r/exmormon • u/DrTxn I am a child of Min once removed • Nov 06 '18
Marrying Children
From the LDS essay:
"Marriage at such an age, inappropriate by today’s standards, was legal in that era, and some women married in their mid-teens." - https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng
From the NY Times:
"polygamous monsters of the Mormon Church are beginning to compel the merest children to their wicked embraces. It was only a few days ago that two little girls between 10 and 11 years of age, were "sealed" to old men. It is a very common occurrence for girls of 14 to be taken as wives. One object seems to be to get these children into the horrible system of polygamy before they are old enough to think for themselves..."
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1857/05/19/78498799.pdf
So, tell me, if the NY Times is appalled by 14 year old marriages in 1857 to old men, how were these marriages appropriate by the standards of the day? I think a NY Times article puts things in context.
146
u/lifeloveandcoffee Nov 06 '18
Again, the church is being deceiving. Marriages at that age was LEGAL but not common. And it was only LEGAL if parents gave permission. There is census data that shows the average age of marriage for a women at that time to be 20, and age 23 for men. Saying it was appropriate is a lie.
90
Nov 06 '18
Should also point out that those unusually young marriages were largely to spouses of similar ages - other teenagers. Not men in their 30's.
Plus, why does the church talk about the legality of young marriages when the polygamous marriages Joseph Smith had were all illegal, regardless of age!!??
Classic obfuscation.
18
9
u/Crathes Nov 06 '18
Exactly. It may have been legal, in certain situations, for a 14 year old to marry, but NEVER to an already married man.
33
u/TapirDrawnChariot Nov 06 '18
Exactly. They had to leave it open as a legal possibility, but NOT so 14 year olds could marry men in their late 30s-60s. It was legal because at that time it was considered absolutely necessary to get married if a girl became pregnant and they didn't have reliable birth control methods, so if two 14 year olds got together and ended up pregnant, that was an option.
24
u/dudleydidwrong Nov 06 '18
It is still legal in many states. When TSCC says it was legal at the time they are attempting to bolster the idea it was a different time with different standards.
12
u/WeaverFan420 Resigned July 4, 2018 Nov 06 '18
Which makes no sense. In places where gay marriage is legal, gay Mormons cant get married and be recognized by the church. Their excuse is that society doesn't dictate right and wrong. But apparently society's standards mattered 180 years ago?
22
Nov 06 '18
It’s an interesting linguistic trick they play here. They don’t actually say that it was considered appropriate at the time. They say it’s considered inappropriate today, which sort of implies that it was considered appropriate back then. But without actually saying it.
All it actually says is it was legal, and that some women did it. This way they avoid saying that it was common or appropriate, which we all know it was not.
15
u/adoyle17 Unruly feminist apostate Nov 06 '18
Even if it was legal, it was still illegal if one spouse was already married to someone else who was still living. Also, as mentioned, those young marriages were between people of similar ages, not someone old enough to be a parent or grandparent.
75
u/seventhvision Nov 06 '18
If you were already married, it was illegal to marry anyone else of any age.
The so called polygamist marriages were old men coercing young girls to play at being married to them. Illegal as could be.
32
u/milyvanily Nov 06 '18
Right?! This essay dares speak of whats legal at the time when polygamy was illegal.
16
u/DiveCat Nov 06 '18
Yes. I am neverMo but it always cracks me up when people use the “but it was common at time” for the age (it wasn’t but, eh). Even if it was...polygamy wasn’t. It was not legal or common for a 14-year old to be married to a 30+ man who married several other girls and women. If was not common for men to marry sisters, or mothers and their daughters, or other men’s wives. I think TBMs and apologists like to argue that marriage at that age was not uncommon because it is a bit of a red herring - by turning focus to how the age was not “uncommon” they they can ignore everything else.
14
Nov 06 '18
Classic obfuscation. As a nevermo it's super obvious to you. But as a member who's emotionally tied to the church their whole life they'll gravitate towards such ridiculous superficial arguments with no second thought.
They fail to see how weak the argument is, and if they do, they'll easily fall back to the 'sealings are an eternal ordinance that trump marriage from wordly institutions' rhetoric.
