Mormon Church Launches Website On 'Same-Sex Attraction'

Dec 6, 2012 Read more: GPB.org 432

The Mormon Church has a new website to clarify its position on "same-sex attraction" and to reach out to all of its members, including gays and lesbians, "with love and understanding." The launching of mormonsandgays.org follows persistent criticism of Mormon involvement in California's ballot measure banning gay marriage, NPR's Howard Berkes ... (more)

Read more

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#343 Jan 4, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
The early Christians didn't resemble the Mormons in any way, shape or form.
Modern Christians don't resemble early Christians in any way, shape or form, now what?
Jesus attended synagogues (church)on the Sabbath. You claimed not to long ago we don't need churches.
Jesus attended the temple since a child showing a temple had purposes for believers. You claim temples aren't needed.
Jesus revered the messages the prophets gave to the people and quoted them. John mentioned two existing in the last days. You claim we have no need of them and they can't exist any more.
Should I continue the difference just between you and the early Christians?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#344 Jan 4, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
Your wishful fantasies are no longer my problem. He didn't marry them to shake their hands.
Prove he married them to have sex. You can't. You can assume that's what he did. That's all.
I can show he married those wives for the here after, not necessarily for the sex. I can show these wives made statements they married him to be his wife in the here after, not for the sex. I can show he and each of these wives were sealed in the Nauvoo temple to further prove the marriage was for the hereafter, not for sex in the than and now.
I can prove he was having constant sex with Emma from the number of babies they had. I can show he was pro-family, not pro contraceptive means to abate pregnancies.
You say he married to have sex and nothing but sex yet you have no reliable evidence to prove it. So who's using wishful fantasies? You are, not I. I admit possibilities even where evidence doesn't exist. You won't admit to possibilities that are counter to your personal agenda. You turn a blind eye to things you shouldn't.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#345 Jan 4, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove he married them to have sex. You can't. You can assume that's what he did. That's all.
I can show he married those wives for the here after, not necessarily for the sex. I can show these wives made statements they married him to be his wife in the here after, not for the sex. I can show he and each of these wives were sealed in the Nauvoo temple to further prove the marriage was for the hereafter, not for sex in the than and now.
I can prove he was having constant sex with Emma from the number of babies they had. I can show he was pro-family, not pro contraceptive means to abate pregnancies.
You say he married to have sex and nothing but sex yet you have no reliable evidence to prove it. So who's using wishful fantasies? You are, not I. I admit possibilities even where evidence doesn't exist. You won't admit to possibilities that are counter to your personal agenda. You turn a blind eye to things you shouldn't.
He didn't bother to live with them after marring them, he didn't support them after marring them. He screwed them and sent them back to their husbands. Brigham Young in General Conference admitted to his. Other leader testified of it in court. The women talked about the sex in their dairies.
He made up ignorant excuses to get in their pants, claiming it was the will of the lord. Of course the Ten Commandments would be the testimony against God having anything to do with that. Remember the verse about adultery? Smith didn't.

People don't get married not to have sex. Grow up.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#346 Jan 4, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Modern Christians don't resemble early Christians in any way, shape or form, now what?
Jesus attended synagogues (church)on the Sabbath. You claimed not to long ago we don't need churches.
You need reading comprehension lessons again. I said that our salvation isn't dependent on what church you are a member of. Why do you always intentionally misrepresent what I say? Are you argues so weak you have to start out your debates with lies and then argue against the lies? What is your problem that you can't get even the simplest things straight?
Jesus attended the temple since a child showing a temple had purposes for believers. You claim temples aren't needed.
And so does the Bible:
Acts 17:24
The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands;

If being temple endowed was needed for our salvation, Jesus would have said so. Not once do you see any reference for temple endowments, or the need for temple endowments, yet according to Mormonism this is the pinnacle and most important ceremony needed by anyone who wants to dwells with Christ.
Jesus revered the messages the prophets gave to the people and quoted them. John mentioned two existing in the last days. You claim we have no need of them and they can't exist any more.
Should I continue the difference just between you and the early Christians?
Yes, Jesus quoted the Prophets of the Old Testament, and reports that there will only be 2 more just before his return. None of the LDS prophets fit that description. He never taught that it would be Prophets who will continue to lead the church. There were none called prophet in the New Testament except John the Baptist, and he is considered the last prophet of the Old Testament.
Max

