Some Russian Leaders Propose Legalizing Polygamy.

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[shanstress70]

The original argument was whether or not Bruce McConkie's sister's story is true, but somehow it got convoluted into an emotional issue.

Not emotional for me... is it emotional for you? I'm just telling you that what you're saying (women getting sooooo bitter about polygamy) is the reason why I left the church.

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[shanstress70]

<div class='quotemain'>

Not emotional for me... is it emotional for you? I'm just telling you that what you're saying (women getting sooooo bitter about polygamy) is the reason why I left the church.

No, I find this entire thread to be wrought with humor! And I never mentioned the word "bitter"...you did. Therefore, what I am saying has nothing to do with your leaving the Church. But if I were you, I'd think it over and come back. :-)

I think the bitterness is exuding from the women you mentioned - thinking it's funny that Emma pushed a lady down the stairs because they are sharing a husband. If that ain't bitterness, I don't know what is!

So, is it a safe assumption that you believe Eliza was carrying Joseph's child? If so, do you REALLY believe that God is OK with that, and even commanded it? Do you think God would stand for something that causes so much mental anguish for something? I definitely do not. I know LDS women who are consumed with that subject and worry about it endlessly. God would not want that for us... trust me.

Believe me... I've thought about it. Thanks for the invite, but I won't be coming back! Too many things have became clear to me.

However, I'm glad it works for you, and that you are happy in your religion.

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[shanstress70]

Have a good day, Aristotle. I hope I did not offend you. It is not my intention to argue with you... just stating my opinion. :)

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[Prend1]

Well said Shanstress. Some people have blinders and cannot be debated with.

[Outshined]

Throughout the course of Church history, there have undoubtedly been many unhappy polygamist wives who have done more than suffer in silence, which is probably one of the main reasons polygamy has been outlawed.

Acxtually, I've seen no such documented history, and Church doctrines are not based on the behavior of wives or anyone else, even if we imagine them to be "suffering".

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[Outshined]

Just because you have not seen any such documented history, does not mean it doesn't exist.

Nor that it does. As posted earlier, we usually get upset if a critic of the Church makes claims without foundation; this is no different.

Wives and mothers have appealed to the prophets in regard to unrighteous dominion practiced in the home. The prophets have continually warned the brethren against this practice. Many of the brethren must not hear what the prophets have said...any more than they are hearing their wives and children who suffer at their hand.

Polygamy had nothing to do with "unrighteous dominion," in case you didn't know. You've somehow made the jump from early Church doctrines to abuse. Does not make sense.

And the folk tale gossip spread at your Relief Society meeting does great damage to Emma Smith's reputation.

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[Outshined]

Polygamy is outlawed, yet, some men in the Church keep the fantasy alive.

Interesting assertion, again, of which I've seen no evidence in the Church. Perhaps it is more gossip...

Men who exert their self-perceived authority over women are guilty of exercising unrighteous dominion. Polygamists are guilty of exercising unrighteous dominion over their wives; many of whom are minor children, which is considered sexual abuse and child molestation.

There are no polygamists in our Church; the doctrine was discontinued over a century ago. When it was doctrine, it was not "unrighteous dominion."

In regard to "folk tale gossip"...perhaps some of the brethren feel uncomfortable with this information.

If by "information" you mean gossip that paints Emma Smith as an attempted murderer, then yes, I for one am uncomfortable with such trash being spread by sisters in the Church, let alone laughed at.

If the story is untrue, it is the responsibility of the brethren to see that "folk telling" is discontinued in the Church...including the exaggeration of certain stories which have been attributed to Paul H. Dunn.

That responsibility would fall on the sisters as well, who should not repeat such gossip as you have here, or paint it as somehow amusing. Such behavior only lowers the Church.

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[Outshined]

Some men listen to their wives as well as they listen to their priesthood leaders.

Not when they spread gossip and heresay like this.

Since polygamy has been discontinued in the Church, keeping it alive by debating whether or not it may be reinstituted based upon its legalization is an exercise in futility.

Who's debating any such thing? This Church does not adopt doctrine at the whims of government. What the country decides to accept has no bearing on our doctrines.

The information came from Bruce McConkie's sister. Since you were not present at that meeting, and did not hear the story in its entirety from the source, and have not spoken with this sister, you are not in a position to malign this sister by labeling her one who spreads gossip or trash.

She was not spreading "information", she was spreading gossip that maligns Emma Smith. I don't have to speak to her to know her story is heresay and yes, it is trash. I believe the story in its entirety has been provided for you in an earlier post. Here

The brethren assume leadership positions in the Church and are responsible for disciplining members if they are at fault. My relating a story which was told at a stake Relief Society meeting (and the reaction of the sisters) cannot be misinterpreted or misconstrued as "repeating gossip" or "painting the truth", since I witnessed this personally.

Nice way to put off responsibility for spreading such tales. The Emma Smith story has no historical evidence, and has been disputed as a false story. It was indeed spreading gossip.

Interesting view; that the brethren need to discipline the sisters in order for them to conduct themselves like Christians.

