Polygamy was no Mormon harem, but it tore at marriages and hearts

(To see Cal Grondahl’s cartoon that goes with this post, click here) I spent some time re-reading the late Richard S. Van Wagoner’s excellent book, “Mormon Polygamy: A History.” The 19th century tales of harems and never-ending teenage-girl hunting were, of course, lies to excite Eastern U.S. readers. Polygamy was a contradictory doctrine, and extremely dysfunctional. Brigham Young once said that he wished it wasn’t a doctrine, but later also raged that those who disbelieved in polygamy — and even monogomous LDS men — were in danger of damnation. And polygamy led to divorce among LDS elite leaders in numbers that would shock today. According to Van Wagoner, more than 50 marriages of LDS leaders ended in divorce in the mid 19th century.

Indeed, two early wives of LDS apostle brothers, Orson and Parley Pratt, gave their husbands the heave-ho for their enthusiastic embrace of polygamy, and penchant for young, teenage brides. And not every faithful LDS elder with a feisty wife was brave enough to try polygamy. Van Wagoner recounts the tale of one husband who abandoned plans to take a plural wife after his wife informed him that she had received a revelation from God directing her to shoot any spare wife who darkened the family doorstep.

As Van Wagoner writes, though, there was a somber paradox to polygamy, particularly for faithful LDS women who reluctantly embraced the doctrine as a commandment of God yet suffered personal heartache and financial pain due to their husband’s extracurricular wives. Emmeline B. Wells, early Mormon women’s leader and feminist, wrote publicly that polygamy “gives women the highest opportunities for self-development, exercise of judgment, and arouses latent faculties, making them truly cultivated in the actual realities of life, more independent in thought and mind, noble and unselfish.” In her private journal, though, Wells despaired of how polygamy had robbed her of the love of her husband, Daniel H. Wells, member of the church’s first presidency.

Emmeline wrote, “O, if my husband could only love me even a little and not seem to be perfectly indifferent to any sensation of that kind. He cannot know the cravings of my nature; he is surrounded with love on every side, and I am cast out.”

“He is surrounded with love on every side, and I am cast out,” is an appropriate indictment of polygamy, and no doubt a reason that it has long been discarded by the LDS Church.

As Van Wagoner recalls, another LDS women leader, physician Dr. Martha Hughes Cannon, the first female state senator in the U.S., yearned in her personal letters for one husband who would be hers only to cherish. Despite these yearnings, she clung to her LDS faith in “the Principle.” Martha wrote her husband, Angus, that only her divine knowledge of the sacred principle of plural marriage made it bearable to endure. Nevertheless, Martha also wrote this scolding to Angus: “How do you think I feel when I meet you driving another plural wife about in a glittering carriage in broad day light? (I) am entirely out of money …”

For Emmeline Wells, there was a sort of happy ending that was denied many others. As Van Wagoner recounts, in his final years, her frail and aging husband, Daniel, seeking tender care and companionship, returned to Emmeline’s home and side, after mostly ignoring her for 40 years. In her eyes, that probably counted as a blessing due after decades of suffering.

Despite lurid tales and even the teenage bride races, sex was a distant reason for polygamy. It was the result of an odd doctrine, now mostly forgotten in the LDS Church, that taught that the more wives and children one accumulated on earth would increase one’s post-life eternal influence and kingdoms. Yet, one will rarely hear that explanation today.