Pekin, IL

#347 Jan 5, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
You need reading comprehension lessons again. I said that our salvation isn't dependent on what church you are a member of. Why do you always intentionally misrepresent what I say? Are you argues so weak you have to start out your debates with lies and then argue against the lies? What is your problem that you can't get even the simplest things straight?
<quoted text>
And so does the Bible:
Acts 17:24
The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands;
If being temple endowed was needed for our salvation, Jesus would have said so. Not once do you see any reference for temple endowments, or the need for temple endowments, yet according to Mormonism this is the pinnacle and most important ceremony needed by anyone who wants to dwells with Christ.
<quoted text>
Yes, Jesus quoted the Prophets of the Old Testament, and reports that there will only be 2 more just before his return. None of the LDS prophets fit that description. He never taught that it would be Prophets who will continue to lead the church. There were none called prophet in the New Testament except John the Baptist, and he is considered the last prophet of the Old Testament.
You are really making a fool of yourself, bigot, making up nonsense that isn't in the Bible and lying about what others believe.
What is your problem? You choose to live in open rebellion against the Bible's many commands against all homosexual behavior, so why do you quote the Bible????
Max

Pekin, IL

#348 Jan 5, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't bother to live with them after marring them, he didn't support them after marring them. He screwed them and sent them back to their husbands. Brigham Young in General Conference admitted to his. Other leader testified of it in court. The women talked about the sex in their dairies.
He made up ignorant excuses to get in their pants, claiming it was the will of the lord. Of course the Ten Commandments would be the testimony against God having anything to do with that. Remember the verse about adultery? Smith didn't.
People don't get married not to have sex. Grow up.
You are a sick liar making up nonsense to satisfy your hate.

You have no morals and choose to live in open rebellion against the Bible's many commands against all homosexual behavior. That keeps you from receiving the Holy Spirit. I Cor 1:18 "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

You are also a liar. You agreed to Terms of Service to use this site, promising to stay on topic. The topic here a a major church reaching out to its members with same sex attractions. It is not your filthy fantasies about Joseph Smith or a place for your to demonstrate your malicious ignorance about others.

You are a very sick bigot.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#349 Jan 5, 2013
Max wrote:
<quoted text>You are really making a fool of yourself, bigot, making up nonsense that isn't in the Bible and lying about what others believe.
What is your problem? You choose to live in open rebellion against the Bible's many commands against all homosexual behavior, so why do you quote the Bible????
Acts isn't in the Bible? Since when? Tell me what I'm lying about.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#350 Jan 5, 2013
Max wrote:
<quoted text>You are a sick liar making up nonsense to satisfy your hate.
Really? Here's what Jedediah M. Grant(Apostle of the LDS church) said about Joseph Smith screwing other men's wives:

"When the family organization was revealed from heaven—the patriarchal order of God, and Joseph began, on the right and on the left, to add to his family, what a quaking there was in Israel. Says one brother to another, "Joseph says all covenants are done away, and none are binding but the new covenants; now suppose Joseph should come and say he wanted your wife, what would you say to that?" "I would tell him to go to hell." This was the spirit of many in the early days of this Church....

"What would a man of God say, who felt aright, when Joseph asked him for his money? He would say, "Yes, and I wish I had more to help to build up the kingdom of God." Or if he came and said, "I want your wife?" "O Yes," he would say, "here she is, there are plenty more." ... Did the Prophet Joseph want every man's wife he asked for? He did not ... If such a man of God should come to me and say, "I want your gold and silver, or your wives," I should say, "Here they are, I wish I had more to give you, take all I have got" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, pp. 13-14)."
You have no morals and choose to live in open rebellion against the Bible's many commands against all homosexual behavior.
How? I'm a straight man who is married with child. I'm not gay, I support the rights of gay people.

That keeps you from receiving the Holy Spirit. I Cor 1:18 "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."
I didn't know the spirit until I left the LDS church.
You are also a liar. You agreed to Terms of Service to use this site, promising to stay on topic. The topic here a a major church reaching out to its members with same sex attractions. It is not your filthy fantasies about Joseph Smith or a place for your to demonstrate your malicious ignorance about others.
You are a very sick bigot.
Cry, throw a hissy fit, or report me. I don't care. The topic is about the LDS and homosexuals. You want to perversions, I giving you the perversions of the LDS church, of which there are many.

You are happy as a lark when you are pointing your fingers at others. You're not so happy when your sicknesses and perversions are being exposed.

Luke 8:17 ESV
For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light.

