do any mormons, practise polygamy at all

[Elphaba]

I think the spirit had to have guided her in those days for her to receive confirmation that in fact JS was to practice plural marriage and this was a commandment from God.

Emma was never reconciled to polygamy. She tried very hard, but couldn't do it. When Joseph was murdered, their marriage was tense because of it.

Additionally, she lied to her children, and everyone else, about it her entire life after her husband's murder, insisting Joseph had never practiced it.

Elphaba

[bytebear]

I don't see Emma being fertile as a factor in Joseph not being intimate with his other wives. However, I think last time I was reading about this historians were aware of between 5-7 children from plural wives and were putting in the due diligence to confirm them via DNA testing. There have also been other questionable children from these women which unfortunately died at extremely young ages so testing isn't possible.

So far DNA has excluded 4 of the 9 alleged children of Smith. Two or the remaining four died in infancy and cannot be tested. The remaining three have not been tested (mainly because their claims were far weaker than the first 4), but I would say 0 out of 4 tested bolsters my position.

Children of Joseph Smith, Jr. - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edited December 17, 2010 by bytebear

[Elphaba]

Look, back when the church was founded, it only had a few thousand members. If they were to not practice polygamy, our church today, would be significantly smaller. Small enough that few people would even know what it is.

This is simply not true. Polygamy does not produce any more children than monogamy. The idea that polygamy was practiced to bolster the population is a myth.

Elphaba

[catalyst]

I'll take your word for it on the numbers. Again I haven't read into it recently. However, again I don' t think Emma's fertility or the fact that there aren't any children that we are currently aware of verifies that there weren't intimate relationships with Joseph and his plural wives. However, maybe he was the anomaly compared to his brethren.

[bytebear]

I'll take your word for it on the numbers. Again I haven't read into it recently. However, again I don' t think Emma's fertility or the fact that there aren't any children that we are currently aware of verifies that there weren't intimate relationships with Joseph and his plural wives. However, maybe he was the anomaly compared to his brethren.

I just find it very odd that a practice designed to "raise a righteous seed" didn't produce any children until Brigham Young. Smith was an anomaly in the world of plural marriage in that he so far has no verifiable offspring from these 33 women.

Now compare that to one woman, Emma whom he had 11 children with. Something is definitely fishy.

So there are three possibilities:

1) Smith was a fraud and was using polygamy as an excuse to satisfy his carnal urges and he got really really lucky not to get any of these women pregnant.

2) Smith was a prophet of God and he was commanded to raise a righteous seed and he failed miserably at it.

3) Smith was a prophet of God and he introduced a spiritual law as a preparation for the fullness of the law (a common practice in Biblical and LDS history) which was to come later.

Edited December 17, 2010 by bytebear

[catalyst]

I just find it very odd that a practice designed to "raise a righteous seed" didn't produce any children until Brigham Young. Smith was an anomaly in the world of plural marriage in that he so far has no verifiable offspring from these 33 women.

Now compare that to one woman, Emma whom he had 11 children with. Something is definitely fishy.

So there are three possibilities:

1) Smith was a fraud and was using polygamy as an excuse to satisfy his carnal urges and he got really really lucky not to get any of these women pregnant.

Are you referring to the pull-out method?

2) Smith was a prophet of God and he was commanded to raise a righteous seed and he failed miserably at it.

Could be-he failed miserably at a lot of things:eek:

3) Smith was a prophet of God and he introduced a spiritual law as a preparation for the fullness of the law (a common practice in Biblical and LDS history) which was to come later.

Do you mean the push back from the Utah territory or are you referring to the next life?

[Elphaba]

I think that it is significant that none of Joseph Smith's wives ever accused Joseph of being abusive or feeling repressed even though some eventually left the Church. That is not true for many fundamentalist groups.

Significant of what?

I've never heard anyone accuse Joseph of being abusive, and I've never seen any evidence that would indicate he was. He was generally a very kind man, and never abusive to Emma or his children. So, why is it significant his other wives never accused him of being abusive when no one's ever said he was? What am I missing?

(Some would argue Joseph was abusive to Emma in that he didn't tell her about his other wives until some time had passed, and I can understand that; however, I think he was just plain scared, and that had more to do with it than abusively wanting to deceive her. I also think he didn't want to hurt her, as he loved her dearly.)