Many men died. In fact, especially years past men tended to die prematurely more often and on average were outlived by their wives considerably...What some make into a sexual agenda today, was nothing more than a way of dealing with women without men, children without fathers in a time before big government and social programs. [Red6, post #17]

...men died more frequently and at a younger age, many women were left fending for themselves in a patriarchal society, not always stable and secure, where family and agriculture was the means to survival. During times like the hundred year war, you literally had entire generations of men wiped out, there were no “social systems” that provided either for the woman nor their children. The childless or one child family that today has become common in Western society is in reality an ingredient for social self destruction even today, but back in those days the relationship was direct and not removed by a larger government bureaucracy and institutions/systems that obfuscates the fact that you can't eat money and it's your kids that feed you in old age, even today. [Red6, post #40]

It depends. I know that following the Civil War there were a lot more females around then males. It was not uncommon for a guy to have a wife and a couple of more ladies around the place who were known as "cousins". It was better then working in a brothal and less uncertain then becoming a mail order bride. Out West where the problem was not enough women you had the situation the other way around. [Harmless Teddy Bear, post #60]

Above you have the following arguments made:
#1 Red6 claiming that polygamy – including Utah polygamy in the 19th century – was a form of grassroots welfare due to men dying earlier than women.
#2 Harmless Teddy Bear bringing up the reality that there was an extreme shortage of males in the 1860s & decades following due to the Civil War...

Harmless Teddy Bear, while that was true in parts of the U.S., that was NOT the issue for Utah Territory in the 1860s and beyond because of the reality of lots of Mormon converts coming to the U.S. from Europe. (Therefore, what you said about the West due to mining and logging towns cropping up applied within Utah as well)

I think a lot of contemporary Mormons plus their allies (like Red6) assume that there was some glut of widowed women and that therefore, men just had to “step up” and “marry” them as a “plural wife.”

According to the Changing World of Mormonism, pp. 224-225: [LDS} "Apostle” John A. Widtsoe, who was born during the polygamy years (early 1870s) stated:

’We do not understand why the Lord commanded the practice of plural marriage.’ (Evidences and Reconciliations, 1960, p.393). One of the most popular explanations is that the church practiced polygamy because there was a surplus of women. The truth is, however, that there were less women than men. Apostle Widtsoe admitted that there was no surplus of women”: 'The implied assumption in this theory, that there have been more female than male members in the Church, is not supported by existing evidence. On the contrary, there seems always to have been more males than females in the Church.’.. The United States census records from 1850 to 1940, and all available Church records, uniformly show a preponderance of males in Utah, and in the Church. Indeed, the excess in Utah has usually been larger than for the whole United States, ... there was no surplus of women'” (Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations, 1960, pp.390-92," as cited in Changing World, pp. 224-225).

Red6, why don't you just be consistent in your badly-done social revisionism by going to the US Census Records, Lds church records, and books written by Lds “apostles” and alter them...just so that you can be right in your half-brain-cocked theories you're trying to superimpose upon 19th century Utah!

And please, I encourage you to stop mentioning you're a Southern Baptist! (You're starting to embarrass other Southern Baptists!)

It was common as far back as the biblical days where men would have other women bear them children (a son) if their own wife was barren, you might want to read about Ishmael and Isaac. In fact, during biblical times, it was the WIFE that would arrange this!

During "biblical times" "where men would have other women bear them children...if their own wife was barren," how many such "barren" women or initially supposed women are we talking about?
* Sarai/Sarah -- who turned out to be not so barren, after all;
* and Rachel, who also turned out to be not so barren, after all.

Do you think that God, who knew both women were not infertile, sanctioned that behavior?
Yes? No?
Will you actually answer this Q?
Am I leaving out other "barren" or supposedly initially perceived "barren" women "during biblical times" that you're talking about?
What specific women am I missing here?
And do you realize that in Rachel's case, we're talking about her arrangement for Jacob to sleep with her servant was due to a competitive rivalry due to Leah becoming pregnant?
And do you also realize that the very nature of that specific polygamous "family" was jumpstarted due to outright deception by Jacob's father-in-law?
Are you really going to continue to infer that the root foundation of biblical polygamy-- in that particular case being rooted in deception-- is something that was therefore socially viable?

You mention Ishmael. Was Sarai/Sarah taking things into their own hands showing trust that God would ensure that she remained infertile? Yes? And if people are showing lack of trust in God, are you claiming that is an institution that is somehow socially viable? Yes? No?