Matthew 7:1-5

"Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother,'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

Are you listening to the word of the Lord?

Luke 6:37
"Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven;

Are you getting the message?

Romans 14:12-13
So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.

Let us know when you get it.

James 4:11-12

Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?

And who is your neighbor?

EVERYBODY!

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#351 Jan 5, 2013
Evidence that Joseph Smith boned his wives, testimony from the women, themselves...

Did Joseph Smith obey the commandment and have sex with his wives?

Compton writes:
"Because of claims by Reorganized Latter-day Saints that Joseph was not really married polygamously in the full (i.e., sexual) sense of the term, Utah Mormons (including Joseph's wives) affirmed repeatedly that Joseph had physical sexual relations with his plural wives-despite the Victorian conventions in nineteenth-century American religion which otherwise would have prevented mention of sexual relations in marriage."

- Faithful Mormon Melissa Lott (Smith Willes) testified that she had been Joseph's wife "in very deed." (Affidavit of Melissa Willes, 3 Aug. 1893, Temple Lot case, 98, 105; Foster, Religion and Sexuality, 156.)

- In a court affidavit, faithful Mormon Joseph Noble wrote that Joseph told him he had spent the night with Louisa Beaman.(Temple Lot Case, 427)

- Emily D. Partridge (Smith Young) said she "roomed" with Joseph the night following her marriage to him and said that she had "carnal intercourse" with him.(Temple Lot case (complete transcript), 364, 367, 384; see Foster, Religion and Sexuality, 15.)

joseph smithIn total, 13 faithful latter-day saint women who were married to Joseph Smith swore court affidavits that they had sexual relations with him.

- Joseph Smith's personal secretary records that on May 22nd, 1843, Smith's first wife Emma found Joseph and Eliza Partridge secluded in an upstairs bedroom at the Smith home. Emma was devastated.
William Clayton's journal entry for 23 May (see Smith, 105-106)

- Smith's secretary William Clayton also recorded a visit to young Almera Johnson on May 16, 1843: "Prest. Joseph and I went to B[enjamin] F. Johnsons to sleep." Johnson himself later noted that on this visit Smith stayed with Almera "as man and wife" and "occupied the same room and bed with my sister, that the previous month he had occupied with the daughter of the late Bishop Partridge as his wife." Almera Johnson also confirmed her secret marriage to Joseph Smith: "I lived with the prophet Joseph as his wife and he visited me at the home of my brother Benjamin F." (Zimmerman, I Knew the Prophets, 44. See also "The Origin of Plural Marriage, Joseph F. Smith, Jr., Deseret News Press, page 70-71.)

- Faithful Mormon and Stake President Angus Cannon told Joseph Smith's son: "Brother Heber C. Kimball, I am informed, asked [Eliza R. Snow] the question if she was not a virgin although married to Joseph Smith and afterwards to Brigham Young, when she replied in a private gathering, "I thought you knew Joseph Smith better than that."" (Stake President Angus M. Cannon, statement of interview with Joseph III, 23, LDS archives.)

Smith, himself, gave the reason he should be marrying all those women in the D&C 132:

Verses 62-63: And if he [Joseph Smith] have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.... for they are given unto him TO MULTIPLY AND REPLENISH THE EARTH, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, THAT THEY MAY BEAR THE SOULS OF MEN; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#352 Jan 5, 2013
He also shows his true intent in a handwritten letter:

The following excerpt is from a love letter Joseph Smith wrote when he wanted to arrange a liaison with Newel K. Whitney's daughter Sarah Ann, whom Smith had secretly "married." It reveals Smith's cloak-and-dagger approach to his extramarital affairs:

"... the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty.... Only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater friendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I will tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it.... I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont, dont fail to come to night, I subscribe myself your most obedient, and affectionate, companion, and friend. Joseph Smith."
- Joseph Smith Handwritten Letter, http://www.xmission.com/~research/family/stra...

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#353 Jan 5, 2013
Smith and 16-year-old Fanny Alger

Smith's first known sexual affair was with a teenager named Fannie Alger, who was living with Smith and his first wife Emma in their Kirtland, Ohio, home. Fanny was also Smith's first confimred plural wife. Smith “came to know [her] in Kirtland during early 1833 when she, at the age of 16, stayed at his home as a housemaid. Described as 'a very nice and comly young woman,' according to Benjamin Johnson, Fanny lived with the Smith family from 1833 to 1836.”

