Emma Smith and Abuse

[Krusader]

I've been a social worker these many years, and I know that abuse, especially of women, comes in many forms. One special type of abuse is mental abuse - the manipulation of the wife/partner by financial, emotional or sexual deprivation, being a major part of mental abuse.

However, one of the greatest examples of mental abuse that I have ever encountered, and which is one the text books should incorporate, is the spiritual abuse heaped on Emma Smith by the Doctrines and Covenants, Section 132, revelation.

Imagine being told that God is going to destroy you unless you agree to allow your husband to take additional wives? Women out there, just put yourself in Emma's shoes for a minute. Here you've supported your husband, Joseph, against all his enemies - even your own parents thought him a charlatan -you've borne his children, kept his house, been a very faithful wife. Now, you get DESTROYED by God if you don't accept his latest revelation! And, you have to agree to additional wives who will share his bed.!

What do you do? If you deny this revelation, you prove that all your trust in his "prophethood" was a sham and a mistake! If you agree - well, you get additional wives sharing your bedroom!

Of course, Emma outlived Joseph - and never admitted (according to her son, Joseph) that her husband was a polygamist. I suppose this was her little way of getting back at Prophet Joseph in the end.

[gratitude]

I've been a social worker these many years, and I know that abuse, especially of women, comes in many forms. One special type of abuse is mental abuse - the manipulation of the wife/partner by financial, emotional or sexual deprivation, being a major part of mental abuse.

However, one of the greatest examples of mental abuse that I have ever encountered, and which is one the text books should incorporate, is the spiritual abuse heaped on Emma Smith by the Doctrines and Covenants, Section 132, revelation.

Imagine being told that God is going to destroy you unless you agree to allow your husband to take additional wives? Women out there, just put yourself in Emma's shoes for a minute. Here you've supported your husband, Joseph, against all his enemies - even your own parents thought him a charlatan -you've borne his children, kept his house, been a very faithful wife. Now, you get DESTROYED by God if you don't accept his latest revelation! And, you have to agree to additional wives who will share his bed.!

What do you do? If you deny this revelation, you prove that all your trust in his "prophethood" was a sham and a mistake! If you agree - well, you get additional wives sharing your bedroom!

Of course, Emma outlived Joseph - and never admitted (according to her son, Joseph) that her husband was a polygamist. I suppose this was her little way of getting back at Prophet Joseph in the end.

Crusader,

To begin, I think you should know that I have had extreme amounts of experience with abuse.

Why did you post this?

I am sorry that you are upset about polygamy. I am.

Why do you paint Joseph and Emma's marriage as one versus the other?

I know the reasons why women stay with abusive husbands. Emma does not fit that stereotype.

She knew she would have had plenty of support and safety had she left Joseph.

Do you not recall that this was the woman who stood up against Brother Brigham?

You know she was the first president of the Relief Society, currently the world's largest organization of women.

She praised that organization, its members, and the church long after she heard of polygamy.

Why do you omit the tender relationship that Joseph and Emma shared? Why do you omit the kind and beautiful things that Joseph said about and did for Emma?

Why do you omit all that Emma said that was great about her husband?

Why do you only cite sources that support your argument and leave all others out?

I have so much love, respect, and admiration for Emma.

You are theorizing the thoughts that Emma had in her heart. You do the same with her thoughts.

Yes, I know she struggled with polygamy. Yes, I am aware of the words of the revelation.

But I am also aware you only tell part of the story.

Crusader, I feel a great sense of friendship and love for you as I write this.

God Bless You, Friend.

Sincerely,

Gratitude

[Goliath]

Gratitude: Gag me already. The guy couldn't have been that great if he cooked up the idea to take multiple wives. How "tender" could he have been towards EMma if he was willing to bring other women into his bed? What a creton! Jesus Christ instructed in the gospels that a man shall have ONE wife. Joe Smith was a fraud. Goliath

[gratitude]

Gratitude: Gag me already.