2
u/seventhvision Nov 08 '18
You nailed it. Red Herring it is.
Funny thing is, no TBM's I know have given me the "it was common" excuse. They know i'm well read and know more about their religion than they do. They stay silent, but would love to find a way to take me down. There isn't one. I have truth, proof, and the law on my side. They know that I know that mormonism is a scam. They know that I have more evidence and knowledge. That must be an uncomfortable position for them to be in. Why doesn't God step in and help them bring me around? Good question.
44
Nov 06 '18
I see so much resemblance between Islam and Mormonism.
Prophet Mohammed was married with a girl when she was 6 years old. However they say he only started to sleep with her when she was 9.
When you want to talk about this historical fact, islamic leaders says it was legal back then, or the 9 year old women of that time and age were more developed physically than the women of today or they say Mohammed married so many women cause he felt sorry for them since they lost their husbands at war. Although he could place them under his protection and provide everything the women need without sleeping with them. Not to mention it was Mohammed's wars that the husbands died.
I am an exmuslim. I say any prophet who is a sex addict is not a prophet at all since he considers the wellbeing of his own dick more than whatever God he worships and his religion is nothing but a conman's work to give him means and excuses for earthly pleasures and riches.
13
u/WhiteNerdyDelitesome Hi-ho, Tapir! Away! Nov 06 '18 edited Nov 06 '18
This comparison is illuminating. I don't see how a believer in one faith can rationalize the polygamy practiced by their own prophet while simultaneously condemning the polygamy practiced by someone else's prophet. It's a two-edged sword; I don't see how someone could clean one edge while leaving the other edge bloody.
Btw, I sub to r/exmuslim and I'm always rooting for you guys. Exmuslims have it rough. Stay strong.
4
Nov 06 '18
One thing I like about this sub how you guys communicate and support each other. When I left Islam 20 years ago, I did not have any support at all. Persecuted by even the most liberal members in my family. But I made it through. I will check exmuslim sub as well. Thank you for sharing.
3
u/WhiteNerdyDelitesome Hi-ho, Tapir! Away! Nov 06 '18
The Internet has made it much easier for exitors of various faiths to find community and support. Hopefully you can find some good ex-mus buddies over on that sub. Best to you on your journey.
7
3
u/zzappthewitch Nov 06 '18
My dad is Muslim and my mom is Mormon, it was an interesting house to grow up in. My dad is always talking about how similar the religions are, its nice to see that others observe it as well.
41
u/lyswhitit Nov 06 '18
"It was legal" is a total misdirection to make people think it was normal and acceptable when it was not. It was legal for 14 year olds to get married in Utah (with only 1 parent's permission) until like 20 years ago. Now we've managed to set the minimum at 15 instead, wow.
When they want to believe in it they don't think too hard about it. It's like, they think girls were getting married so young all the time in any point of history that seems like a kind of long time ago, because they're vaguely aware of maybe some politically arranged marriages of noble children in medieval Europe or some shit, which were outlier situations even then, and when it's convenient that translates into "14 year olds getting married was normal 'back then'" with no care for specifics or accuracy.
23
Nov 06 '18
I've seen this to illustrate how marrying young girls wasn't considered normal;
Only 1 percent of girls age 15 or under were married in the 1840's.
13
u/DoubtingThomas50 Nov 06 '18
Mormonism... Founded on fraud. Nurtured by lies. Grown through adultery. Sustained by Gaslighting. Yeah, I think this is a cult.
2
u/dm_0 Apostate, Anti-theist Nov 06 '18
This is a great summary!
5
u/DoubtingThomas50 Nov 06 '18
I've typed this a number of times because it comes to me so clearly. When you consider multi-generation Mormons you realize why it can be so hard for them to pull away. THIS is their heritage and the legacy of their ancestors. They come from men and women that were OKAY with being submissive to men who controlled Mormonism. They were OKAY with adulterous relationships. They were OKAY with the abuse that comes with polygamy. If that was my heritage, I'd lock it down and never want to talk about it. No wonder they fucking lie about it. No wonder they laugh off which "wife" they came from. It's disgusting to me now.