Fanny eventually became the target of Smith's sexual advances, with Smith's predatory behavior soon becoming the talk of the town:

“Martin Harris, one of the 'Three Witnesses' to the Book of Mormon, recalled that the prophet's 'servant girl' claimed he had made 'improper proposals to her, which created quite a talk amongst the people.' Mormon Fanny Brewer similarly reported 'much excitement against the Prophet ...[involving] an unlawful intercourse between himself and a young orphan girl residing in his family and under his protection."

Emma discovered the sexual affair between Smith and Fanny and exploded in anger. Caught with his hand in Fanny's cookie jar, Smith confessed. A noticeably pregnant Fanny eventually was kicked out of the house by Emma, as reported thusly:

“Former Mormon apostle William McLellin later wrote that Emma Smith substantiated the Smith-Alger affair. According to McLellin, Emma was searching for her husband and Alger one evening, when through a crack in the barn door she saw 'him and Fanny in the barn together alone' on the hay mow. McLellin, in a letter to one of Smith's sons, added that the ensuing confrontation between Emma and her husband grew so heated that Rigdon, Frederick G. Williams, and Oliver Cowdery had to mediate the situation.

"After Emma related what she had witnessed, Smith, according to McLellin,'confessed humbly and begged forgiveness. Emma and all forgave him.' While Oliver Cowdery may have forgiven his cousin Joseph Smith, he did not forget the incident. Three years later, when provoked by the prophet, Cowdery countered by calling the Fanny Alger episode 'a dirty, nasty, filthy affair.'

“Chauncey Webb recounts Emma’s later discovery of the relationship:'Emma was furious, and drove the girl, who was unable to conceal the consequences of her celestial relation with the prophet, out of her house'...

“'... Webb, Smith's grammar teacher ... reported that when the pregnancy became evident, Emma Smith drove Fanny from her home..... Webb's daughter, Ann Eliza Webb Young, a divorced wife of Brigham Young, remembered that Fanny was taken into the Webb home on a temporary basis ..... Fanny stayed with relatives in nearby Mayfield until about the time Joseph fled Kirtland for Missouri.

“Fanny left Kirtland in September 1836 with her family. Though she married non-Mormon Solomon Custer on 16 November 183614 and was living in Dublin City, Indiana, far from Kirtland, her name still raised eyebrows. Fanny Brewer, a Mormon visitor to Kirtland in 1837, observed 'much excitement against the Prophet ...[involving] an unlawful intercourse between himself and a young orphan girl residing in his family and under his protection.'”

(Van Wagoner,“Sidney Rigdon: A Portrait in Religious Excess,” p. 291; and Van Wagoner,“Mormon Polygamy: A History,” p. 8; cited in ibid)

