It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mormon Bombshell! Church Admits Founder Had 14 Year Old Bride!!!

page: 5
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: ausername

originally posted by: Hefficide

With this consensus I am left to ask, why then did the Church keep this secret for nearly 200 years?


It wasn't the age of the bride, it was the polygamy, and marrying already married women that they tried to keep secret.

Regardless, the Mormon church has much darker secrets than these, they will likely never see the light of day. They will do anything, ANYTHING to keep it that way.

imo

Are you Mormom? Have you ever been Mormom?

One thing I learned when I was Mormon is ----- non-members are "experts" on Mormonism.

There is so much wrong and twisted information on Mormons, it's extremely difficult to find legitimate facts.

Just like this OP story. It's not secret. I read about it in legitimate LDS material more then 20 years ago.




posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee


The Mormon church acknowledges in a new essay that founder Joseph Smith had a teenage bride and was married to other men's wives during the faith's early polygamous days, a recognition of an unflattering part of its roots that historians have chronicled for years.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints says most of Smith's wives were between 20 and 40 years old. One of them, however, was a 14-year-old girl who was the daughter of Smith's close friends.

The essay posted this week on the church's website marked the first time the Salt Lake City-based religion has officially acknowledged those facts, though it also has not denied them.


from the OP source

I maintain that if the facts are only known to insiders, then it would surely qualify as a secret. This being the first official acknowledgement implies something.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

just out of curiosity what was the age of consent when he was taking brides as applying modern law to ancient situations rarely goes well.... i mean was this not like the 1800ish times probaly 1850ish more accurately



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

1. I'm not Mormon, so let's get that straight.

2. Wow! I hope you've researched your own family tree before throwing the pedophile word out there and judging someone concerning age at marriage this far back. Things were viewed differently then. Things are viewed differently in rural America TODAY. People get married at ages that apparently will leave you gob-smacked.

Seriously.

Word up...my grandfather, who was 7 years my grandmother's senior and who married her when she was at the age of 14 and stayed married to her until the night he died in his sleep at 72....was NOT a pedophile. HE wasn't a Mormon either.

There's just really no way to express how ignorant that statement is. SOoooo many cultural norms you haven't taken into account.

P.S. This is NOT a bombshell. I think the whole damned thread needs to be marked HOAX.


edit on 10-27-2014 by Valhall because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

It was the 1820-1840 and as far as I can source, during that period the age of consent was 21, but parental consent could override that. I've found a lot of anecdote but no official codification for Utah during that period.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Valhall

You are ascerting that a 21 year old man being sexually involved with a 14 year old female is normal?

ETA: Using the phrase "possible pedophile" once in an OP is a qualifier for "throwing the term around"?


edit on 10/27/14 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

Back then child brides weren't that unusual. Families commonly "rid" themselves of daughters as soon as possible because they were an economic burden.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Valhall
a reply to: Hefficide

Things were viewed differently then. Things are viewed differently in rural America TODAY. People get married at ages that apparently will leave you gob-smacked.

***
There's just really no way to express how ignorant that statement is. SOoooo many cultural norms you haven't taken into account.




Pedophile is an adult who has sex with a child. There has been arranged marriages in History and there are still arranged marriages today in some parts of the World. Some are married even as a babies but live with their parents till they are in appropiate age. Marriage doesn´t mean instant sex.
What comes to Smith he was accused by law of having sex and adultery with a minor.. there is the difference.

Do not inhale a pea through your nose... its a discussion about Joseph Smith not your grandparents.

About maturity in those days 14 year old was still a child and propably were still playing with dolls. Nowadays girls mature earlier due the chemicals they use and get from food.
edit on 27-10-2014 by dollukka because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

Morons I have talked to seem to be well versed in the questionable aspects of their faith and more specifically their founders.

In the end, from what I gather, they know full well about the things we see from the outside in. I think its just like a Catholic who knows the discrepancies with Jesus, translation errors, the churches history and so on...

They just try to live a good life and their teachings allow for that. If you actually meet a Mormon outside of his preaching gig, he /she is going to be a very kind, polite and considerate person. In the end you have to just look at the real world effect of their religion.

I dont think many religions, or any for that matter will have a spotless beginning. Take Scientology for example. They are only now being accepted by mainstream society. In another couple hundred years they may not be as aggressive or secretive once their existence isnt threatened.

Mormons once threatened to start a civil war when they moved out west after being kicked out of NY. If it wasnt for a bad winter and some difficult mountains to pass an army over, they could have been wiped out by the US army. NOW?
That would be unheard of. What is the difference from then and now? I think its only that enough time has passed and they are now accepted as a legitimate faith.

Look at Christianity. In its first couple ages, it was a Mormon or Scientology type faith to most people of the ancient world.

