There’s a famous story about the Squarson Baring Gould, who only had 15 children by one wife — being Anglican — benevolently meeting a small child…
…one evening a child bumped into his leg and, upon picking her up, he asked “And whose little girl are you?”, at which the child burst into tears and said “I’m yours Daddy!”.
They were a tad younger for the most part. 
I don’t know as much about Kimball’s clan (though his genealogy is online), but I know a good bit about Brigham’s from when he was a research obsession, and he had many children with a few of his wives. His supposed favorite for many years was Emmeline Free, with whom he had 10 kids, and his official residence was shared with his first plural wife Lucy Decker with whom he had 7; he also wed her 15 year old sister who accompanied him on the first trip to Great Salt Lake and with whom he ultimately had 5 kids. He had 7 by Joseph Smith’s widow Emily Partridge (whose sister married Kimball and had a large family), and he had 5 children with poor Louisa Beaman, all of whom died at birth (Louisa died young also).
Thus, many of his wives only had one child each- I’m assuming they were probably removed from the rotation after that.
His last wife famously and very publicly divorced him- she was more than 40 years his junior. His last baby-mama was also a 40+ years his junior wife and by legend threatened to divorce him as well due to the horrible Amelia, but she was given money and other incentives not to do so.
Hmmm… does these folks spawn counts include all those who died in infancy?
Yes.
In fact a disproportionate number of Kimball’s did, even more than you would expect from an average 19th century family. (Young lost 11 of his 57 kids in infancy/early childhood, which was closer to the average.)
Kimball goes to the doctor.
“Doc, doc - ya gotta help me!”
“Certainly, sir - what seems to be the problem?”
"Let me explain my situation. On Monday, before breakfast, I screw wives 1 and 2. Then I do the haying, come home, and boink wives 3 and 4. In the afternoon I work in the back forty, come home, and put the wood to wives 5 and 6.
Tuesdays I clean out the chicken house, pork numbers 7, 8, and 9, weed the alfalfa, screw number 10, have dinner, mount 11, read The Deseret News, make it with number 12, and go to bed.
Wednesday I copulate early with wives 13 - 15, plow the potatoes, plow wife #16, milk the cows, and do the deed with 17 and 18.
Thursday I slop the hogs, bang 19, 20, 21, and 22, weed the garden, make the beast with two backs with 23, have supper, have number 24, and go to sleep.
Friday is much the same, except with wives 25 - 30. Saturday I have to work on my sermon in between servicing the next six, and Sunday I do number 37 before service, numbers 38 - 42 in the coach on my route visiting parishioners, and finally I do number 43 in the evening, twice because she is the youngest."
“Okay”, says the doctor, “but what seems to be the problem?”
“Well, it hurts when I masturbate…”
Regards,
Shodan
:dubious:
I lol’d 
Indeed, that was perfect.
I take exception to this. We have all known for ever that these practices were followed by Mormons. NO new info here.
No, they got a get out of Hell free card a few decades ago.
Still trying to get caught up. Another teacher quit and I’ve been covering.
I’m going to pick and chose a few things to respond to, and then will go over the rest later.
I’m specifically leaving aside the question of the age thing for the moment but I’ll return to that.
Other than Smith, Young and a few more of the early leaders, this wasn’t widespread. The practice is forbidden in the revelation authorizing plural wives, which Smith claims to have received. That 1843 revelation is pretty nasty, God, speaking through Smith rather conveniently orders Smith’s first wife, Emma, to receive these things or be destroyed
It also states that the sole reason for establishing polygamy is for the purpose of raising up seed. Oddly enough, God is rather forgetful as Smith had already married other men’s wives by that time.
This has been argued. I’ll follow up on this, but rumors of Smith’ sexual misconduct predates his invention of the religion. His profession prior to starting Mormonism was as a clairvoyant, telling people that he could see buried treasure. People would pay him to look for it. It’s quite the story.
Reread Doctrine and Covenants 132, the revelation concerning polygamy. It was specifically for raising up seed.
I was really surprised to hear how many member had been told that polygamy was to care for widows because that wasn’t what we were taught in the 60s. It’s been thoroughly debunked, of course and I’ll be delighted to provide cites for that.
Yup. A good friend of mine, who is Catholic, and I used to laugh about that. Enough research has been done to pretty well connect the dots, and we can see whose finger prints are where.
I had a friend who went to college in Idaho and said one of her dorm mates had pictures of Joseph and Emma Smith on her wall, and I’ve read that pictures of Emma aren’t uncommon in Mormon homes that display church paraphernalia. I’d always assumed she was an embarrassment to the mainstream church since she and her sons never came west, started “the other church”, and denied he ever practiced polygamy (and by most accounts her second marriage was much happier and less eventful).
How is she viewed in the church?
More than a few.
Prior to the internet, people just would not talk openly about their doubts. Prior to my mid-20s, I never heard of a “cultural Mormon.” I take that back, there was one gentleman who came to a church picnic when I was 12ish. The brother of one of the members, Paul Swenson was the editor of Utah Holiday magazine, which dared attempt to investigate the church finances. He suggested that there could be room within the church for people who didn’t completely 100% agree with everything the modern prophets said. Such heresy!