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#354 Jan 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>Prove he married them to have sex. You can't. You can assume that's what he did. That's all.
I can show he married those wives for the here after, not necessarily for the sex. I can show these wives made statements they married him to be his wife in the here after, not for the sex. I can show he and each of these wives were sealed in the Nauvoo temple to further prove the marriage was for the hereafter, not for sex in the than and now.
I can prove he was having constant sex with Emma from the number of babies they had. I can show he was pro-family, not pro contraceptive means to abate pregnancies.
You say he married to have sex and nothing but sex yet you have no reliable evidence to prove it. So who's using wishful fantasies? You are, not I. I admit possibilities even where evidence doesn't exist. You won't admit to possibilities that are counter to your personal agenda. You turn a blind eye to things you shouldn't.
Just because u are closeted, married and celibate doesn't mean js was too.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#355 Jan 6, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't bother to live with them after marring them, he didn't support them after marring them. He screwed them and sent them back to their husbands. Brigham Young in General Conference admitted to his. Other leader testified of it in court. The women talked about the sex in their dairies.
He made up ignorant excuses to get in their pants, claiming it was the will of the lord. Of course the Ten Commandments would be the testimony against God having anything to do with that. Remember the verse about adultery? Smith didn't.
People don't get married not to have sex. Grow up.
Young didn't admit to anything of the kind. Not a single wife spoke of having sex with Smith in any diary. I realize that you as a fool take second hand information as facts, but as I said a fool does that, not a wise person. A wise person will wait for actual evidence that's incontestable before making a judgement call.
Take the following for example. I got it from a web site discussing Smith's polygamy.
...
"This is taken from IN SACRED LONELINESS, by Todd Compton...
Nauvoo stake president Wililam Marks suggested in 1853 that Smith came to have doubts about polygamy before his death:
When the doctrine of polygamy was introduced into the church as a principle of exaltation, I took a decided stand against it; which stand rendered me quite unpopular with many of the leading ones of the church... Joseph, however, became convinced before his death that he had done wrong; for abut three weeks prior to his death, I met him one morning in the street, and he said to me, "Bro. Marks, we are a ruined people." I asked, how so? he said, "this doctrine of polygamy, or Spiritual-wife system, that has been taught and prcticed among us, will prove our destruction and overthrow. I have been decieved,' he said, " in reference to its prcatice; 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 and its practice stopped in the church."
....
Now you would take the stake president's words as God's own utterance and that his words are facts that Smith regretted the polygamy he instituted.
Now I on the other hand won't take his statement as correct or incorrect. Why? Because it's called "second hand information." Person A is saying what they claim person B said. But person B isn't around to verify this nor are there any written statements by person B affirming this information is true.
In this case, person A, he's against polygamy. He believes it's wrong. That would mean he speaks against it when given the chance. With that set forth, I find it more than coincidence that a man against polygamy, would recall a conversation with Smith ten years after the death of Smith that fits his very disbeliefs of polygamy. To tell others that Smith realized polygamy was wrong and evil and not of God, that Smith came to this realization after he had already knew those things concerning polygamy, that it was wrong and evil and not of God, that Smith had told him those things...way to convenient of a memory I believe.
Especially when Smith never spoke against polygamy a single day of his living life in all the writings he wrote. Smith never said an ill word of polygamy. And if you read what Smith wrote about polygamy, in many instances he supported it.
So I remain neutral of this being a true statement of remembrance by this stake president.
You on the other hand would declare it's God's truth because a Mormon said it.
And that's our difference.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#356 Jan 6, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't bother to live with them after marring them, he didn't support them after marring them. He screwed them and sent them back to their husbands. Brigham Young in General Conference admitted to his. Other leader testified of it in court. The women talked about the sex in their dairies.
He made up ignorant excuses to get in their pants, claiming it was the will of the lord. Of course the Ten Commandments would be the testimony against God having anything to do with that. Remember the verse about adultery? Smith didn't.
People don't get married not to have sex. Grow up.
Grow up? lol...you should listen to your own advice. I'm not the one claiming something as fact that isn't fact. I'm not the one claiming hearsay evidence is factual evidence and undisputed as you claim. I'm not the one saying if two people marry, THEY MARRIED TO HAVE SEX. Those are your childish, erroneous statements.