Goliath,

With a beginning like that I can tell you bring to this posting serious prejudices.

I have them, too.

The guy couldn't have been that great if he cooked up the idea to take multiple wives. How "tender" could he have been towards EMma if he was willing to bring other women into his bed?

Emma did not agree with you, even if she did struggle with polygamy.

What a creton!

What are you trying to say here?

Well, it does not matter. I believe name calling is childish.

Jesus Christ instructed in the gospels that a man shall have ONE wife.

Would you please quote the scripture to which you are referring?

Joe Smith was a fraud. Goliath

I appreciate your opinion.

Sincerely,

Gratitude

[Dee Dee Warren]

With a beginning like that I can tell you bring to this posting serious prejudices.

And they are quite unreasonable. Like my right as a woman to be valued as an individual who alone is enough for my husband without him seeking solace, pleasure, or companionship of another. Sorry but you are a man, and have no clue. Can you trot out women who would disagree? Sure - there are deviants in any crowd. And I am not meaning deviant perjoratively - I don't ohh and ahh each time I see a baby, I realize that is not typical female response - therefore I do not make rules or judgments based upon my deviation. You are unwittingly advocating the robbing of women their just due. You say, well God allowed it. That is a long debate and has to tear down the mistaken walls of what relativism is and what absolutism is. God also allowed incest for a time. God allowed concubinage. You do not make rules or doctrines from the exceptions or practices in differing times and cultures. I do not wish to debate this with you - you strike me as a very kind and gentle soul, and wanted to give you a female side. Sure Emma struggled - she knew she was being robbed and manipulated, but she still loved her husband. Women do that every day - which makes it even more heinous to exploit them.

[gratitude]

And they are quite unreasonable. Like my right as a woman to be valued as an individual who alone is enough for my husband without him seeking solace, pleasure, or companionship of another. Sorry but you are a man, and have no clue.

Dee Dee,

This is something that worried me greatly about this post. I thought it would separate men and women and has done just that.

Dee Dee, I do not feel it appropriate to go into details concerning my marriage, but nobody here knows the details the of conversations that my wife and I have had on the subject.

But I have no doubt that people are going to make assumptions about them. And they are dead wrong.

Can you trot out women who would disagree?

No, nor did I. I would ask that you read my original post again.

The subject of that post is of a different nature.

You are unwittingly advocating the robbing of women their just due. You say, well God allowed it.

I am not Dee Dee. I am a firm believer in the Law of Sarah.

That is a long debate and has to tear down the mistaken walls of what relativism is and what absolutism is. God also allowed incest for a time. God allowed concubinage. You do not make rules or doctrines from the exceptions or practices in differing times and cultures.

I agree with you again.

I do not wish to debate this with you - you strike me as a very kind and gentle soul, and wanted to give you a female side. Sure Emma struggled - she knew she was being robbed and manipulated, but she still loved her husband.

I appreciate both your words and your concerns. I also appreciate that you want me to understand the female side of this.

That is so kind of you, Dee Dee. And I thank you.

Women do that every day - which makes it even more heinous to exploit them.

I completely agree. President Hinckley has twice spoken on the subject since he has been prophet.

In 1996 he said:
Unfortunately a few of you may be married to men who are abusive....

No man who engages in such evil and unbecoming behavior is worthy of the priesthood of God. No man who so conducts himself is worthy of the privileges of the house of the Lord. I regret that there are some men undeserving of the love of their wives and children. There are children who fear their fathers, and wives who fear their husbands. If there be any such men within the hearing of my voice, as a servant of the Lord I rebuke you and call you to repentance. Discipline yourselves. Master your temper. Most of the things that make you angry are of very small consequence. And what a terrible price you are paying for your anger. Ask the Lord to forgive you. Ask your wife to forgive you. Apologize to your children.

Those are significant and hefty words coming from what we believe to be the Lord's mouthpiece.