Ephaba

[mapman]

Significant of what?

I've never heard anyone accuse Joseph of being abusive, and I've never seen any evidence that would indicate he was. He was generally a very kind man, and never abusive to Emma or his children. So, why is it significant his other wives never accused him of being abusive when no one's ever said he was? What am I missing?

(Some would argue Joseph was abusive to Emma in that he didn't tell her about his other wives until some time had passed, and I can understand that; however, I think he was just plain scared, and that had more to do with it than abusively wanting to deceive her. I also think he didn't want to hurt her, as he loved her dearly.)

Ephaba

Mormon polygamy was often portrayed in popular culture back then as being something like a Middle-eatern harem. People today think of the FLDS compounds where all the women have to wear dresses. These perceptions are incorrect.

I agree that it is ridiculous to think that Joseph was abusive. However, in many people's minds polygamy and abuse and repression of women are all inseparably connected.

[MichaelCraig]

I can't get past the...having more than one mother-n-law at one time thing. Yeeeooowweeeee!!!!!!

[Blackmarch]

are there even small tiny groups that do?

i saw a mini youtube thing on a temple with loads of polygamysts, i just didnt understand.

i had a huge argument at school about this with my friends, and its serious getting to me

is it true brigham young had 17 wifes?

any help, thanks.

Well there should not be any that have multiple wives that are currently alive....

Is it true that BY had 17 wives ? quite likely... dunno if that was the exact number but it was probably closer to 17 than it was to 1 ^.^ .

[Blackmarch]

Significant of what?

I've never heard anyone accuse Joseph of being abusive, and I've never seen any evidence that would indicate he was. He was generally a very kind man, and never abusive to Emma or his children. So, why is it significant his other wives never accused him of being abusive when no one's ever said he was? What am I missing?

(Some would argue Joseph was abusive to Emma in that he didn't tell her about his other wives until some time had passed, and I can understand that; however, I think he was just plain scared, and that had more to do with it than abusively wanting to deceive her. I also think he didn't want to hurt her, as he loved her dearly.)

Ephaba

well I don't think the abuse accusations are the physical(violent) abuse but rather the seducing of minors and/or forced marriages (again sometimes with minors).

I've come across plenty of "critics" who've used that argument. (havent heard one that wasn't full of holes tho)

[Elphaba]

well I don't think the abuse accusations are the physical(violent) abuse but rather the seducing of minors and/or forced marriages (again sometimes with minors).

Okay, I can see that, as those were accusations against Joseph. So, thanks for that.

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

So far DNA has excluded 4 of the 9 alleged children of Smith. Two or the remaining four died in infancy and cannot be tested. The remaining three have not been tested (mainly because their claims were far weaker than the first 4), but I would say 0 out of 4 tested bolsters my position.

According to the Wiki article, the one child that I believe has the most credibility, Josephine Lyon, hasn't been tested. (I actually thought she had been and found negative.)

However, even if all of the alleged children turned out to be not Joseph's, it wouldn't prove anything with regard to whether he was intimate with his any of his wives or not. There could be children no one spoke of, and we'd never know.

Frankly, I don't understand this need to make Joseph's relations with all of his wives, excluding Emma, asexual. If it's to prove to an unknowledgable public that he didn't start polygamy because of his urges, it doesn't prove that. His polygamous world was complicated, and certainly included dynastic issues beyond sex, but that doesn't exclude sex.

Additionally, 900 people in Nauvoo were involved in polygamy, and it's beyond impossible to presume none of these were intimate.

Given some of his wives testified to having relations with him, unlike you, I believe them. I don't consider these women liars.

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

So far DNA has excluded 4 of the 9 alleged children of Smith. Two or the remaining four died in infancy and cannot be tested. The remaining three have not been tested (mainly because their claims were far weaker than the first 4), but I would say 0 out of 4 tested bolsters my position.

According to the Wiki article, the one child that I believe has the most credibility, Josephine Lyon, hasn't been tested. (I actually thought she had been and found negative.)

However, even if all of the alleged children turned out to be not Joseph's, it wouldn't prove anything with regard to whether he was intimate with his any of his wives or not. There could be children no one spoke of, and we'd never know.

Frankly, I don't understand this need to make Joseph's relations with all of his wives, excluding Emma, asexual. If it's to prove to an unknowledgable public that he didn't start polygamy because of his urges, it doesn't prove that. His polygamous world was complicated, and certainly included dynastic issues beyond sex, but that doesn't exclude sex.