Furthermore, the "it" you reference here in your response to Vladimir998 is polygamy. Here you're even falsely assuming that the Abram/Abraham/Hagar & resulting son Ishmael arrangement was done in the context of a polygamous family.

If you're indeed a Southern Baptist, have you actually sorted thru the Biblical verses on this? Yes? In detail?

Let's review your off-base assumptions.

(1) God never told Abraham to sleep with Hagar for a night. The Angel of the Lord--whom most commentators think is the pre-incarnated Son of God, told Hagar post sleepover to return to her mistress (master Sarai) and to submit to mistress Sarai. (He never said to return to "your husband, Abram"...see Genesis 16)

So. Was Abram a polygamist? No.

Q. Why not?
A. Concubines were not considered "wives." And the only one who ever references Hagar as a "wife" is Sarai/Sarah. (But we never know if Abram slept with Hagar even more than once).

Q. Who continues to deem Hagar a servant/slave after sleeping with Abram?
A. …Abram,
…Sarai,
…the Angel of the Lord (who some say is the pre-incarnated Son of God),
…Moses (Gen. 25),
…even the apostle Paul (Gal. 4:21-31),
…and Hagar herself.

Sarai labels Hagar as a gift as a "wife" to Abram, but I question if a woman has the authority to "consent" on behalf of a slave.
Hagar was considered a slave both "before" and "after" sleeping with Abram. Why does the "before" matter? Just as a minor cannot "consent" to sex, a slave is in no better situation to "consent" to--or deny--her master's commands for sex. And in this case, the command didn't come from her husband, Abram; it came from her mistress (female word for "master"), Sarai (Sarai is twice referenced as "mistress"--Gen. 16:4,8).

Why does the "after" matter?

Because it shows she didn't become a "transformed" person--from slave to wifely status! Gen. 16:6,8,9; 21:11; 25:12; and Gal. 4:21-31 all are still referencing her as either a "slave" (twice in 21:11), "servant," or one who was told by the Angel to submit to her mistress (female word for "master"). By Gen. 25, Abraham is married to Keturah with no mention of Hagar (25:1) and is then buried with Sarah (25:10).

So, to summarize: If we were to call all the key witnesses to the stand, and hear what they have to say:

Q Hagar, after Sarai gave you to Abram and Ishmael was conceived, did you still acknowledge Sarai as your "mistress" in your conversation with the Angel of the Lord? [female master]
A Yes. (Gen. 16:8)

Q Sarai, when you were in your early nineties when Isaac was a toddler, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Abraham, Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son, Isaac. (Gen. 21:10)

Q Abraham, after Sarah gave you Hagar and you slept with her, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Sarah, as mistress (master) of her servant, Your servant is in your hands. Do with her whatever you think best. (Gen. 16:6)

Q When Sarah began to mistreat her servant, Hagar, did you intervene like what we might expect a husband to do?
A No. Hagar was Sarah's servant.

Q Angel of the Lord, when you called to Hagar after she conceived Ishmael, how did you reference her?
A Servant of Sarai (Gen. 16:8)

Q And when you conversed with Hagar, did you, Angel of the Lord, acknowledge that she was released from her servant role to Sarai?
A No. In fact, I told her Go back to your mistress and submit to her. (Gen. 16:9)

Q Moses, since you wrote Genesis, how did you identify Hagar in her last reference of that book? Did you link her to Abraham?
A No. I identified her as "Sarah's maidservant" (Gen. 25:12).

Q So in that same passage, you link Ishmael to Abraham, but you link Hagar only to Sarah?
A Yes.

Q Apostle, Paul How did the Holy Spirit lead you to interpret the Old Covenant as expressed through Abraham?
A For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise. These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother...Now you brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? 'Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son.' Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. (Gal. 4:21-31)

Utah is...one of the more socially conservative states in the Union. They vote red...It’s one of the few states left that has their affairs in order and isn’t tanking because of gross mismanagement and corruption. What’s your point? Do you want them to be more like California? Delaware? Maryland? New York? Illinois?