Many, many former members and these cultural Mormons talk about the cult-like nature of the church. Bishops will often advise spouses of doubting members to divorce them so as to not become “tempted” themselves or to prevent their children’s faith to be damaged.
Pretty much all of the ex-Mormon forums have many members who hate it, but are forced to go through the motions in order to preserve their marriage. When one spouse leaves, divorce is not uncommon.
There are some who genuinely like the culture, which I personally can’t understand. The Poster Boy for this is John Dehlin, founder of a popular Mormon Stories podcast. From wiki:
All that John did was publicly state that he did not believe the divine origins of the church. Being public about it was too much, apparently. The “Court of Love” where they excommunicate people is still on ice for the mombent.
His podcast used to be fairly balanced for both pro-Mormon and those who disagreed, although I don’t know of any shows featuring real anti-Mormons. John faces criticism from within the church and also from those who quit and wonder why he doesn’t as well.
I’ve been surprised that there are as many cultural Mormons as there are. My cousin posted openly of that on her facebook, which just would never have happened 30 years ago (talking about being open about it, obviously facebook wasn’t there).
The church takes up so much time and money, and as the lower levels of leadership are all lay members, it would seem so hard to be a cultural Mormon. You are always in a position of having to say you believe in the restoration of the gospel and are so thankful for modern day revelation, that so many of these cultural members feel really, really uncomfortable. John Dehlin now isn’t attending but doesn’t want to resign either.
Sorry about the rambling. I should have been in bed hours ago.
After musing over it the past day, I made a thread on the monetary value he sacrificed by not freezing on to the Golden Plates.
Fixated? I firmly believe that if ANYBODY is up on EVERY LAST 19th century American religious cult with repugnant sexual practices it would be my friend, Sampiro. It’s not an avocation. It’s a vocation.
Emma has been alternately vilified and worshiped, her memory goes hand-in-hand with the view of polygamy of the era.
Emma was dearly loved by the average member when polygamy and polyandry were practiced in secret by a select inner circle. After Smith’s death and Young took his followers west, Emma was treated as the devil incarnate by Young who is quoted as saying that Smith has said he would go to hell to find Emma, which is good because there is where she would be.
In front of witnesses, including Young Joseph accused Emma of attempting to poison him, although it was probably food poisoning. Although the couple made up privately, Joseph apparently never retracted the accusation publicly.
Young has the following to say about her:
Once the practice of polygamy was finally suspended by the mainstream church in 1910ish, an underground polygamous movement began in the 1920s which subsequently split up into various factions. The threat to the mainstream church from the polygamists started the church to slowly back away from teaching about the principle, eventually allowing her reputation to be rehabilitated.
I grew up in an ultra-orthodox family, so my personal experience could be 20 to 30 years behind my contemporaries, but while Emma wasn’t really vilified, she also wasn’t treated as the saint she is portrayed now.
Searching through the LDS.org site, I found only a few articles about her life outside the context of her being the first president of the women’s society. One is a flattering biographical article from a 1979 Ensign church magazine entitled The Elect Lady: Emma Hale Smith. (God called her this in a revelation given through Joseph which passive-aggressively also warns her about pride and requires her to serve her husband.) Amazingly, the 2,500 word article never mentions polygamy or even eternal marriage, and it concludes with “There is much to admire and respect in the life of the ‘elect lady.’”
A later Ensign article from 1992, My Great-Great-Grandmother, Emma Hale Smith written by a descendant of Emma who happened to be converted to mainstream Mormonism. In the article, she give this reverence point:
So, somewhere between the 1950s and 1979, Emma was rehabilitated and then by 1992 the church felt comfortable enough to hint at the problems between Emma and the church.
The current position is that Emma was the most wonderful woman in the world. The LDS producted 2005 sappy, fictionalized Joseph Smith: The Prophet of the Restoration portrays their relationship as tender and loving, completely skipping over plural marriage.
If any of the other ex-Mormons show up, I’m sure they could better answer when she was fully rehabilitated. I was out of the loop from the late 80s until 2003 or so when I started researching things.
Mormonism has gotten caught between several dangers. The polygamous groups and other fundamentalist movements was to restore the religion to the form practiced in the early days. Through such measure as the “Strengthening Church Members Committee”, the LDS Stasi, the church had been fairly successful at keeping these groups at bay. However the Net has enabled a growing number of independent fundamentalists.
From the other side, the liberal members who don’t accept the priesthood authorities as the final say (heretics!) are also eroding the base. There is a growing feminist movement who are rejecting the exclusively male church leadership and are pressing for more quality. These women reject polygamy and many look up to Emma for standing up to her husband.
Non-apologetic historians debate if Smith was a pious fraud, really believed what he did was inspired, an outright fraud or all or some combination of these. (Apologetic historians naturally assume the divine origins but that can be proven to not be true to be beyond a reasonable doubt.)
