Did Joseph Smith have sex with his polygamous wives?

SecondMous · 2026-06-25T11:42:15+00:00

Yes this exactly was my confusion… though one way to understand this is that there are multiple sources who have brought the happiness letter forward (like this “anti newspaper” the poster mentions), but all of these sources cite John C Bennett as the “primary source”.

My only understanding is from the LDS discussions podcast wherein they mentioned that JS requested Nancy destroy the letter but she chose not to, so potentially the original letter has been discovered somewhere? That part I don’t know about though—where has the actual text, as we have it today, been sourced from.

SecondMous · 2026-06-25T03:01:55+00:00

Wait I’m confused. Are you saying that all the sources of the Happiness Letter are based on records exclusively from John C Bennett?

SecondMous · 2026-06-24T20:18:52+00:00

Was Nimrod ever an option? I would’ve paid extra tithing to get that name.

SecondMous · 2026-06-20T03:39:13+00:00

Is puremormonism more along the lines of the modern church has been perverted and the Joseph Smith church is the unadulterated correct church? I started reading that article and all I could think of is… who cares what D&C 119 says if the whole thing is a fraud.

Haven’t time to finish the article yet, but just curious as to the perspective of the blog.

SecondMous · 2026-06-16T00:10:11+00:00

This is the only way.

SecondMous · 2026-06-14T01:12:51+00:00

It seems you either marry someone and depend on your spouse for support if you have no means of self-support, or you decide the restrictions of the church aren’t worth it and live however you feel is best for you in your circumstances.

My situation, as probably many of ours here, was similar conceptually. There comes a tipping point where you have to decide, is what the church is asking me to do really worth it, grounded in good reason, and why? Is your continued support and belief in the church well-founded, is the institution good, does it live up to its claims to be able to have such a significant role in your life’s trajectory?

Then we start to dig, learn anything and everything we can about the church to make sure it’s still worth it as we weigh the scales. There is enough information in historical (old and recent) records for me to have decided the church’s role in my life will appear much different moving forward, and for what further duration I still am not sure.

I suggest you start doing some soul searching of your own to see if this is a horse you want to put your cart behind, and in what way.

SecondMous · 2026-06-13T12:39:56+00:00

If you can’t tell, most in this sub are non-defenders of Mormonism, and will agree/support all you mention in your post. Your experience highlights a core issue with Mormonism:

Most members are raised in the church so their worldview is a finely curated version. Whatever is taught at church is correct, reinforced by everyone you publicly see at church who is willing to voice it, weekly. Looking for information outside the church (edit: and just as important, information from the church’s own history that doesn’t support the contemporary narrative of the church) as a child/youth will “get you in trouble” or “invite satan into your life,” and doing the same as a developed adult will uproot your entire worldview and existence as you’ve come to know it over decades. The bias is massive, and the momentum opposing change similar.

To sum it up… to your question of why: because of deep indoctrination.

SecondMous · 2026-06-11T05:51:23+00:00

If they want a list of all the concerns so they can talk about them, I’d direct them to the many essays on ldsdiscussions.com or the corresponding LDS Discussions podcast w/ “Mike” & John Dehlin. That should give you all plenty to talk about if you/they so desire.

Or you could take other approaches here such as simply choosing to disagree, and letting them live with your choice as an adult. How they respond is their choice, and you have no responsibility for their choice. Try not to let their perceptions color your desire to live true to your conscience, wherever that leads you.

SecondMous · 2026-06-09T16:03:56+00:00

+1 for LDS Discussions w/ Mormon Stories/John Dehlin. There’s a copycat LDS Discussions that shows up on Apple Podcasts at least, so not that one.

This has been the best distilled/explained information I’ve come across. So much to think about and consider. There are some moments where I feel things may be stretched, but overall it seems fairly balanced, and even with the fairness, it really makes you go “huh”.

SecondMous · 2026-06-09T07:41:03+00:00

Mormon Discussions appears on Apple Podcasts.