Red6, please let us know which of the ensuing sociological data doesn't fall in under your failed to check-under-the-Utah-hood of "affairs in order...and corruption." (Your fly-by-night approach to vetting sociological data is very embarrassing.)

#1 Utah's White-Collar crime reputation: (The second note below shows this problem is endemic & specific to the Mormon church):
* ”Frustrated by the wave of fraud that by one estimate took $750 million out of Utahns' pocketbooks last year, regulators, law enforcement officials and attorneys are organizing a free 'Fraud College' next month in Utah County for the public to call attention to the problem and to try to combat it.” Source headline: Preying on the faithful: Though Mormons often victims, LDS Church skips fraud-prevention event [Click on first link above for linkage to actual article]
* Lds members have fleeced over $1.4 billion from fellow Mormons the past few years alone! Guess what? They initially didn't regret "doing business" with them, either!!! Source headline: Mormons Now Losing Billions to Affinity Fraud [Click on first link above for linkage to actual article]
* This isn't new...Utah has long been host to the most per-capita fraud in America: Salt Lake City, with a mere 170,000 residents, is by far the country’s smallest city where the scam-fighting U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission has an office. It has been there since the early 1950s. Why? “There is a lot of fraud here per capita,” says local SEC boss Kenneth Israel. “There doesn’t seem to be any shortage of work for us.” [Source url: http://www.lds-mormon.com/6303056a.shtml ]
* Utah was #1 in mortgage fraud in America by 2001 when the FBI listed Utah as No. 1 in the country for the amount of mortgage fraud cases reported. [Source url: http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600151169,00.html ]

#2 Depression & Suicide

Next, you can go to this post I did several months ago, you can see all the original sources for what is below: Sociology of Utah

I provided links to first two headlines below...plus several others [wherever you see "source headline"]:
* Two Studies Find Depression Widespread in Utah
* Utah leads the nation in rates of depression
* And referenced where Utah has the most anti-depressant use, especially in women: Study Finds Utah Leads Nation in Antidepressant Use. Some point to the pressures of Mormonism, especially for women, to explain the surprising findings. [Source urls:
* http://www.usu.edu/psycho101/lectures/chp2methods/study.html
* http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/06/03/eveningnews/main510918.shtml ]

Other related depression and suicide Utah anecdotes:
* ”Utah, which a 2007 report said had the country's highest rate of nonmedical painkiller abuse.” Source headline: Utah has new prescription for painkiller problem [Original link...click on first link above for linkage to actual article]
* Utah leads the nation in suicides among men aged 15 to 24: As of 5 years ago: Utah leads the nation in suicides among men aged 15 to 24...Utah also has the 11th highest suicide rate — 14.3 deaths per 100,000 people — in the nation over all age groups, according to the most recent data from the American Association of Suicidology.” Source headline: Deadly taboo: Youth suicide an epidemic that many in Utah prefer to ignore [Original link -- click on first link above for linkage to actual article]
* ”Utah has the country's highest suicide rate for males between the ages of 14 and 25. That grim statistic is given a name and a troubled family in Carol Lynn Pearson's impassioned ‘Facing East,’ now at the International City Theatre in Long Beach. Source url: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2285528/posts
* ”For more than 10 years, 15- to 34-year-old males in Utah have had suicide rates markedly higher than those seen nationally. In fact, in the early to mid-1990s, suicide was the number one cause of death among 25- to 44-year-old men in the state and the second-leading cause of death among men aged 15 to 24. Source url: http://www.adherents.com/largecom/lds_LowSuicideRate.html

Now, this article actually says being active Lds "helps" in comparing rates. But this and another study I saw actually says when you compare the suicide rates for active Lds, inactive or less-active Lds, and non-Lds, the middle category is by far the highest:

In addition, per this article –the risk of suicide among males aged 15 to 19 was three times higher among the less active church members than among their active peers, but the rate among the active youth was comparable to the national suicide rate.

