Eliza Roxcy Snow (Smith) Young - wife #15

 
Eliza Snow (January 21, 1804 - December 5, 1887) was one messed up lady. She was known as a poet from her early years so maybe we should say she was more of a trouble artist type. Some say she lived a life of celibacy, some say she was raped by persecutors of the Church, some say she had sex with both her husbands, some say she was pregnant at one point with Joseph Smith's child. However mysterious her sex life may be, her poetry and autobiographic writings reveal someone who needed some serious help. To put it mildly, she was dramatic as fuck and completely full of herself. I'm amazed anyone wanted to be around her.

Eliza seems to have had a taste for Primitive Church movements. She first joined Alexander Campbell's Christian primitivist movement and then the Mormons. She moved to Kirtland, where she stayed with Joseph and Emma, even after being given her own lot. She moved with the saints to Missouri and then Nauvoo, where Joseph gave her an appointment in the newly organized Relief Society and told her about plural marriage. She was disgusted by the idea for all of a couple of months, and then she married Joseph.

Joseph eventually invited Eliza to live with him and Emma in Nauvoo for what Eliza hoped would be a permanent stay. She took up teaching the Smith children.

Living conditions soon got out of hand. About six months in Emma found out that Eliza was a sister wife, freaked out (Eliza says she kept her cool), and sent her down a flight of stairs (some say with a broom, other say by her hair). Eliza's fall might have prematurely ended a pregnancy, either way, it ended her stay with the Smiths.

It still hurts like like before, doesn't it Emma? 
Maybe worse because Joe didn't learn the first time?
Maybe worse now that it's a self-righteous bitch your own age?

Eliza was a staunch and dishonest defender of polygamy. The same year she married Joseph she sent around a petition in Nauvoo collecting signatures from a thousand women denying Joseph's involvement in polygamy. Later that year she produced a Relief Society document denouncing the practice. 

When Joseph died Eliza stayed close to power; she married Brigham Young (yet another reason why Emma would have no interest in moving out to Utah). Eliza never had any children of her own but she raised or help raise many by other women. She fought for women's suffrage and refused to be powerless. Today she is one of the most celebrated women in the LDS Church.

Political "neutrality"

The LDS Church uses a special definition of political neutrality (i.e. not officially endorsing any political party or candidate) and claims to moral duty as a smoke screen to get involved in politics on an institutional level without ever gaining consensus from its general membership.

The LDS Church has, since its earliest of days, engaged directly in political issues. By the Church's own preferred version of the story, the establishment of the Church was a reaction to the politically contentious religious atmosphere of the early 1800s New England. Many of the early Church's problems with neighbors were a direct result of the tendency for Mormons to vote as a solid block. Joseph and Hyrum Smith's death was cause to introduce an oath of vengeance against the United State into the endowment ceremony. Brigham Young ran the state of Utah largely as a theocracy and today in Utah the state government continues to bend to the religious directive of the Church rather than to civic responsibility. The Church openly opposed desegregation. The Church organized its Relief Society against the Equal Rights Movement. The Church invested millions of dollars to oppose Proposition 8, tried to fight marriage equality in Hawaii, and continues to support opposition to marriage equality in Utah. How can the LDS Church claim political neutrality when it has been involved in these issues and thousands upon thousands of other actions taking place on all levels of politics, from neighborhood to city to county to state to federal to international?

Doesn't political neutrality mean you refrain from taking sides on a given issue? The LDS Church is obviously unable to simply let its members determine their political convictions on their own, opting instead to lead them out on the conservative war path. The Church's claim of neutrality is deceptive and wrong, but I can think of a way the Church could justifiably get involved in politics: hold a Church-wide vote involving all members wherever they may be in the world and gain unanimous support before taking action.

However, if the LDS Church took action only after a unanimous vote in favor, as is required for the establishment of official Church doctrine and proclamations, there would be no chance in hell that the Church would reach the consensus to mobilize in a single direction on a given issue. No wonder our leaders don't ask our opinion on political matters.

Thus vote the Brethren!

Remember how in all of LDS scripture God essentially taps a dude on the shoulder, tells him he's now a prophet, and sends him off to tell everyone else what it is he (God) wants? I'm not sure that process was the most efficient considering the prophet to non-prophet ratio and the tendency for huge portions of the population to be skeptical of what one man has to say, but I think that process would be much more convincing than what we have going on today. The Church leaders (our dear prophets, seers, and revelators) no longer do things Moses' way, or Isaiah's way, or Jesus' way, or Samuel the Lamanite's way, or Joseph Smith's way of wielding all decisive power and authority on a matter; now they sit around in board meetings and vote like businessmen. And nothing passes unless there is a unanimous vote in favor. It sounds a bit Catholic, but such is the business of revealing God's Will for us today. I'm just curious what happened to the traditional method of prophecy, in which men had much less say in what the message would be.