As Emma was there the entire time, the question was how much was she a true believer, a fellow pious fraud, a conspirator or some combination as she was there for many of the foundational stories which clearly did not occur as they are now portrayed.
She venomously opposed polygamy, as is recounted in this story.
She rejected the revelation on polygamy (also recalled in that article), giving Smith’s brother Hyrum a tongue lashing and ripping up the copy.
I can already tell, this is going to be fun. Haven’t they warned you in your priesthood meetings that us ex-Mormon know a hell of a lot more about your religion than members? Most Mormons never really question what’s taught, so there isn’t any real reason to dive into the deeper stuff. It’s obvious from your response that you aren’t that familiar with your history. OTOH, many ex-Mormons go through a “crisis of faith” in which they discover that the church hasn’t been honest with its history. Then they search and find out about all the dirty secrets which were hidden with the dead bodies.
For example, many if not most of the members haven’t heard about the super secret Second Anointing, where living people are ordained as gods-to-be, guaranteed to get their own planets in heaven. They can do anything they want, short of murder or quitting and they get an unlimited Get Out of Jail, Free cards. Pretty cool, isn’t it? Although most members haven’t heard about it (I never did), wiki knows everything.
Most of the bystanders here don’t care about the particulars, since they find Mormons to be weird. What they don’t know is how weird it really is. I didn’t know how weird other saw us until after I quit and was out drinking with some clients when Mormonism came up. One of their sister companies was founded by a Mormon (who happened to be a friend of mine from elementary school, but they didn’t know that). These guys started joking about Mormons ,never knowing I had been 6th generation. Wow.
That was an eye opener. Mormonism has tried to mainstream itself since when, the late 80s or so? It was after I left. But the “Brethren” (15 white, conservative, mostly old guys who run the church) don’t get it. There is a fundamental paradigm, the concepts of which defines Mormonism. Without these, Mormonism loses it’s raison d’etre. These actually need to be specified in order to understand BaldDudePeekskill’s arguments which you asked for the cites.
-
The Jesus is the Christ. This is accepted by about one third of the world, although the Mormon version is heretical for the vast majority of Christians.
-
That there was an original church founded by Jesus, which looks just like the LDS church and has the same priesthood authorities, including “keys” to perform ordinances such as the sacrament (Eucharist), baptism, marriage et al. Without these keys, then none of the ordinances are valid or meaningful.
-
That there was a “Great Apostasy” following the death of the original twelve apostles. The keys were lost.
-
That the Book of Mormon is a mostly historical record of some Jews who went over to the Americas and left their records on gold plates.
-
That God raised up the prophet Joseph Smith, selected from the pre-existence as one of the greatest prophets in the history of the world. Second to Jesus, our older brother who got to become the literal, physical son of the Heavenly Father, making him a half-divine, half mortal being, although it’s never spelled out like that. (This obviously is not considered orthodox by Christians.)
-
That Smith, by God’s power, translated the Book of Mormon. If anyone hasn’t seen the South Park documentary one this, please do so. It gets the rock in the hat perfectly.
-
The Smith and his co-founder Oliver Cowdery received the priesthood powers from resurrected angels: John the Baptist, and then Peter, James and John.
-
Through this restored priesthood authority, Smith and others founded the Mormon church in 1830.
-
Smith received a bunch of revelations from God. These are mostly canonized in the Doctrine and Covenants.
9.1 The revelations include the power for eternal marriage and the authority to “seal” people so they will be together in the hereafter. Without this, families are only until death.
9.2 The concept of eternal progression, that God used to be a mortal man, his wives used to be mortal women and we have to ability to become like God or one of his wives as well.
9.3 The true temple ceremony and the priesthood authority which does the actual sealings. As noted about with that Second Anointing in the temple, the promise of being a god/godess is guaranteed. The number of new gods has been debated, but from wiki
So about 21,000 plus change. Prominent apostate Tom Phillips gave a four hour interview concerning his Second Anointing with John Dehlin of Mormon Stories podcasts. Because of the nature of the subject, Dehlin elected to not run the interview, but Phillips have made it available here.
Polygamy is inherently interwoven with the temple ceremony and eternal marriage. Young and his immediate successors, and their contemporaries preached the doctrine that polygamous marriage was essential in order to become a god oneself.
(Young also taught that Adam is God. Or rather, God came down as Adam and one of his wives came down as Eve. That doctrine was declared heretical by later prophets.)
-
After Smith’s death, the keys of the priesthood went with the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and continues through now. Only Mormon ordinances are valid.
-
That Christ continues to lead the church and provides continuing revelation to the modern prophets.
Anyway, you asked for some cites concerning your doctrine. Remember the adage about be careful of what you ask for. It will be my pleasure to offer some cites, but I’m out of time for tonight so I’ll do so later.
Sorry, but I don’t have the time, interest or patience to read that.
Have a nice day.
But why, Morgenstern? You demanded I cite my claims and I directed you to one of the many authoritative ex Mormon sites, written by former members with much dogmatic background and then Tokyo Bayer provided concrete examples as well. Me thinks the "morning star " protesteth too much…is that a garment line I spy?
Comedy gold!