So...this article not only says suicide risk is 3x higher among less active Lds than active Lds (among 15-19 yo), but that the suicide rate for active Lds 15-19 yo is no different than the national suicide rate!!!

My point: Mormonism is no barrier to the suicide rate for teens, and in fact, jeopardizes more teens (the less active ones)!

What else about Utah is distinctive sociologically?

#3 Utah's sexual violence: broader Utah, of which 60% are Lds.
Sexual misconduct pervasive problem among teachers (KSL.com, Oct. 25, 2009)

Quote from this KSL article: SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- State education officials say sexual misconduct by teachers is the No. 1 reason Utah educators are forced to surrender their licenses. Records shows Utah has nearly 20,000 licensed educators. Since 1992, the State Board of Education has suspended or revoked 313 teacher licenses -- 208 of them for sexual misconduct. That number excludes 10 cases still being investigated by the Utah Professional Practices Advisory Commission. The behaviors range from inappropriate touching and downloading pornography on a school computer to full-blown molestation...In 2005, a survey by The Associated Press ranked Utah 16th in the nation for teacher sex offenses based on disciplinary records from 2001 to 2005 in 50 states and the District of Columbia. At that time, 52.7 percent of Utah teachers who lost their licenses surrendered them for sexual misconduct -- twice the national rate, the AP found.
Sexual misconduct persistent in Utah schools (Oct. 25, 2009)
Utah's sexual assault rate outpaces U.S. average (April 6, 2010)

Utah Sexual assault realities:

* Less than a month ago, KSL reported that there's a reported rape in Utah less than 9.5 hours apart (see http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=14136899)-- that's up just from 2008 when it was just under a rape per 10 hours...http://publicsafety.utah.gov/bci/documents/CIU%202008%20book%200810.pdf, p. 6

* Per the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification (see also Utah Department of Health), the 2008 Utah rape rate was 63.7 per 100,000 females vs. U.S. average of 57.4. For entire crime report, see: http://publicsafety.utah.gov/bci/documents/CIU%202008%20book%200810.pdf

* BTW, 2008 wasn't some “new surge”: Since 1991, Utah’s rape rate has consistently inched higher than the national rate. By 2002, Utah ranked 14th in the nation for rapes. [Source url: http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600125585,00.html] -- and inched to 13th by 2004...http://www.utahfoundation.org/reports/?page_id=290)

* Why has Utah as of the years since 2000, consistently has ranked between 13 & 18 re: rape rate?

* Why as of 4 years ago, was Utah #8 in the nation for its sex offender rate per Nation Master.com?

Of course, we could take the approach that...
...Surely 60% of the population that is "nice and friendly" would actually ensure that 40% of the population would not place them in the upper rankings for rape & sex abuse, right?...
...And therefore NONE of this has anything to do with any specific Utah environmental factors, right?...
...Hence, let's just sweep this all under the image rug, shall we?...
...After all, it doesn't make for good religious PR or marketing, does it?...

#4 Domestic violence:
The U.S. Department of Justice reported (Fall 2001) ”that national domestic violence rates decreased 41 percent since 1993. But Utah officials reported a 31 percent increase in state domestic violence between 1997 and 2000. With those climbing numbers, Utah in 2001 had the second highest domestic violence rate in the nation.” Source url: http://byumedia.com/story.cfm/34616

Polygamy is a big nasty stain on Mormonism.

Especially when you realize its initial motivation.

What a lot of people don't realize is that Joseph Smith came out with the first published Book of Mormon in 1830. In there, several passages exist (including the Book of Jacob) where polygamy is spoken of very negatively -- even being labeled an "abomination."

A few summers ago, Lds apologists were meeting and one presenter admitted that polygamy as a Mormon institution began in 1831. 1831! Only one year after the Book of Mormon had denounced polygamy repeatedly!

Why the abrupt u-turn?

