Section 132 was recorded in 1843 and they were married in 1827. This is not a matter of interpretation. You’re just flat wrong.
By your logic, all sex in Christian marriages is rape. After all, they’re all taught the threats God made against fornicators, thus they’ve been groomed under duress into marriage.
You can go with that logic, and it’s not necessarily wrong. It just muddies what rape is into something meaningless.
You’re wrong, actually. Joseph and Emma Smith were married in 1844. You’re probably thinking of when he took her as a concubine.
No, all sex in Christianity doesn’t have God telling women who specifically they must marry and “cleave unto” (spread their legs) - only Mormons have such a vile religion.
Stop spreading misinformation. It’s very clear Mormons worship rapists - they supported the current rapist in the White House at a higher proportion than any other denomination. It’s just who they are.
Section 132 was recorded in 1843 and they were married in 1827. This is not a matter of interpretation. You’re just flat wrong.
By your logic, all sex in Christian marriages is rape. After all, they’re all taught the threats God made against fornicators, thus they’ve been groomed under duress into marriage.
You can go with that logic, and it’s not necessarily wrong. It just muddies what rape is into something meaningless.
You’re wrong, actually. Joseph and Emma Smith were married in 1844. You’re probably thinking of when he took her as a concubine.
No, all sex in Christianity doesn’t have God telling women who specifically they must marry and “cleave unto” (spread their legs) - only Mormons have such a vile religion.
Stop spreading misinformation. It’s very clear Mormons worship rapists - they supported the current rapist in the White House at a higher proportion than any other denomination. It’s just who they are.