Elder Russel M. Nelson spoke to the Priesthood and said (among other things):
As fathers we should have love unbounded for the mothers of our children. We should accord to them the gratitude, respect, and praise that they deserve.

Sincerely,

Gratitude

[Krusader]

Dee Dee,

This is something that worried me greatly about this post. I thought it would separate men and women and has done just that.

Dee Dee, I do not feel it appropriate to go into details concerning my marriage, but nobody here knows the details the of conversations that my wife and I have had on the subject.

But I have no doubt that people are going to make assumptions about them. And they are dead wrong.

No, nor did I. I would ask that you read my original post again.

The subject of that post is of a different nature.

I am not Dee Dee. I am a firm believer in the Law of Sarah.

I agree with you again.

I appreciate both your words and your concerns. I also appreciate that you want me to understand the female side of this.

That is so kind of you, Dee Dee. And I thank you.

I completely agree. President Hinckley has twice spoken on the subject since he has been prophet.

In 1996 he said:
Unfortunately a few of you may be married to men who are abusive....

No man who engages in such evil and unbecoming behavior is worthy of the priesthood of God. No man who so conducts himself is worthy of the privileges of the house of the Lord. I regret that there are some men undeserving of the love of their wives and children. There are children who fear their fathers, and wives who fear their husbands. If there be any such men within the hearing of my voice, as a servant of the Lord I rebuke you and call you to repentance. Discipline yourselves. Master your temper. Most of the things that make you angry are of very small consequence. And what a terrible price you are paying for your anger. Ask the Lord to forgive you. Ask your wife to forgive you. Apologize to your children.

Those are significant and hefty words coming from what we believe to be the Lord's mouthpiece.

Elder Russel M. Nelson spoke to the Priesthood and said (among other things):
As fathers we should have love unbounded for the mothers of our children. We should accord to them the gratitude, respect, and praise that they deserve.

Sincerely,

Gratitude

Gratitude, this is not a personal attack leveled against you - so don't take it that way. What I'm dealing with here is the issue of abuse - not only in early Mormonism, but as it exists today. Are you aware of the fact that Utah has a high rate of child-abuse compared to percentages nation-wide? The same goes for spousal abuse. Unfortunately, the extreme patriarchal order found in Mormonism breeds male domination and abuse - my opinion.

Now, let's suppose that tomorrow Pres. Hinckley goes into the temple and receives a revelation stating that Doctrine and Covenants 132 is now restored, and that in order not to be damned eternally Mormon men must now return to the practice of polygamy. Well, as a good Mormon man, wouldn't you be expected to take additional wives? How do you think your wife would deal with that - or most Mormon women for that matter.

The Manifesto simply states that Mormons are not to contract marriages in opposition to the law of the land - actually, Mormons in Botswanaland, for instance, should be practicing polygamy since it is legal. Currently there are several lawsuits going on, soon to be before the higher courts, which challenge laws protecting monogamy. What will the Mormons do if polygamy becomes legal? In order to be true to Smith's revelation in D&C 132, you would have to obey it or be damned. Read it carefully, that's what it says! If you didn't, and if the Mormon Church refuses to allow its members to engage in polygamy (should it be legalized), they would be (in fact) denying the authenticity of Smith's supposed revelation.

Gratitude, you shouldn't be afraid to discuss things that are divisive. In your lifetime, the scenario I laid out above is a real possibility. No use hiding your head in the sand. It will cause division between men in women if polygamy is restored - just as it did in the 1840's. The reason there was division is because the doctrine of plural marriage goes against Jesus' very words, "and the twain shall be as one." Not the three, four or five shall be as one.

Emma Smith was a mentally abused woman - she virtually left Mormonism after the death of Joseph and married a Mason. How much clearer could she have made it that she wanted nothing more to do with the hedonistic, male-dominated cult that robbed her of the happiness she deserved!