Because a 16 yo neighbor girl -- Smith's first polygamous lover -- named Fanny Alger had begun living in the Smith household as a sort of "maid" to earn her keep.

Joseph Smith only lived for 13 more years. And by the time we get to the 1841-1844 years, we have in rapid succession...
* Both Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum openly denying -- and in print -- that polygamy was being practiced in Nauvoo, IL...
* By 1842, Smith is adding a "wife" on about an average of every month. Every month! (How did he have the time to court a woman, let alone add her to the wife roster, run a church, be a city mayor, and attend to previous added wives?)
* Not only was he adding a wife on the average of every month over a two-year period in the 1840s, but almost half of them in a given time period (11) were still married to their husbands! [Some of these husbands just happened to have been shipped out as "missionaries"...and btw, many other women & their husbands rejected Smith's untoward advances for similar arrangements...Orson Pratt and his wife, for example. Heber C. Kimball and his wife as another example. Instead Heber gave Smith his 14-year-old daughter!

You can't get more willingly blind Mormons that those who refuse to look at this track record of Smith! They've essentially told the world, go ahead and poke out my spiritual eyes!

There are times in a society when polygamy or polyandry are necessary for survival...

Like when?

Let's take the sociological example you provided on another post: The Civil War's ensuing years...mid 1860s onto the rest of the 19th century.

Here, we lost more men in that war than ALL other American wars put together.

You would think that of all the sociological reasons that could undergird polygamy, this would be it, right?

But did America -- aside from Mormons -- rush into polygamy in the mid-1860s through the 1890s?

Nope!

Why not?

#1 Recognize that a LOT of the men who died in the Civil War (not sure of %) -- were single or already divorced. In fact, a LOT of teens -- including 15, 16 and 17 yo -- were among the "men."

#2 Sheer sociological replacement of "marriageable men": The males born in the 1840s, 1850s, and 1860s -- of whom there was no shortage -- became of marriageable age in the 1860s, 1870s, and 1880s!

But what about widows in their upper 20s and beyond, you say? What about them?

Some remarried simply because 19th century medicine being what it was, things that could be readily cured -- or readily dealt with -- like even childbirth -- resulted in many women dying young. These men would take a second wife.

#3 The grassroots American culture was dead-set vs. polygamy!

How do we know this?

When Utah became a state in the mid-1890s, it elected as one of their initial congressman a Democrat by the name of B.H. Roberts.

America found out that Roberts was a polygamist. Was especially infuriated America is that Roberts, who became a General Authority in the Lds church, assumed his third wife around 1893 or 94...several years after the so-called "Manifesto" that was meant to ditch polygamy. How could Mormonism, which secretly solemnized at least 260 or so additional plural marriages 'tween the years of 1890-1910, be so publicly two-faced?

Well, that's been the nature of deceptive Mormon leaders from the get-go!

Well, what was the reaction to Roberts being elected in the pre-media days of 1898 America?

America's grassroots, which was committed to upholding the Republican roots of ridding itself of the "twin relics of barbarism" (slavery and polygamy)...the GOP's rally cry of 1856...put together 28 banners that included 7 million signatures. These 28 banners were delivered to Congress in 1898...asking Congress to NOT seat B.H. Roberts as the Congressman from Utah.

Sure enough, Congress sent Roberts back home!

You would think that the culture that saw so many widows from the 1860s, 1870s, 1880s and 1890s might be more sympathetic to polygamy, right? Wrong!

Do you know what they did with Smith, after they murdered him?

Do you realize that prisoner Smith had two loaded weapons smuggled into him earlier on the day he died?

If you heard about a prisoner today who was shot while shooting off two loaded weapons, what would your conclusion be? That others "murdered" him?

Indeed, we know members of that mob were out to murder Smith. [One of Smith's jailmates survived with no wounds, so we know not all were under such direct targeting] But we don't know all the reasons why Smith's jailguards gave the mob such access.

