Posted on 10/25/2014 11:04:54 PM PDT by Up Yours Marxists
Let’s read your defense of the thread topic, not whether you have seen it in action.
Yes, meaning ole Joe, despite all his prophetic prowess, could not render due benevolence 50 times a night such that many of his cast off “wives” had sexless marriages. How noble of him!
I do not choose to defend the thread topic. In fact, I do not choose, at this point in time, to adopt any stance on the thread topic.
FReepers are free to join in on a thread and express their disapproval of the impolite behavior (unnecessary aggressiveness) of other posters, without themselves volunteering a decided opinion on the main topic.
In fact, I do have an opinion, but don't believe that it would especially enrich the discussion here, so I will reserve it to myself for the time being.
However, I do feel that unnecessary rudeness should be critized whenever it rears its ugly head. Free Republic should be protected as a forum for polite discourse at all times.
Regards,
In other words, you have nothing to add other than a scold about what you perceive as tone?
Just defend what it is that you want to defend as morals and politics.
Maybe he married the ugly ones for their money.
There's an old German saying: "Der Ton macht die Musik." I.e., an uncivil tone will frequently mask a legitimate point. So, I feel that you are doing yourself no favor by rudely attacking another apparently well-meaning poster (entrophy12) who simply wanted to make a casual observation, and not engage in a "tooth-and-nail" fight.
And, yes: I don't think that anything that I have to say on this time-worn issue would prove especially edifying or entertaining to most other FReepers - with whom I am probably in accord, anyway.
Discretion is sometimes the better part of valor.
Regards,
Well, he’s not as bad as mohhamed, he married his favorite wife when she was 9.
What part of Appalachia or the South were they from?
That’s what I was thinking.
Google "Mormon blood atonement"
One of my great-grandfathers married my great-grandmother when he was 42 and she was 16, in 1880.
GGM was the oldest living-at-home child of her parents, who both died the previous year of whatever went through the farming village that winter. The younger children were parceled out to local families for raising, but she was presumably considered old enough to be married. GGF had lost his second (or third, we're not sure) wife at about the same time, so it was almost certainly a marriage of convenience: he needed someone to take care of the house and raise his children (though one of them was 18 at the time), and she needed a home and someone to provide for her.
They stayed married 20 years until his death in 1901, and had a number of children, one of whom was my father's mother. None of which in any way provides any "cover" for Joseph Smith, of course.
Your tables don’t seem right to me at all. For instance, some ages at marriage don’t vary by a hundredth of a year over a century. That’s simply not possible, given the statistical nature of the data. What are your sources?
Ms Kimball was several months pregnant when “wed” if memory serves. The first Mrs. Smith separated from Joseph shortly before No. 2 “wed” him. Many of the subsequent “marriages” served to enforce his power in the cult. Would you challenge a guy who could take your wife away?
W R to the perception they are peaceful folk, there is a lot of violence among them, but the victims know silence is safer.
Let me help you: see http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Meadows_massacre
I didn’t know about this until a friend, who’s a descendant of one of the few Christian survivors, went to the dedication of a monument and was apologized to by modern Mormons.
Hear, hear!
“History for most Americans only starts on 7 December 1941.”
And history for most Japanese only starts on August 6, 1945.
Back on topic: the LDS church’s latest admission about their randy founder is deck chairs on the Titanic, in my opinion.
Modernity is the worst enemy of those who seek to falsify the past, as modern technology as applied to information management, DNA microbiology, and even archaeology are now being brought to bear against the long-accepted claims made by the LDS.
What could be dreamed up or falsified by a 19th century charlatan & snake oil salesman in his day, primitive in comparison to today, is now being subjected to withering scrutiny.
For example, the Mormon teaching that today’s American Indians are descended from Hebraic “Lamanites” who destroyed the “white & delightsome Nephites”, has been quietly set aside by the General Authorities in Salt Lake City.
The Mormon dam of misinformation is leaking badly & could burst at any time.
Are we forgetting Jerry Lee Lewis’ 13 year old bride ?
Define reluctant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.