[Goliath]

Gratitude: Gag me already. The guy couldn't have been that great if he cooked up the idea to take multiple wives. How "tender" could he have been towards EMma if he was willing to bring other women into his bed? What a creton! Jesus Christ instructed in the gospels that a man shall have ONE wife. Joe Smith was a fraud. Goliath

Gratitude: How exactly am I prejudiced? I would like that explained to me. Perhaps I do not use flowery language. for that I apologize. I am from New York. We tell it like it is in NY. Jesus told it like it was as well. It is good for everyone to remember that. He NEVER sugar coated anything.

On to bible verses regarding one wife.
1. Matthew 5:31, 32 regarding putting off one's wife. "whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement. (32) But I say unto you that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced commiteht adultery.
2. Matt 19: 5 for this cause shall a man leave his mother and father and shall cleave to his WIFE (singular) and the twain shall be one fleth. 6: wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What god hath joined together let no man put asunder.

And then on to verse 8:moses because of hte hardness of mens hearts suffered you to put away your wifes; but from the beginning it was not so.

There are many more but I don't have time right now. I will post more at a later time today/
Finally, remember i Emma's time women didn't have many rights, not married women anyway. She was pretty powerless to do anything to get out from under Joe's grip. Goliath

[Krusader]

Gratitude: How exactly am I prejudiced? I would like that explained to me. Perhaps I do not use flowery language. for that I apologize. I am from New York. We tell it like it is in NY. Jesus told it like it was as well. It is good for everyone to remember that. He NEVER sugar coated anything.

On to bible verses regarding one wife.
1. Matthew 5:31, 32 regarding putting off one's wife. "whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement. (32) But I say unto you that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced commiteht adultery.
2. Matt 19: 5 for this cause shall a man leave his mother and father and shall cleave to his WIFE (singular) and the twain shall be one fleth. 6: wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What god hath joined together let no man put asunder.

And then on to verse 8:moses because of hte hardness of mens hearts suffered you to put away your wifes; but from the beginning it was not so.

There are many more but I don't have time right now. I will post more at a later time today/
Finally, remember i Emma's time women didn't have many rights, not married women anyway. She was pretty powerless to do anything to get out from under Joe's grip. Goliath

Hi Goliath, and thank you for that input. You hit the nail right on the head. The 19th century woman was fairly powerless. She worked in the home and was supported by her spouse. Everything was contingent upon his income - and in this case, Smith's income came from the Church he founded. She couldn't very well have accused him of being a false prophet when her support and the support of her children relied on his position as head of the Church.

Now, when Smith and Hyrum ran away from the authorities and went into hiding (false shepherds do that, you know), it was Emma who went and told Joseph that his people needed him and that he needed to come back and face the music, so to speak. Smith ended up being arrested and thrown into jail - and the rest of the story you know. It was Emma who played the part of the "good shepherd," I always thought.

While the official LDS teaching on polygamy is that it is banned (by the Manifesto), Utah is full of "plural marriage" families. A good site to check out the abuse of these kind of "marriages" is found at:

http://www.polygamy.org/

The abuse in plural marriage households runs the gamet from physical, financial to sexual (incest), etc. This is the legacy of D&C 132 - which most Mormons would like to tear out of their book, I'm sure, and forget Smith ever uttered such a so-called "revelation."

Keep up the good input, Goliath, it's nice to see you posting here.

[gratitude]

Gratitude, this is not a personal attack leveled against you - so don't take it that way. What I'm dealing with here is the issue of abuse - not only in early Mormonism, but as it exists today. Are you aware of the fact that Utah has a high rate of child-abuse compared to percentages nation-wide? The same goes for spousal abuse. Unfortunately, the extreme patriarchal order found in Mormonism also leads to domination and abuse - my opinion.

You just equated the state of Utah with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

That is a massive statistical error.