Additionally, around 900 people in Nauvoo were involved in polygamy, and it's beyond impossible to presume none of these were intimate. Why would Joseph refrain?

Given some of his wives acknowledged they'd had relations with Joseph, unlike you, I believe them. I don't consider these women liars. But then, I don't think his having had sex with them damns him in any way, not if you actually study his practice in its entirety.

Elphaba

Edited December 17, 2010 by Elphaba

[Blackmarch]

According to the Wiki article, the one child that I believe has the most credibility, Josephine Lyon, hasn't been tested. (I actually thought she had been and found negative.)

However, even if all of the alleged children turned out to be not Joseph's, it wouldn't prove anything with regard to whether he was intimate with his any of his wives or not. There could be children no one spoke of, and we'd never know.

Frankly, I don't understand this need to make Joseph's relations with all of his wives, excluding Emma, asexual. If it's to prove to an unknowledgable public that he didn't start polygamy because of his urges, it doesn't prove that. His polygamous world was complicated, and certainly included dynastic issues beyond sex, but that doesn't exclude sex.

Additionally, around 900 people in Nauvoo were involved in polygamy, and it's beyond impossible to presume none of these were intimate. Why would Joseph refrain?

Given some of his wives acknowledged they'd had relations with Joseph, unlike you, I believe them. I don't consider these women liars. But then, I don't think his having had sex with them damns him in any way, not if you actually study his practice in its entirety.

Elphaba

I agree with your line of reasoning.

My experience with other christians is that monogomy is the way that is right, and that polygamy seems to have very negative connotations. A lot of times this conception of monogomy vs polygamy is used to villify Joseph smith.

Edited December 17, 2010 by Blackmarch

[Elphaba]

Sorry, Blackmarch. You had said you agreed with my reasoning on your previous post, and I missed that. So, this entire post is probably not pertinent to yours. I didn't want to delete it, though, as that would have confused anyone who had already read it. Elph

My experience with other christians is that monogomy is the way that is right, and that polygamy seems to have very negative connotations. A lot of times this conception of monogomy vs polygamy is used to villify Joseph smith.

I understand that, and I don't dismiss the impact these other Christians have on the Church by painting Joseph's polygamy as entirely sexual.

However, if one actually studies the polygamy of Nauvoo, it is a complex system that can't be explained by purely sexual desire on Joseph's part.

What really happened . . . really happened, and trying to placate people who attach the worst of motives to Joseph is, IMO, no different than these other Christians' ignorant condemnation.

(I'm not saying everyone who believes Joseph was not intimate with his wives is trying to placate these Christians, but I do believe it is a motivation for some.)

Joseph obviously attached great familial meaning to polygamy. He also believed he was ensuring his wive's salvation. In my opinion, those aspects of his polygamhy are just as real, and valid, as the intimacy I believe he had with at least some of his wives. I don't see any reason to be defensive about any of that.

Unfortunately, the Church is never going to convince people who condemn Joseph's intentions that they weren't sexual, and I don't think it should try. I think scholars do an excellent job analyzing Joseph's polygamy, but these particular Christians will never take it seriously. I don't see any reason to try to convince them of the truth, because they're not interested in it.

I'm not saying people who deny Joseph's sexuality in his marriages aren't acknowledging the truth--I know they honestly believe there were no relations. I just think there's enough evidence to suggest otherwise, and that the fact that other Christians condemn that is not a good enough reason to say it never happened.

I hope that makes sense.

Elphaba

Edited December 17, 2010 by Elphaba

[bytebear]

According to the Wiki article, the one child that I believe has the most credibility, Josephine Lyon, hasn't been tested. (I actually thought she had been and found negative.)

However, even if all of the alleged children turned out to be not Joseph's, it wouldn't prove anything with regard to whether he was intimate with his any of his wives or not. There could be children no one spoke of, and we'd never know.

Frankly, I don't understand this need to make Joseph's relations with all of his wives, excluding Emma, asexual. If it's to prove to an unknowledgable public that he didn't start polygamy because of his urges, it doesn't prove that. His polygamous world was complicated, and certainly included dynastic issues beyond sex, but that doesn't exclude sex.