If you were a less-than-professional jail guard in those times (1844), and you knew your prisoner had loaded weapons, would you try to take those weapons away yourself -- or would you let an angry mob who had other issues with somebody in that room take care of it for you?

My main point here is that it wasn't your average "murder." It was a shoot-out. And in this way, it's a microcosm of the way so-called "Mormon persecution" from the earlier 1830s years is also presented: one of the alleged times of "persecutions" in 1830s Missouri was also a series of shootouts between the Mormon Danites, known as the Avenging Angels, and Missouri residents.

Let me provide you with a parallel illustration:

In the territorial days of the West, duels and challenges to fastest-gun draws were common. I would say that in most cases, if the one who primarily provoked such a duel was shot, law enforcement didn't press charges vs. the shooter. In fact, even if the provocateur won the duel, if it was perceived as an equal-opportunity shoot-out, the one who survived "walked."

Such shoot-outs of the 19th century, if they were perceived as a "fair draw," were not perceived as you have framed it: Persecution.

What's ironic is that here you talk about others superimposing a "sexual harem" interpretation upon 19th century polygamy, yet you're doing the same thing with these shoot-outs in 1830s Missouri! These were open conflicts in which Mormons were also killing people in Missouri!

Let me provide you with one example:
(a): Note this first entry at: Setting the record straight on the 'Hawn's' Mill Massacre

In this article, it explains how the Mormons love to cite Jacob Haun (real name was spelled Jacob Hawn with a "w"), who was the owner of the Hawn's Mill. But Jacob Hawn was never a Mormon...(In that article, a historian discusses why Jacob and Harriet Hawn were never Mormons.

"I like many other historians mainly assumed they were Mormons." But among other proofs, Baugh explained that they arrived earlier to Caldwell County before the Mormons, and no family records report that they were Mormons. So the mill that was attacked wasn't even a Mormon mill, after all! [Rewrite the history books and all that Mormon propaganda!]
(b) From the above-linked article: With 17 Mormons killed and 14 Mormons injured, the historian explained that the massacre on October 30, 1838 was the "singular most tragic event in terms of loss of life and injury enacted by an anti-Mormon element against the Latter-day Saints in our entire church's history." Well, I would hope that historians would present history in a more balanced way. What's NOT mentioned in that article is that 12 days before this attack:
•On October 18, 1838, Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, Lyman Wight, D. W. Patten at the head of 40 men made a descent on Gallatin, the county seat of Daviess, and they burned the only store and stole their goods. Previous to the 25th of October a great part of the Mormons residing in Caldwell County had returned home with their dividend of plunder.
* 6 days before this attack: • On October 25, 1838, the Battle of Crooked River: Mormon forces attacked (unknowingly?) the Missouri state militia under the command of Samuel Bogart. This incident became one of the principal points of conflicts in 1838 Missouri. The battle resulted in the death of three militia and the LDS leader, David Patten. One of the militia was taken prisoner by the Mormons. Source: http://www.carm.org/religious-movements/mormonism/are-christians-persecuting-mormons

You can see how "lopsided" Mormon historians tend to present history!

...hung and burned alive

You know, I'm a descendent of a Mormon who was indeed harassed outside of Utah at one time -- just for being Mormon.

NOBODY is claiming that Mormons weren't harassed at times; that Mormons were not free from being murdered, being tarred with feathers, injury, and loss of homes. It all happened.

But, pray tell, which Mormons were hung? (Never heard of any by Lds historians wanting to play up such an example as "persecution.") "Burned alive." Who?

As poster Zakeet has ably pointed out on other threads, Lds killed more Gentiles than vice-versa.

As Mormons moved West, did they have 140 of them in a wagon-train put under siege for days on end, not letting children & their parents & injured & dying ones get access to water?
Did they have over 100 of them executed at point blank range? Their bodies stripped of all their clothing and left naked for animals to prey upon them?
Did they have 16-18 children -- a few of them bleeding profusely from wounds suffered as they were shot while in their parents' arms -- kidnapped for a few years?