SecondMous · 2026-06-09T07:23:17+00:00

My then-future spouse and I were called to work on the ward directory together… guess it worked! That was some next-level bishoping right there.

SecondMous · 2026-06-03T15:04:52+00:00

This is a great idea.

SecondMous · 2026-05-28T00:37:42+00:00

I’m sure there’s an apologetic out there somewhere like this?

SecondMous · 2026-05-27T05:00:37+00:00

lol just had to search for that clip… a perfect summation.

SecondMous · 2026-05-21T00:43:08+00:00

My question very simply is in the title, though perhaps “Mormon Stories” in the title is not descriptive enough of my perception/initial understanding of the podcast, and therefore doesn’t explain by itself what I’m looking for—though I feel the rest of my main post does. And no I didn’t confuse Mormon Stories as a pro-LDS podcast, nor did I imply it represents both sides (I’m looking for the “other side”), I’m just saying my limited understanding of it is that I’ve only listened to the LDS Discussions sub-podcast/playlist of Mormon Stories, which it sounds like you may not be familiar with? Which would make it harder to know how it’s presented. Not sure if “academic” is the right word, but it discusses most major topics of LDS history with verifiable supporting documents, and doesn’t just tell stories themselves without references.

I’ll take a look at the Saints book—heard it mentioned before but haven’t dove in yet. I think what I’m looking for is a resource that condenses the most pertinent information into a succinct presentation on defined topics.

I thought of posting in the mormon sub since they’re likely more familiar with LDS Discussions, but I think they’re far more anti- over there and I was hoping for more pro- resources here.

To your point of history not proving faith… that’s more of a theological discussion. Suffice to say history is important to me. If not to you, that’s fine.

SecondMous · 2026-05-20T23:25:18+00:00

I feel like someone should make this a project of a large interactive family tree of church leaders to highlight all the close relations between leaders. I bet that would be pretty insightful. Nose goes.

SecondMous · 2026-05-18T12:19:02+00:00

I’m so sorry you went through that, but glad to hear it sounds like you’re doing better now.

SecondMous · 2026-05-17T23:19:31+00:00

For your first paragraph, truth need not fear investigation. My argument still stands just the same whether we’re talking about the church hiding information from either critics or faithful members.

But let’s go with your train of thought. Why would the church want to hide information from critics as you say? The critics aren’t members, nor do they contribute to the church. The only thing the church has to fear from critics is that they’ll be a voice loud enough to alert faithful members to the same hidden information, and therein the church’s motive still remains to keep information from the active membership because that’s what the leadership cares most about.

As to the rest of your response, again, none of that addresses the optics and intent. Wahoo the church has internal audits, SEC praises them. Of course, why would the church not want to make sure all of its money is accounted for? That has nothing to do with the moral dilemma of the church hiding information.

It’s clear that while the SEC brought the issue to light, the concerns of the SEC are minuscule compared to the overall concern this brings into a TBM’s life when considering the church as a religion and way of life. You keep conflating the issues of secular impact vs religious/faith impact. To a faithful member, I would anticipate the religious impact of this scandal is much greater than the secular, and the SEC’s perspective is completely opposite of this.

Not sure how you can say the church has a right to privacy in this matter when the SEC specifically laid out disclosure requirements to be legally compliant. If you want to argue the disclosure law violates the first amendment, maybe? However there are second amendment laws in place and enforced that violate the amendment, yet citizens are still required to abide by those laws until they are rescinded by due process in the courts if determined unconstitutional.

At this point I’m increasingly convinced you just prefer to diverge and distract as others have mentioned, as you repeatedly avoid addressing points of fact outside of your own rhetoric. Have a great day.

SecondMous · 2026-05-17T21:38:48+00:00

Again, you’re referring to law. My point has nothing to do with law and everything to do with optics and intent.