When stating statistics, I ask that you give all the statistical data as well as your source. I want to know who in Utah is abusing, how many of them are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, how many of them are active members of the church in good standing, how many of them are women, how many of them are of other religions, etc., etc. etc.

That is like hinting that the Catholic Church supports homosexual marriages since Spain, a predominantly Catholic country, recently passed a law allowing it.

You also just hinted that Mormonism fosters abuse.

That absolutely makes me sick.

I would invite you to attend more Priesthood meetings (both of local congregations and Conference sessions) and listen to what is being taught.

Would you like me to start a thread which lists quotes from LDS leaders (male and female) that discuss how men and women should treat each other?

It would be extensive.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is now the fourth largest church in the United States. It also has more members outside of the United States than in the United States.

If what you hint at is true, it would appear a major catastrophe would be at hand.

There will not be one, Crusader. I am a professional policy analyst and would ask that you give all statistics in their proper context.

Now, let's suppose that tomorrow Pres. Hinckley goes into the temple and receives a revelation stating that Doctrine and Covenants 132 is now restored, and that in order not to be damned eternally Mormon men must now return to the practice of polygamy. Well, as a good Mormon man, wouldn't you be expected to take additional wives? How do you think your wife would deal with that - or most Mormon women for that matter.

First, that was never the order of the revelation of polygamy. Less than five percent of men in the early church practiced it at the time and only did so when instructed to do so.

The same was true in the Old Testament.

So for President Hinckley to make such an announcement in such a manner would go contrary to the order of that revelation.

Why do you give those kind of scenarios? Hypothetical questions are just that...hypotheses.

Second, I said in my post to Dee Dee that
I do not feel it appropriate to go into details concerning my marriage, but nobody here knows the details the of conversations that my wife and I have had on the subject.

But I have no doubt that people are going to make assumptions about them. And they are dead wrong.

You just illustrated my point. You made an assumption. And you were wrong. Dead wrong.

The Manifesto simply states that Mormons are not to contract marriages in opposition to the law of the land - actually, Mormons in Botswanaland, for instance, should be practicing polygamy since it is legal.

You quote the following:
And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.

Why did you leave out the previous sentence?

There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved.

He clearly states that polygamy was at that time (and continues to be now) against the policy of the Church.

Currently their are several lawsuits going on, soon to be before the higher courts, which challenge laws imposting monogamy. What will the Mormons do if polygamy becomes legal?

That is a good question, but any and all answers are speculation, which seems to be a substantial past time of many on this site (Mormons included). Too many palm readers if you ask me, but no one did.

I do not speculate on the future. I have too many of things I have done in the past to fix.

Rather than focus on some speculative, unknown future, I am going to focus on the Savior and His teachings.

So I am going to focus on trying to be a better husband to my wife.

In order to be true to Smith's revelation in D&C 132, you would have to obey it or be damned. Read it carefully, that's what it says!

Why do you keep telling me to read the scriptures carefully, especially this one? I have, Crusader, and I am well aware of what it says.

If you didn't, and if the Mormon Church refuses to allow its members to engage in polygamy (should it be legalized), they would be (in fact) denying the authenticity of Smith's supposed revelation.

You are using the same standard that those in the past have used "The Church banned polygamy so Utah could become a state"

The argument was false then, it is false now.

This is not a political issue. If the commandment comes, it will come from the Lord and the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will reveal it accordingly.

If it were a political issue as you have suggested, the practice would be in force today in specific countries.

I appreciate you pointing that out.

Gratitude, you shouldn't be afraid to discuss things that a divisive.

Let me make this very clear. I am not afraid to discuss divisive issues. I take issues with people being divisive and creating divides based on their own worldview. The Savior taught that we should be one. Whether you meant it to be or not, your posting was incredibly charged to divide men versus women, and I think that is inappropriate.

Christ's teachings are divisive enough. We do not need to infuse our own spin on issues to create gaps that he never taught.

You are exchanging posts with a man that reveres women.