All religions have shady commencements. Their founders are usually people who are very human and so do terrible things with so much power.

IMO, just look at the street level effect of a religion. Mormons seem to be good people on a whole. I think their weird religion does that for them. I may be wrong. I think that makes it valid.

They do need to stop with the underage marriages though. Thats weird and they need to work on that.


edit on 10 27 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

I completely agree! I have nothing against Mormons nor their religious beliefs. When I lived in California we had very good family friends who were Mormon and it never occurred to me to think of them as different.

This is not meant as a hit piece. I simply found an article about the founder of a religion that shocked me and wondered if others would be shocked as well. Joseph Smith was a man, flawed, just as we all are. My interest is less in that he had plural wives, even one well underage - but why the Church would be publically admitting to these things now after nearly two centuries of silence?

That is the part that intrigues me.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org... bit of info on the top seems the standard age for alot of western nations used to be or is currently 16-18 (age of consent is allegedly 16 in my state but not something im gonna test out mind you) and seems even today exceptions will be made with parental consent or whatnot. it also seems that alot of current nations continue the practice in Africa middle east and Asia but less commonly in Europe/north America (still 16 in Scotland with versions of cohabitation allowed at younger ages)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

Fair enough. I have actually seen you post for a while and wasnt saying that you made a hit piece here. It really is interesting that they would just admit it now.

They have been struggling with their founders history ever since that south park episode (of all things).

They had allot of younger Mormons losing faith since it was all hushed up before. Their response to the episode in question was to have kids watch it with their instructors and parents. It was generally really effective at getting handle on the whole situation and stop the surge of Mormon loss of faith from youths.

IMO, this is probably just an extension of that same approach but towards non Mormons with similar questions. They may have just needed time to form a way of explaining things to non Mormons as they did to young Mormons with questions about their faith.

Have a good one.
Hold it down.

edit on 10 27 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide

I maintain that if the facts are only known to insiders, then it would surely qualify as a secret. This being the first official acknowledgement implies something.



I read it on the Internet. Obviously it's not a secret.

As I've said, there is so much misinformation about Mormons, it's difficult to find legitimate facts.

There is factual information on the Internet. But, you have to know where. And/or you need previous knowledge to know if what you're reading is legitimate or not.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 06:01 PM
link   
No surprise there.

All organized religions are perverted in some way or another.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

I haven't asserted anything yet except that your statement was ignorant and your claim exaggerated. I have the feeling it's more based off your intolerance toward others (most likely those of religion or more specifically Mormonism) than toward anything else.

And, to the other ignorant poster, no, the word pedophile, as connected with pedophilia, does not apply simply because a person over a given age has sex with a person under a given age. cheeseandrice



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Valhall

Explain to me who using the words "possibly a pedophile" while describing a grown man who takes a fourteen year old bride is ignorant or exaggerated please.

Oh and responding on behalf of the "other ignorant poster" pedophiles are people of a certain age who have sex with others of a certain age. AGE is the qualifying factor in determining pedophilia.

As far as me being intolerant goes... You'll be hard pressed to back up that claim in any way, shape, or form. Go ahead and dig. Years of posting history - no bigotry. Be my guest.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Valhall



Oh and responding on behalf of the "other ignorant poster" pedophiles are people of a certain age who have sex with others of a certain age. AGE is the qualifying factor in determining pedophilia.




Criminy...no it's not! Are you really that ignorant? And you're going to BACK apply modern legal constraints to a person that hasn't been alive in a century and a half?

No, it's not real kosher to label a person a pedophile simply because they may have fallen in love with a person who was below a certain age at the same time they were above a certain age. Not even TODAY is that a fair practice to undertake. A pedophile is a person who is driven by a physical attraction toward children. Yes, in the modern legal constructs a child CAN be defined as anyone under the age of 18. However, there's a unending train load of men out there who have been labeled a "child molester" who are not, were not, and never will be pedophiles.

Sorry but you're way way wrong in your labeling on this.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Valhall

I would argue to the contrary and state that you are the one with the incorrect notion. Age is absolutely the qualifying factor in discussing pedophilia.

As the father of a 16 year old daughter - if she were to come home with a 21 year old man, it would not go well for him and I would absolutely assert that he were a pedophile.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide


I leave it in your worthy hands, ATS, to work out the quirks and kinks in the concepts here. I, myself, find no excuse for any grown man to marry a girl barely in her teens. To me it seems inexcusable.


It may have been the difference in time periods.

My grandmother was married when she was 14, and she was Roman Catholic.


edit on 27-10-2014 by jadedANDcynical because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
My aunt got married in 1951 and she was 15. So I got to ask, is there alot of difference?
This kind of thing was not as uncommon as you think.


Up until recently you could get married in Nebraska at the age of 14.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join