Perhaps you need to read up on the Mountain Meadows Massacre of September, 1857. Just this week, only 154 years after the fact due to the reality that the Mormon church owns the property where these atrocities took place in Southern Utah, was it named as a "National Register" site. Way to go, Mormon church. It only took 154 years for that to happen!

When you consider what worldwide Christianity has suffered at the hands of outright persecutors, what's happened life-and-limb wise to Mormons is not even a drop in the bucket comparison-wise. Even where Mormons have suffered more -- loss of homes & properties -- is still not even a drop in the bucket compared to the history of historic Christianity.

What I would like to know is, who do the children of such unions end up marrying? One polygamous man siring so many children creates a population of half-siblings. Are they going to inbreed with each other or migrate to other communities for mates?

For the past almost 70 years, the most infamous communities for open polygamy (practiced by the fLDS) has been the twin communities of Colorado City and Hildale, located near the AZ-UT border...one community apiece on each side of the state line.

Per Wikipedia (see Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints): The Colorado City/Hildale area has the world's highest incidence of fumarase deficiency, an extremely rare genetic condition.[82] Geneticists attribute this to the prevalence of cousin marriage between descendants of two of the town's founders, Joseph Smith Jessop and John Yeates Barlow.[82][83][84][85] It causes encephalopathy, severe mental retardation, unusual facial features, brain malformation, and epileptic seizures.[86][87]

Footnotes 82-->87:
82.^ a b Szep, Jason (2007-06-14). "Polygamist community faces rare genetic disorder". Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0727298120070614. 83.^ Dougherty, John (2005-12-29). "Forbidden Fruit". Phoenix New Times. http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2005-12-29/news/forbidden-fruit/. 84.^ Hollenhorst, John (2006-02-08). "Birth defect is plaguing children in FLDS towns". Deseret Morning News. http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635182923,00.html.
85.^ "Doctor: Birth defects increase in inbred polygamy community". Daily Herald. 2006-02-09. http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/165069/.
86.^ Bayley JP, Launonen V, Tomlinson IP (2008). "The FH mutation database: an online database of fumarate hydratase mutations involved in the MCUL (HLRCC) tumor syndrome and congenital fumarase deficiency". BMC Med. Genet. 9 (1): 20. doi:10.1186/1471-2350-9-20. PMC 2322961. PMID 18366737. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2350/9/20.
87.^ Kerrigan JF, Aleck KA, Tarby TJ, Bird CR, Heidenreich RA (2000). "Fumaric aciduria: clinical and imaging features". Ann. Neurol. 47 (5): 583–8. doi:10.1002/1531-8249(200005)47:5<583::AID-ANA5>3.0.CO;2-Y. PMID 10805328.

Did any of them actual exact said revenge? Pretty interesting stuff.

- - - - - - - -
There are several accounts in journals that seem to connect violence against ‘gentiles’ (non-mormons) with the oath of vengeance.

Most historians (LDS and not) connect the Mountain Meadows Massacre with this oath of vengeance and that there were rumors that the Francher wagon train had people who were in the mob that killed Smith (that was not true). There is also evidence that Parley P Pratt, when he was killed was in the process of hunting down people thought to be in the mob.

Aside from MMM, there are also several other examples of violence and murder of non-mormons traveling through Utah that are believed to be (or were claimed to be) revenge as a result of this oath.

The MMM museum and library in California has several journals that have these accounts in them, as do other journals and books of the period.

There is also a connection to the LDS doctrine (at the time) of blood atonement, that apostates needed to have their throats slit in order to ‘save’ them.

Some books that cover this would be - “Blood of the Prophets” and “Devils Gate”. I can also give you the names of some of the private journals but they are not online at this time. Wife No 19 (the original not the new fiction book) by one of Young’s ex-wives also mentions it and can be found online. UTLM.org has several online books that discuss this and the accounts as well. All of those resources can be verified through inter-library loan.

And you are right, it is interesting.

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.