You're like the rest of the lemmings who think because someone said it, it has to be fact and nothing less. You don't question anything else. You don't ask questions about anything else. You won't even consider anything else.
You're a shut box. You restrict yourself to tunnel vision and that's it. You are your own worst enemy for information. And that's why you will always have a problem when examining evidence be it hearsay or established fact. You can change that part of yourself :)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#357 Jan 6, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
You need reading comprehension lessons again. I said that our salvation isn't dependent on what church you are a member of. Why do you always intentionally misrepresent what I say? Are you argues so weak you have to start out your debates with lies and then argue against the lies? What is your problem that you can't get even the simplest things straight?
<quoted text>
And so does the Bible:
Acts 17:24
The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands;
If being temple endowed was needed for our salvation, Jesus would have said so. Not once do you see any reference for temple endowments, or the need for temple endowments, yet according to Mormonism this is the pinnacle and most important ceremony needed by anyone who wants to dwells with Christ.
<quoted text>
Yes, Jesus quoted the Prophets of the Old Testament, and reports that there will only be 2 more just before his return. None of the LDS prophets fit that description. He never taught that it would be Prophets who will continue to lead the church. There were none called prophet in the New Testament except John the Baptist, and he is considered the last prophet of the Old Testament.
You're a liar.
There have been many past conversations between you and I and you and others where you did your best to prove the unimportance of temples and churches because the Mormon church supports them both. And you said it in a variety of ways.
Of your Acts 17:24 you use to justify disbelief and no need of temples, since your interpretation of the verse states God doesn't reside in temples made by hand, that makes God a liar. Nice job.
Did you forget the moving temple Moses was instructed to build in the wilderness God dwelled in? And the other temples God commanded OT prophets to build that he dwelled in, temples made by the hand of men, so God's a liar in those instances to eh?
lol...you better rethink your irrational logic to figure this one out dude lolol.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#358 Jan 6, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
Smith and 16-year-old Fanny Alger
Smith's first known sexual affair was with a teenager named Fannie Alger, who was living with Smith and his first wife Emma in their Kirtland, Ohio, home. Fanny was also Smith's first confimred plural wife. Smith “came to know [her] in Kirtland during early 1833 when she, at the age of 16, stayed at his home as a housemaid. Described as 'a very nice and comly young woman,' according to Benjamin Johnson, Fanny lived with the Smith family from 1833 to 1836.”
Fanny eventually became the target of Smith's sexual advances, with Smith's predatory behavior soon becoming the talk of the town:
“Martin Harris, one of the 'Three Witnesses' to the Book of Mormon, recalled that the prophet's 'servant girl' claimed he had made 'improper proposals to her, which created quite a talk amongst the people.' Mormon Fanny Brewer similarly reported 'much excitement against the Prophet ...[involving] an unlawful intercourse between himself and a young orphan girl residing in his family and under his protection."
“'... Webb, Smith's grammar teacher ... reported that when the pregnancy became evident, Emma Smith drove Fanny from her home..... Webb's daughter, Ann Eliza Webb Young, a divorced wife of Brigham Young, remembered that Fanny was taken into the Webb home on a temporary basis ..... Fanny stayed with relatives in nearby Mayfield until about the time Joseph fled Kirtland for Missouri.
“Fanny left Kirtland in September 1836 with her family. Though she married non-Mormon Solomon Custer on 16 November 183614 and was living in Dublin City, Indiana, far from Kirtland, her name still raised eyebrows. Fanny Brewer, a Mormon visitor to Kirtland in 1837, observed 'much excitement against the Prophet ...[involving] an unlawful intercourse between himself and a young orphan girl residing in his family and under his protection.'”
(Van Wagoner,“Sidney Rigdon: A Portrait in Religious Excess,” p. 291; and Van Wagoner,“Mormon Polygamy: A History,” p. 8; cited in ibid)
I had to delete some of your post to have room to write.
Everything you listed is an account of what someone said someone else said.
Let's take one item and go through it.
"- Faithful Mormon Melissa Lott (Smith Willes) testified that she had been Joseph's wife "in very deed." (Affidavit of Melissa Willes, 3 Aug. 1893, Temple Lot case, 98, 105; Foster, Religion and Sexuality, 156.)"
1. Why was Lott testifying about private sexual matters? Did she testify about all private sexual matters she ever engaged in?
2. Why would she in a court of law want God and everyone to know her "supposed" sexual undetakings? Why would she want that personal information to be had by so many?
3. Who was the person that approached a very old woman and asked if she'd talk about her sex life? What was their reason for wanting to know about her sex life?
4. Why was she so willing to talk about her sex life?
5. Did she get paid to reveal/state this information?
.....
I know it's unimportant information to you as you take any statement against Smith to be God's own very words, but wisdom tells me to ask questions. Why, when, what purpose, etc.
Can you answer my questions?