Additionally, around 900 people in Nauvoo were involved in polygamy, and it's beyond impossible to presume none of these were intimate. Why would Joseph refrain?

Given some of his wives acknowledged they'd had relations with Joseph, unlike you, I believe them. I don't consider these women liars. But then, I don't think his having had sex with them damns him in any way, not if you actually study his practice in its entirety.

Elphaba

I have no problem with Smith having relations with these women. Clearly polygamy in the Utah years was producing children so they were obviously consummating their relationships. But, I find the evidence puzzling in that this isn't the case with Smith. As was said he is an anomaly. He didn't have 57 children. He didn't attend to or claim any of these suspected children as his own. This is very odd indeed. So I have an alternative theory which says that he practiced polygamy differently than later prophets.

You mentioned some 900 people involved in polygamy. Is there evidence that they practiced it more like Smith or Young? I know that several apostles were excommunicated for practicing spiritual wifery an adulterous version of plural marriage.

I think the Nauvoo years were learning years, and the doctrine was not fully understood and I do think it was designed to be spiritual first, before later revelation opened the full practice some time later (likely in Utah or late in the prophet's life).

The whole difference between the way Smith and Young practiced plural marriage is what gave the RLDS so much credence to disavowing Young as a prophet.

[Elphaba]

I have no problem with Smith having relations with these women. Clearly polygamy in the Utah years was producing children so they were obviously consummating their relationships. But, I find the evidence puzzling in that this isn't the case with Smith. As was said he is an anomaly. He didn't have 57 children.

No one has ever suggested Joseph practiced polygamy like Young did, and I doubt anyone's surprised he didn't have 57 children. But that doesn't mean it was entirely spiritual.

Joseph had very little to do with his polygamous wives' day to day lives. He did not publicly acknowledge them, and unless they lived with him as helpers to Emma, he did not take care of them.

None of that, however, precludes intimacy. But no one suggests it happened often, and thus, it wouldn't be surprising if it did not produce many children. I agree it would be surprising if there were no children, but we'll never know that for sure, as it's entirely possible there are some no one spoke of at the time.

He didn't attend to or claim any of these suspected children as his own. This is very odd indeed.

I don't find it odd at all. In fact, I would have been shocked had he done so.

Again, he never publicly acknowledged his polygamous wives, so why would he publicly claim any of their children?

So I have an alternative theory which says that he practiced polygamy differently than later prophets.

Obviously, he practiced it differently, but that does not preclude intimacy.

You mentioned some 900 people involved in polygamy. Is there evidence that they practiced it more like Smith or Young?

You speak of the two as if they we know exactly how they practiced it. With Young, we pretty much do. With Smith, we only have a relatively few details. I don’t believe it’s as cut and dried as you do.

But one of the details we do have is the testimony of his wives saying they were intimate. I see no reason not to believe them.

I know that several apostles were excommunicated for practicing spiritual wifery an adulterous version of plural marriage.

That's true, but it doesn’t mean Joseph was not intimate with his wives. In fact, if anything, it suggests they had reason to think being intimate was part of the Nauvoo practice. But that's just speculation on my part.

I think the Nauvoo years were learning years, and the doctrine was not fully understood and I do think it was designed to be spiritual first, before later revelation opened the full practice some time later (likely in Utah or late in the prophet's life).

You seriously believe valid polygamous marriages in Nauvoo did not include sex?

I agree they were learning years. I disagree it was entirely spiritual at first, given we have some of Smith's wives testifying otherwise.

The whole difference between the way Smith and Young practiced plural marriage is what gave the RLDS so much credence to disavowing Young as a prophet.

There is no evidence of that.

First, the RLDS Church taught that Joseph opposed polygamy. That contradicts the notion that he only practiced spiritual polygamy.

Additionally, for decades they accepted Emma’s explanation that Joseph never practiced polygamy. That is completely different than understanding it was only spiritual.

I do not see any evidence for that assertion at all.

Elphaba

[Backroads]

It all leaves me wondering what the big deal is about wehther or not he practiced polygamy. I personally have no problem with the idea that he did and that he even made it a tad sexul, though I like to assume it was at some degree of consenting.

[bytebear]

But one of the details we do have is the testimony of his wives saying they were intimate. I see no reason not to believe them.