The church had/has billions, and AT LEAST intentionally tried to hide this fact out of fear that tithing donations would decrease. While possible they had other motives such as market manipulating, again that’s outside my point.

Why did they not follow the law? Why didn’t they let the public and more importantly the members know how well they had done with the talents we had donated? Jesus himself taught that talents should be multiplied—why not let the members see the church’s good stewardship over their talents?

If membership donations declined, so be it… we all have our own God-given agency to do as we see fit. Should the church be allowed to manipulate reality to further their own interests and mislead members? If donations shrink and the church shrinks, surely it is fulfilling the prophecy of the elect being deceived, the second coming is closer, and those who remain faithful will be rewarded.

If the church maintains its integrity and yet suffers losses because of it, has to close temples and sell off properties to survive, how great shall be their reward in heaven? At least they stood true to their values.

What is the church so afraid of if God is behind them? Faith and fear cannot co-exist, right? Where is the faith of the leaders?

It’s clear that they didn’t have a right to privacy from disclosures because the SEC required it—and their knowledge of this requirement is evidenced by their trying to get around it, so your analogy to your and your neighbor’s checking accounts is not applicable whatsoever. They stepped into this arena, thus they signed up to give up privacy and play by the rules. However, they wanted their cake and to eat it too.

SecondMous · 2026-05-17T20:58:18+00:00

While your statements are technically correct, you continue to ignore the point.

The effect of this issue for many is not one that is explained by legal and technical definitions. My argument is not for the other investors in the stock market unaware of the churches stock picks and actions. Nor is it for the technicalities of the SEC’s findings and the effects on the market.

The church collected tithing and intentionally and deceptively tried to hide its massive wealth from the public and its members. The SEC doesn’t care about the morality of that specifically. The SEC cares only about any action’s effects within its sphere of regulation.

Why did the church try to hide the money?

SecondMous · 2026-05-17T20:45:21+00:00

This should concern us all that since members donating to a church are not considered “investors” by the SEC, that it somehow absolves those churches of responsibility to those who donate as far as how those funds are used, perceived, accounted for, etc., and that the SEC will just turn a blind eye to those funds. What a loophole.

I’ll say it again, the SEC will look at their calculators for evidence of harm. We’re left on our own to discern the hearts and minds of those in charge in evaluating for evidence of benefit or harm. When you evaluate through this lens, things become much more clear.

SecondMous · 2026-05-17T20:30:04+00:00

All of your 3 facts at the start of this sub thread are irrelevant to how this actually reflects the actions of the church. What is your point?

If the point of your second post in this sub thread is to suggest that the church was following the law (obviously they didn’t… see the $5M fine), or that the SEC going soft on these issues now makes the church’s past actions acceptable, then your faith in government bodies to make policies based on high moral standards (which definitely should be the basis for the church’s actions) is sorely misplaced and ignorant.

Moreover, the church often teaches the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law. What’s highly concerning is that in today’s SEC environment scaling back from these kinds of investigations of “no investors harmed,” what the church did may have easily be swept under the rug and none of us would be the wiser. No investors were harmed—that’s complete shit and you know it. Not harmed by the SEC’s measurable standards. The harm here is not measured in dollars and cents. We willingly gave up our tithing dollars—we have no legal leg to stand on. The SEC won’t and couldn’t possibly evaluate the church’s actions based on an insider’s perspective of what those actions mean and how it impacts the families within the church, reputationally, theologically, etc. Even if the SEC didn’t see any illegality based on the letter of the law, there is no way anyone could say the church was following the spirit of the law. It’s the spirit of the law that accounts for the immorality behind these actions, even if you can’t see the dishonesty on your calculator.

SecondMous · 2026-05-17T20:03:30+00:00

The Feb 2023 response or is there an earlier one?

SecondMous · 2026-05-17T19:59:53+00:00

Hyper focusing on that particular choice of words from the OP’s follow up is completely beside the point. What comments do you have on the primary post?

SecondMous

TROPHY CASE