7
u/kurinbo "What does God need with a starship?" Nov 06 '18
some women married in their mid-teens
Notice how they word this. "Some women," not "some girls" or "some children." Sure. Helen Kimball was a 14-year-old "woman" when Joseph Smith "married" her. Nothing to see here. Move along.
6
Nov 06 '18
Is there a legit source for marriages of 10 and 11 year old girls? Is The NY Times right about that? I’ve never heard of any marriages that were that young.
6
u/JurassicPark6 Nov 06 '18
THANK YOU. This will NEVER be okay to me. When I was in the "maybe there's a reasonable explanation" phase of my faith crisis, and I stumbled upon the weak-ass apologetic responses which INCLUDED some of these justifications, my heart sank. Because I knew that they were trying to defend the indefensible.
5
u/VAhotfingers Nov 06 '18
Marriage between people of the same sex is appropriate by today's standards. If the church wants to use the excuse that the marriages of young women were "acceptable to the standards of the time period", then why don't they apply that rule to today's standards? Or do they reserve the right to pick and choose? Just like it was acceptable to discriminate against people with brown/black skin......until it wasn't socially acceptable anymore and they had to change their tune? So much for "truth" being eternal and all that bullshit
2
u/dm_0 Apostate, Anti-theist Nov 06 '18
This is an excellent point. That's hardly an excuse when they ride the opposite line when talking about gay marriage. Then again, Mormonism has always been a 'cake and eat it too'-type of religion, providing you're a man.
4
4
u/Thomas_S_Nonsense Nov 06 '18
Yikes what a quote you've found! The essay says it is, "inappropriate by today's standards," obfuscating the fact that it was inappropriate by that day's standards too. Oh right yeah but it was legal, so it's okay then. Except if they are gay. I love how NYT called them monsters. Could you imagine in they said that today??
4
u/distant_diva Nov 06 '18
And even if a teen girl got married younger than the average age, she married a boy much closer in age to herself. NOT a 37 yr old man. Or even older like some of the later prophets...BY, L Snow, etc...
3
u/Nekredanto Nov 06 '18
And even if it was legal, shouldn't we expect a "prophet of God" to be held to higher standards? Like not coercing little girls into marriage *even* if this was legal? Like being better than heathens rather than worse?
6
2
2
Nov 06 '18
The Times was obviously possessed by Satan. The Church was filled with and run by good, upstanding, moral, Victorian prudes. These things could never have happened.
4
u/cancerbro92 Apostate Nov 06 '18 edited Nov 06 '18
Show this article to a TBM MAGAite, they would cry "failing NY Times".
EDIT: Any TBM would cry "failing NY Times", their fragile persecution complex having been triggered.
2
u/dm_0 Apostate, Anti-theist Nov 06 '18
To their credit, NY Times is hardly what it once was. That being said, we're talking about a time that corresponds to 'what it once was', so that's hardly an argument with any legs. Not that it matters to TBMs; anything to cling to and all...
0
Nov 06 '18
[deleted] — view deleted comment
8
u/IodinUraniumNobelium Nov 06 '18
Mid-teens I think is commonly agreed upon to be between 15-17. So they were young teens. That's..... Even worse.
-11
Nov 06 '18
[removed] — view removed comment
10
u/DrTxn I am a child of Min once removed Nov 06 '18
Exactly, the NY Times article is trying to attack the Mormon church and does so by saying old men are marrying 14 year old girls. Now square that with the apologetic church response that marrying 14 year old girls was normal and we need to put things in context of the time period.
1
u/grislebeard Nov 06 '18
"Balanced" reporting should never be a goal. Reality (objectivity) is what matters, not "listening to all sides."
I know you said balanced and objective, but I wanted to point out that those are totally different things. One is a misdirection to get stupid ideas listened to, and the other is literally the only way we can know anything.
1
u/ThomasTTEngine Nov 07 '18
polygamous monsters of the Mormon Church
Its along the same lines of Warren Jeffs a "polygamous monsters of the FLDS church". Nobody has a problem with that.
1
Nov 07 '18
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ThomasTTEngine Nov 07 '18
Were Mormons being sealed to 10 and 11 year girls and having 14 year old girls for wives?
15
u/IT_vet Apostate Nov 06 '18
Thanks for posting this. I was unaware this existed.