I see a very big reason for not believing them. Their testimonies were part of court proceedings dealing with claims of who were the legal owners of church property back East. The RLDS and the LDS church (among others) were battling for the Kirkland temple and other church lands, and the LDS Church used the fact that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy as evidence that Brigham Young was the rightful successor.

Add to that the status a pioneer woman would have if she claimed an intimate relationship with the prophet, gained favor with the community. Or the possibility that her child may be the rightful heir to the presidency. (remember some believed in biological succession which is why JS III became prophet of the RLDS church).

Now we have four known children who had claims that turned out to be false. So at least someone was lying somewhere. It would be interesting to research how many of their mothers claimed an intimate relationship with the prophet. That would prove they were lying. Is that reason enough for you?

You seriously believe valid polygamous marriages in Nauvoo did not include sex?

I don't know. From what I understand there were no records of children from polygamous relationships recorded, but I could be wrong.

First, the RLDS Church taught that Joseph opposed polygamy. That contradicts the notion that he only practiced spiritual polygamy.

Yes, but had Joseph explicitly claimed children of plural wives, this would have been a moot point. As it was, the RLDS church had a strong case that Smith did not practice polygamy because the evidence was so scarce.

The RLDS church took advantage of the fact that Smith was not a polygamist in the same way as Young was to strengthen their case as the true heirs of the church, and the government agreed with them partly on the lack of evidence, and partly because of the bigotry and fear of the Utah Mormons.

Edited December 17, 2010 by bytebear

[xenic101]

Seeing the 'Family Stickers" on the backs of cars, I was talking to my wife about getting some for our car. After some discussions about why I couldn't cut the stickers in half for my two kids from a previous marriage, I decided that I wanted more stickers and should get enough to fill a row across my neon's back window. The wife informed me that she didn't want people looking at her funny when she got out, thinking she'd had all 20 kids. So I came up with the obvious solution. I should also get extra women stickers and do a little family chart on the back of the window. The wife then informed me (very informative person I married) that I wasn't allowed to feed stereotypes. (I assume she meant false ones).

Sorry for interrupting the fascinating discussion on Joseph Smith's sex life. I just wanted to throw that out there.

[Elphaba]

I'm sorry it took me so long to put this together. I was busy putting my head back together after it exploded. :)

I see a very big reason for not believing them. Their testimonies were part of court proceedings dealing with claims of who were the legal owners of church property back East.

The RLDS and the LDS church (among others) were battling for the Kirkland temple and other church lands, and the LDS Church used the fact that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy as evidence that Brigham Young was the rightful successor.

If the women’s legal testimonies in the Temple Lot case were the only evidence we have, your argument might be persuasive. But they're not. There are numerous other statements, in historical documents like journal entries and such, that corroborate the women’s testimony in the sense that Joseph's polygamous marriages included physical intimacy. So, I see no reason not to believe the women.

For example, we have the journal of William Clayton, one of the Nauvoo Mormon elite, where he records that Emma became enraged when Joseph and Eliza Partridge were in a room, alone, in the mansion (I think it was the mansion. I may be wrong about that). Emma called Eliza’s name four times before Joseph opened the door to her. Why would he wait that long to do so if there wasn’t something physical going on?

We have the autobiography of Elder Benjamin Johnson, a close friend of Joseph’s, where he wrote:

He told my sister to have no fears, and he there and then sealed my sister, Almira, to the Prophet."

"Soon after this he was at my house again, where he occupied my Sister Almira's room and bed, and also asked me for my youngest sister, Esther M."

We also have evidence that Joseph knew about the physical nature of at least one other polygamous marriage in Nauvoo, and that he not only approved of it, he protected it. When William Clayton’s second wife, Margaret, was pregnant in October of 1843, Joseph told him:

Just keep her [the mother and baby] at home and brook it and if they raise trouble about it and bring you before me I will give you an awful scourging and probably cut you off from the church and then I will baptise you and set you ahead as good as ever.

It’s beyond belief that Clayton was the only person in Nauvoo whose polygamous marriages were physical in nature, while the other 895 people’s were spiritual. Or that Joseph would have protected such a marriage if all polygamous marriages were only intended to be spiritual.

Add to that the status a pioneer woman would have if she claimed an intimate relationship with the prophet, gained favor with the community.

If the marriages were only spiritual in nature, the very fact that Joseph had chosen them would have been enough to elevate them in society. Admitting to have been intimate with him was not necessary to do that.