You are striking me to the heart.

I have seen the prophet weep once. And it was at the death of his wife.

In your lifetime, the scenario I laid out above is a real possibility.

There is a movie opening up this weekend. It is a scenario that could happen.

Palm reading with do very little good.

No use hiding your head in the sand.

Who is hiding their head in the sand?

It will cause division between men in women

Too late, Crusader. You are doing that right now with a posting that is calling women to one side.

if polygamy is restored - just as it did in the 1840's.

Imagine that...a doctrine that divides.

Polygamy's staunchest, most outspoken enemies in the early church were men. Men that requested to practice but were denied.

The reason there was division is because the doctrine of plural marriage goes against Jesus' very words, "and the twain shall be as one." Not the three, four or five shall be as one.

I read this scripture very differently than you do.

Emma Smith was a mentally abused woman

She did not agree with you, Crusader. Like I said, she struggled with polygamy, but she would disagree with you.

- she virtually left Mormonism after the death of Joseph and married a Mason. How much clearer could she have made it that she wanted nothing more to do with the hedonistic, male-dominated cult that robbed her of the happiness she deserved!

That is a pathetic characterization, Crusader. You know it.

You just called the entire religion hedonistic because a tiny minority of people practiced it for a few years (yes, I realize it was a few decades). Again, less than five percent of the men of the Church practiced it at the time.

Should I redirect readers to posts on here that have praised churches that continue to practice polygamy? Ones that you posted?

Of course I am going to take it personally.

You do not know where my wife stands in my home.

You do not know where my mother stands in my home.

You do not know where the Apostles' wives stand in their homes.

Because men hold the Priesthood does not mean women are anything less in the eyes of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Can you name any other religion where women are as empowered as women are in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, where virtually every woman in a congregation has had hands placed upon her head to be given power according to the duty which she has been assigned? What are those assignments? Presidencies, teachers, activities coordinators, counselors, area supervisors, communication directors, publi relation coordinators...the list goes on and on.

Can you name any other religion where one of its leaders publishes a book informing the men of that religion that they are neglecting the wisdom and capabilities of their women?

Can you name another religion in which the head of that religion has stated in a forum that reaches every single one of its members publicly that "Woman is God’s supreme creation"?

Can you name another religion where abusive men are publicly rebuked by its President in the manner that I posted earlier?

Can you name another religion which has attacked pornography, a practice that defiles women, as openly by speaking of it in a forum that will simultaneously be heard by millions?

Of course, Emma outlived Joseph - and never admitted (according to her son, Joseph) that her husband was a polygamist. I suppose this was her little way of getting back at Prophet Joseph in the end.

I was not going to comment on this, Crusader, but after what you have said, I have decided to do so.

Emma did not comment on it because she had made a covenant not to. Is she wanted to "get back at Joseph," she would have shattered that oath and screamed about it to the world.

Instead she kept her promise and remained silent.

Sincerely,

Gratitude

[Krusader]

Gratitude, I don't have time to answer your lengthy post at the present, but if you're working for the US Government you can check on the abuse stats in Utah yourself, since they come from a government published publication - "Kids First."

Second, if you are the fourth largest church in the United States, what are the first three? Where do you get those stats?

Do a search on top religious denominations in the United States - you guys are ninth in the order of membership. Not fourth.....and Baptists outnumber you guys 10 to one. Additionally, do you know how hard it is to GET OFF the membership rolls of the LDS Church? Try it some time.

Many, many "Mormons" which are counted no longer attend the LDS Church, and probably haven't for years. They don't bother resigning from your church since it's such a hassel.

In our Church, if you miss church for 6 months you are off the membership rolls - providing it is not related to a physical disability preventing you from coming to church. It's written into our constitution.

And many of those who Mormons count as "converts," especially from South American countries, are bogus Mormons - they got baptized in order to get food for their families, clothing, etc. When the missionaries go - it's back to the RC Church! I know this for a fact - my former son-in-law (who is from Ecuador) told me it happened to his family. The whole family went Mormon - not because they believed in Mormonism, but because they believed in Mormon money!