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#359 Jan 6, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I had to delete some of your post to have room to write.
Everything you listed is an account of what someone said someone else said.
Let's take one item and go through it.
"- Faithful Mormon Melissa Lott (Smith Willes) testified that she had been Joseph's wife "in very deed." (Affidavit of Melissa Willes, 3 Aug. 1893, Temple Lot case, 98, 105; Foster, Religion and Sexuality, 156.)"
1. Why was Lott testifying about private sexual matters? Did she testify about all private sexual matters she ever engaged in?
2. Why would she in a court of law want God and everyone to know her "supposed" sexual undetakings? Why would she want that personal information to be had by so many?
3. Who was the person that approached a very old woman and asked if she'd talk about her sex life? What was their reason for wanting to know about her sex life?
4. Why was she so willing to talk about her sex life?
5. Did she get paid to reveal/state this information?
.....
I know it's unimportant information to you as you take any statement against Smith to be God's own very words, but wisdom tells me to ask questions. Why, when, what purpose, etc.
Can you answer my questions?
Nope, and I'm not obligated to answer them. You claimed none of his wives ever said he had sex with them. Again, I've proven you wrong, which you have a history of intentionally being. It's can't be claimed to be second hand information either.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#360 Jan 6, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a liar.
There have been many past conversations between you and I and you and others where you did your best to prove the unimportance of temples and churches because the Mormon church supports them both. And you said it in a variety of ways.
Of your Acts 17:24 you use to justify disbelief and no need of temples, since your interpretation of the verse states God doesn't reside in temples made by hand, that makes God a liar. Nice job.
Did you forget the moving temple Moses was instructed to build in the wilderness God dwelled in? And the other temples God commanded OT prophets to build that he dwelled in, temples made by the hand of men, so God's a liar in those instances to eh?
lol...you better rethink your irrational logic to figure this one out dude lolol.
You love to dwell on the old, and forget the teachings of the new. Christ was the temple of the New Testament. Why? because he paid the price for the sins of the world. The temple from the beginning was build as a place where people paid their price for sin once a year with animal sacrifices. It was a temporary payment to God until Christ arrived and paid the full price. After Christ, the temple was no longer needed. When we accept Christ, we accept Christ dwelling within us through the Holy Spirit. The Christian is the temple of God, that is what Act 17v24 is telling us.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#361 Jan 6, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Grow up? lol...you should listen to your own advice. I'm not the one claiming something as fact that isn't fact. I'm not the one claiming hearsay evidence is factual evidence and undisputed as you claim. I'm not the one saying if two people marry, THEY MARRIED TO HAVE SEX. Those are your childish, erroneous statements.
Again with the intentional misstatement of what I said. I didn't say "THEY MARRIED TO HAVE SEX." I said "married people have sex". Now Joseph Smith certainly married them to screw them, that is without doubt. There is no "Holy" reason for one man to marry another, ask the Ten Commandments.
You're like the rest of the lemmings who think because someone said it, it has to be fact and nothing less. You don't question anything else. You don't ask questions about anything else. You won't even consider anything else.
That is because I refuse to give up my common sense. If there were only one or two claims, yes, there would be room for doubt. But we have proof from even the writings of Smith he was boning these women, and the witness of dozens of others to support it. You're being pathetic.
You're a shut box. You restrict yourself to tunnel vision and that's it. You are your own worst enemy for information. And that's why you will always have a problem when examining evidence be it hearsay or established fact. You can change that part of yourself :)
I'm not going to make excuses for a pervert so I can pretend he is a prophet. I'm accepting the evidence, you're the one in denial.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#362 Jan 6, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, and I'm not obligated to answer them. You claimed none of his wives ever said he had sex with them. Again, I've proven you wrong, which you have a history of intentionally being. It's can't be claimed to be second hand information either.
I know you have your short comings. So let me state this as I did in the past a few times to be complete in what I mean that you continuously have no comprehension for.
Not a single wife has ever claimed sexual actions with Smith with proof. Like a child. A dead child. A living relative of a dead child. A child that was hidden and adopted out.
Certain wives had said certain things of having had sex with Smith, but none had proof or evidence that it happened.
And the testimonies from the Temple Lot reference, they were made in 1890. FIFTY SEVEN YEARS AFTER SMITH DIED. I bet you never gave it a second thought why they didn't speak of it before?
It was a legal case. Certain LDS persons were in court against certain RLDs persons concerning the Temple Lot land in Missouri.
Those on the LDS side, they were showing claim to that piece of land by polygamous marriages. It was important to prove the polygamous marriages existed by having one or more wives connected to this issue state they had sexual relations with Smith, thus justifying the claim of polygamous marriages.
Know what? The judge (a non-Mormon) said there wasn't sufficient evidence proved to show actual polygamous marriages existed between Smith and the so claimed wives. There was no records of the marriages. There were no existing or deceased children used for evidence. There was no proof to verify sexual relations took place.
In the case the judge found Smith not guilty of those claiming he had had polygamous marriages and thus they lost their case. The RLDs got the land.
DO SOME FRICKING RESEARCH......PLLLLEEEEEEAAAAS SSSSSSSEEEEE??????????

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Governor Cuomo bans non-essential state travel ... 4 min LeroyJones 6
News Indiana lawmakers try to quiet firestorm surrou... 4 min okimar 158
News Indiana House OKs religious objection bill by w... 6 min barry 172
News Indiana backlash: What you need to know 6 min Go Blue Forever 137
I Got the Hots for NE Jade!!! 15 min Fan of Jade 2
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 19 min RiccardoFire 201,838
News U.S. corporations pressure two states accused o... 24 min NorCal Native 43
News Gay marriage (Mar '13) 33 min Pietro Armando 58,967
News Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 2 hr Brian_G 1,967
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 hr Respect71 17,858
More from around the web