Or the possibility that her child may be the rightful heir to the presidency. (remember some believed in biological succession which is why JS III became prophet of the RLDS church).

There are three known children for whom this could have been true, and none of their mothers forwarded them to make a claim on the presidency. Thus, I see no reason to entertain this position whatsoever.

Now we have four known children who had claims that turned out to be false. So at least someone was lying somewhere.

I agree this is compelling evidence that some might have lied, but not proof that ALL of them lied.

It would be interesting to research how many of their mothers claimed an intimate relationship with the prophet. That would prove they were lying. Is that reason enough for you?

No, it’s not. It’s possible there are other children that are not recorded in history, and we’ll never know about them. Mary Lightner said there were children who grew up with a different name that Joseph's.

Additionally, some of these women were previously married when Joseph married them. We know Prescindia Buell said she did not know if her child was Joseph's or her husband's. Perhaps this was true of others as well, but they did not articulate it. I don't know--that’s pure speculation on my part. But nothing will ever prove, definitively, that Joseph did not sire any children in these marriages.

The only thing that will prove he did do so is DNA evidence. Apparently the testing is not completed on Josephine Rosetta Lyon, who's mother made the deathbed confession. The last reference I found was in 2008, and it said the results would be in in a year or two, but I could find nothing newer. I won't be surprised at the results, regardless of what they are.

As far as evidence of your position that Joseph's poygamy was spiritual only, I do think the fact that none of the children, so far, have turned out to be Joseph's, is the strongest. Actually, I believe it's the only evidence, and not all that strong, but I can see how it would be persuasive to someone who wasn't convinced Joseph's marriages were physical as well as spiritual.

I don't know. From what I understand there were no records of children from polygamous relationships recorded, but I could be wrong.

As I mentioned above, we have evidence of William Clayton’s child born to his second wife. And again, this was with Joseph’s consent and protection.

Yes, but had Joseph explicitly claimed children of plural wives, this would have been a moot point.

So what? Again, using Clayton’s child as an example, we know how Joseph believed a child born from a polygamous marriage would be perceived, and thus he told Clayton how to deceive everyone, and offered his protection as well.

Why would you think Joseph would ever admit to siring a child in a polygamous relationship when he realized Clayton could not admit to having done so? It’s simply impossible that would ever have happened, and is not evidence, in any way, that Joseph did not father any other children.

As it was, the RLDS church had a strong case that Smith did not practice polygamy because the evidence was so scarce.

The RLDS Church had a strong case that Joseph didn’t practice polygamy, period, because of his direct public avowals. For example, publicly, Joseph said:

All legal contracts of marriage made before a person is baptized into this church, should be held sacred and fulfilled. Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again.

The RLDS church took advantage of the fact that Smith was not a polygamist in the same way as Young was to strengthen their case as the true heirs of the church,

Again, no one has ever said Joseph was a polygamist in the same way as Young was. That doesn’t mean, in any way, that Joseph wasn’t intimate with his plural wives.

and the government agreed with them partly on the lack of evidence,

No, it did not. The case was appealed, and the government said the Hedrickites, whose claim the Utah Church supported, were the ones entitled to the property, but then it dismissed the case entirely, essentially making it as if the case had never happened.

and partly because of the bigotry and fear of the Utah Mormons.

I’m not sure what you mean by the bigotry and fear of the Utah Mormons. Are you saying the Utah Mormons were bigoted and that the RLDS feared them?

There is plenty of evidence to believe the Utah Mormons were right. If they were, is that bigotry?

I do agree the RLDS Church feared them, but that doesn’t prove anything as whether or not Joseph practiced physical polygamy.

Elphaba

Edited December 19, 2010 by Elphaba

[Suzie]

This discussion reminds of whether or not Jesus was married. Some people cannot fathom the idea he could have been married and....HAD SEX! Same for Joseph Smith. It's funny, with the amount of children average couples have in our Church one would think we know there is/was sex involved...and this includes the Brethren and Prophets.

[HoosierGuy]

However, if one actually studies the polygamy of Nauvoo, it is a complex system that can't be explained by purely sexual desire on Joseph's part.

Elphaba

Not according to Fawn Brodie's book.

[pam]

Not according to Fawn Brodie's book.

But of course let's take the words of someone who was excommunicated for apostasy.