[Krusader]

P.S. to above posting. If you'd like to see the incredible ordeal one former Mormon missionary went though just to get his name removed from LDS records, please go to:

http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/exitletter_1.htm

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dee Dee,

Hello gratitude, I am glad you want to hear the female side of things. Can I tell you that when I hear men defending this (and some of the men really do give the aura that they are the master of women in all things - not all, and you have not) it sickens me literally. You do not know the female heart. You are not a woman - but one of the most cherished things that a women craves is that one man who has eyes for her alone. It isn't even really about sex - it is about dedication and devotion to her. I know I am not going to explain this well - but to advocate this is to devalue that right of women - we are not simply pleasure machines and housekeepers and baby makers.

The reason I said "can you trot out a woman that will disagree with me" it is because some of the hyper-patriarchal types I have discoursed with do - and I say so what? They are deviant. I have no problem saying that. Any woman who has no problem at all (I am not saying she couldn't cope with it - I am not saying there may be times when there is no choice - if only one man was left on planet earth and a 100 women, well to repopulate the earth sacrifices have to be made) but it is a problem. Any woman who says no has issues, is self-deceived, or is deviant.

For example, let say women have an innate mothering nature and love babies. That is true. However I do not. Do we then make void that almost universally true statement because I am an exception? No - in that respect I am deviant. I lack something that should be present in a woman. It could be from numerous reasons that I feel this way - and there could be numerous reasons why a woman would deviate to want to be one of many.

That is one reason Gratitude this is not of God. In the OT culture, I agree it was a necessity, but it certainly wasn't ideal. And I am certain the women then had a problem with it, but there were other bigger problems that were solved. When God made the Church he symbolized it as one man and his bride.

It is this one fact alone that is enough for me to reject Mormonism and Joseph Smith. I am not trying to insult you but I think he was a randy man who shamelessly used the name of God to satisfy his baser needs and clothe them with "holiness." And if I am right, that is about as despicable as a man can get.

So please understand Gratitude that for many women, hearing a man advocate this is analogous to a black person hearing someone advocate black slavery. It makes the woman feel less than a man and worthless on her own. Not only that, I can guarantee that the wives of men who advocate this have this heavy on their heart, even they are currently the only wife - they know their man thinks it is okay to have more - the flesh then will inevitably look at others and think "she could be my wife" or "she could be my wife" and the current wife is the old and stale but that hot babe sidling up the street will be on that man's mind because "morally" she, if single, is not off-limits. Something like that would destroy trust and love. I could never live like that. And it makes women enemies of each other - ask a woman if you don't know what I mean.

Single women can be some of the nastiest cattiest people to each other when they are out man-shopping or in the market for marriage. When one of them is married, she is often much more gracious and loving to her single friends. Not so if they too are trying to eat off of her plate.

This is in fact life. I also know the nature of men - having more women is an attractive idea - but you will never then have that special and supernatural one on one bond of one flesh. Never. I am passionate about this subject gratitude because it devalues and demeans my value.

[Dee Dee Warren]

I am only responding to gratitude as he is a gentle and compassionate soul. If anyone wants to aggressively debate this or tell me that I am opposing God or whatever, I am not interested.

[Krusader]

I am only responding to gratitude as he is a gentle and compassionate soul. If anyone wants to aggressively debate this or tell me that I am opposing God or whatever, I am not interested.

I don't think you're deviant for not wanting kids. Maternal instincts are acquired not innate. I had 5, but to tell you the truth, when somebody pushes a baby in my face now and expects me to say, "oh, how cute," I might say it,but don't really think it. And, frankly, I can only take my grandchildren for just so long - I'm just not a doting grandmother! I'll take dogs and cats, anytime!!!!!! Have a good weekend. C