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[Outshined]

I witnessed this story being told by Bruce McConkie's sister in Relief Society. This is evidence, based upon my testimony as a witness, not hearsay and gossip.

It is heresay and gossip, as the story has been disputed by both Eliza Snow and Joseph Smith's own son. Read the link. Just because you heard it from someone else does not excuse the repetition of the gossip.

The Church outlawed polygamy after it was outlawed by the civil government.

You may think the ban was in response to government pressure, but I disagree.

One is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. You have not proven that Bruce McConkie's sister is guilty of spreading hearsay and gossip.

And how did this sister prove her story about Emma killing a baby? The story does end that way, you know. Emma is innocent until you prove she did it in a court of law... B) May we assume you brought that up to the storyteller?

I challenge you to present OFFICIAL Church documentation which proves that Bruce McConkie's sister's story is false. I also challenge you to prove that I did not hear Bruce McConkie's sister's story firsthand. Since either is improbable and most likely impossible, this proves that your accusation of my spreading gossip is false.

I challenge you to present OFFICIAL documentation that it is. I have Eliza Snow's journal and JS III's word that it did not happen; what do you have? I couldn't care less who you heard it from; it is still gossip and does not excuse anyone involved. It is gossip and you did repeat it.

You misread what I said: The brethren assume leadership positions in the Church and are responsible for disciplining members if they are at fault.

It's just a shame that it should take such action to get RS sisters to act decently in Church, isn't it?

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[Outshined]

Official Church documentation, please. You quote an unoffical church website; I quoted the source (Bruce McConkie's sister).

McConkie's sister is not an official Church source. That's gossip.

This isn't about personal disagreement...it is fact.

So you believe that the Church ended polygamy merely because of government pressure. You're saying that God provided a revelation because He was afraid of the government?

If that's the case, won't there be a revelation accepting gay marriage if the government makes it law?

I did not hear or say that Bruce McConkie's sister called Emma a murderess; nor did I hear her say that Emma ever killed anyone. Was Emma tried in court for murdering her "sister wife's" unborn child? Please provide official Church documentation of the "story end[ing] that way".

Provide an official Church version of the story at all... Hint: there is none; it is a rumor. Just her accusation that Emma pushed a pregnant woman down a flight of stairs is a bad enough stain on the woman's name; you should have been horrified at such claims without proof. Of course she was not tried because it did not happen.

I provide my testimony as a witness that Bruce McConkie's sister told this story at our stake Relief Society meeting...and that's official...and final! Methinks thou protesteth too much in this regard. Falsely accusing me of gossip doesn't change the fact that I heard this story at Relief Society.

As I've said several times, I don't care who you heard it from; it is still heresay and gossip about Emma Smith. Eliza Snow denied that it happened, as well as JS III. There is no official source for the tale, but you swear it is true because you heard it repeated in Church...

One more time for the record: The brethren assume leadership positions in the Church and are responsible for disciplining members if they are at fault. Gossip is a very strong [false] accusation.

And it stands, as the story is both unproven and was denied by the parties involved. It is not a false accusation, but the one about Emma is... I don't deny that JS practiced polygamy, or that Emma probably did not care for it, but this story maligns Emma's character and paints her as sadistic and murderous.

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[Outshined]

That is conjecture on your part, since you were not present at the Church meeting to see what documentation Bruce McConkie's sister was referencing; therefore, it is not gossip.

There is no "documentation". If so, provide it.

Do not put words in my mouth...I did not say God was afraid of the government. The following is an official statement on this subject:

So you agree that the Church will accept same-sex marriage if a law is passed? I mean, if the law was why God ended polygamy...

And bear in mind about putting words in other people's mouths while you're at it.

I don't need proof, you do.

For what? I never accused Emma of a crime; you did.

If you roll your eyes too many times, they just might stay locked in your head.

They do that when I read too much garbage.

Methinks you have beaten a dead horse. The facts remain the same. The story is unwavering. And you have engaged yourself in a character assasination attempt just to prove, unsuccessfully, that you're right and I'm wrong.

Methinks you still have no evidence that the false story about Emma ever happened. And the "unwavering" story is unfounded gossip. Amazing that you don't see the story about Emma shoving a pregnant woman down a flight of stairs as "character assassination"...

Very telling.

[Prend1]

Sorry but I have to agree with outshined on this one. Just bc we hear something at church does not make it true. I have seen many a bishop stand up in sacrament meeting, RS, sunday school, etc and correct or even outright stop the conversation.

And if she had proof what was it. Was she using offical church documents? I find it hard to believe she would. I do not feel that even if it were true (and I don't feel that it is) that such a story has a place in RS or anywhere else.

[Aristotle]

Edited by Aristotle

[Outshined]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. The burden of proof would lie upon her.

Exactly, especially when we consider that there is no documentation at all for the story, and the people involved denied that it took place.

[Outshined]

And if she had proof what was it. Was she using offical church documents? I find it hard to believe she would. I do not feel that even if it were true (and I don't feel that it is) that such a story has a place in RS or anywhere else.

Agreed.