a sin.

Or are you saying that you will never accept polygamy. If so, why?

[Bini]

So you don't believe that desiring polygamy is a sin.

Or are you saying that you will never accept polygamy. If so, why?

The latter.

It is a situation that my husband and I both agree is not for us. Be it multiple spouses or multiple partners.

[Elphaba]

Ann Eliza Young's book is a valid source (subject to Elphaba's critique above), but you should be aware that it went through several editions and the later ones were apparently spiced up by publishers who had zero first-hand experience with the Mormons. If you want to read her experiences, make sure you've got a first edition (or an exact copy thereof).

Well, now I wonder. Perhaps I read the "spiced up" version, hence the hyperbole that put me off.

Hmmmm.....

Elph

[Just_A_Guy]

Elphaba, I wish I could recall where I read about the modifications to later editions, but I can't think of it off the top of my head. Will let you know if I remember it.

[MrsAri]

I'm not saying the ex-es should be ignored. But they are only part of "the source"--the other part being the current polygamists.

Admittedly the FLDS haven't done themselves many favors, with their pre-2008 refusal to engage the outside world.

But they've been vocal lately; and other polygamous groups (like the Allredites) have always been willing to talk to a greater or lesser degree.

Are we listening?

Is it required for us to listen to apostate groups, other than for information-gathering...the "how not to do it"?

[Just_A_Guy]

Umm . . . if you're intending to disseminate "factual" information about them and their practices, then your answer is "yes". To do otherwise is reckless libel.

[MrsAri]

Umm . . . if you're intending to disseminate "factual" information about them and their practices, then your answer is "yes". To do otherwise is reckless libel.

Initially, that's what I said: "Ex-cult members would provide the most reliable information."

[Just_A_Guy]

Not sure we're understanding each other. I answered "yes" to your question of

Is it required for us to listen to apostate groups, other than for information-gathering...the "how not to do it"?

on the understanding that by "apostate groups" you meant "current FLDS" - as in "apostate" from the mainline LDS Church.

I dispute the contention that "ex-cult members would provide the most reliable information", just as I would dispute the contention that Jerald and Sandra Tanner would provide the most reliable information about the LDS Church.

Especially when one of those "ex-cult members" is on record as saying, while nursing children were being torn from their mothers, "I don't give a f*** what the parents think" (as Carolyn Jessop did).

[MrsAri]

Not sure we're understanding each other. I answered "yes" to your question of

on the understanding that by "apostate groups" you meant "current FLDS" - as in "apostate" from the mainline LDS Church.

I dispute the contention that "ex-cult members would provide the most reliable information", just as I would dispute the contention that Jerald and Sandra Tanner would provide the most reliable information about the LDS Church.

Again, you may dispute me, it is your right. I've spoken with investigators who counsel former cultists, so I'm getting different information.

[FunkyTown]

Again, you may dispute me, it is your right. I've spoken with investigators who counsel former cultists, so I'm getting different information.

Having been invited to a rally in support of The Bountiful Women's Society, I can honestly say that I don't know what group you're referring to: In Bountiful, BC, Canada, the women are intelligent, erudite and passionate about their beliefs.

Bountiful polygamists speak up

I disagree with them, but for those who want to see if they're an abused bunch, just go to Bountiful. They invite people to go there. They love visitors and a chance to share their views.

[MsQwerty]

I agree Webb Young's book is compelling; however, we need to keep in mind that she had an agenda, i.e., educating everyone on the evils of polygamy, and to that effect, she was prone to pepper the truth with hyperbole.

Of course she had an agenda that may have relied on sensationalising her experiences, but in general I felt she had valid insight and experience to support her complaints about polygamy.

But she tends to project her personal experience onto other women living "the principle," which gives the wrong impression of many of these women's lives.

Agreed, but this was a fairly natural response, given what she went through. Although as you say, there were women who experienced polygamy differently.

A book I would recommend is Annie Clark Tanner’s “Mormon Mother.” Her autobiography is straightforward about her experience, as she has no agenda to disparage polygamy, even though it caused her great heartache.

Sounds good, thanks. I'll look for it.

[FunkyTown]

Of course she had an agenda that may have relied on sensationalising her experiences, but in general I felt she had valid insight and experience to support her complaints about polygamy.

Agreed, but this was a fairly natural response, given what she went through. Although as you say, there were women who experienced polygamy differently.

Sounds good, thanks. I'll look for it.

Here's the face of polygamy in Bountiful:

Those are a few of his daughters as well.

EDIT: Hahah. I remember when that picture was splashed across the front page of every newspaper in Canada when the government went in to arrest him. Nothing did more damage to the case than that did. All of a sudden, this person who was arrested had a face.

[MsQwerty]

Emma did not join the Reorganized Church until 1860, when her son Joseph III had a revelation he was to lead the Church. In the interim, Emma and her sons did not attend any church at all.

That's what I get for posting late at night. What you say is correct and I worded it clumsily. I'm fairly sure I read that Emma believed the prophetic mantle should be passed on to her son after Joseph died. During the years between 1844 when Joseph was martyred and 1860 when she was baptised a member of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, she must have given a lot of thought to which spiritual direction she and her children should take. The fact she hated polygamy and tried to deny it ever happened, that she had legal wranglings with Brigham Young over trying to secure an inheritance for her children from Joseph's (and the church's) property, her marriage to Lewis Bidamon and being pregnant when her husband was killed, would have been more than enough to think about in those interim years before joining the Re-og's.

The church is now called "The Church of Christ," and has sort of acknowledged Joseph did practice polygamy. From the church's website:

The admission by the current C of C that Joseph practiced polygamy is fairly recent, if I recall correctly?

I think there is some truth to the rumor that Joseph was going to try to stop the practice of polygamy, though I don't know about "several of his associates." According to Newel and Avery, "Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith":

I suppose polygamy was a bit of a Pandora's box in some ways. I don't know how Joseph would have been able to justify stopping it once it had been introduced.

I've also read that Emma threatened Joseph with divorce if he didn't stop marrying other women. It appears he might have done so around this time. However, I believe it is possible if Joseph hadn't been murdered, and continued practicing polygamy, Emma would have left him, though I doubt she would have divorced him. When Emma took such drastic measures, Joseph usually came around.

She saw it for what it was, I think.

[MsQwerty]

Here's the face of polygamy in Bountiful:

Those are a few of his daughters as well.

EDIT: Hahah. I remember when that picture was splashed across the front page of every newspaper in Canada when the government went in to arrest him. Nothing did more damage to the case than that did. All of a sudden, this person who was arrested had a face.

No wonder he's got a big smile on his face...

[MsQwerty]

Especially when one of those "ex-cult members" is on record as saying, while nursing children were being torn from their mothers, "I don't give a f*** what the parents think" (as Carolyn Jessop did).

I remember being surprised by her statements to the press during the FLDS raids, considering she claimed a strong bond with her own children while she was living in a polygamous household. I immediately wondered if she considered that she could just as easily have been one of those women if she'd been unable to escape when she did.

I still feel sick recalling that whole incident. It was just horrifying.