mormons, Can history defend Joseph Smiths act of treason when he destroyed a printing press in Nauvoo?

Question

was it an act of treason?
please defend Joseph Smith with you best thoughts and opinion

Answer 1

not treason

There has been long debate about it violating the first amendment.

Answer 2

It wasn't just Joseph Smith, it was the Nauvoo City Council. they wanted something done because they were deathly afraid that the Expositor was going to bring all the anti-Mormons to Nauvoo to do the mob scenes again. They were having a period of relative peace and the Expositor was going to bring the same violence that they had suffered before, and because of a pack of lies and half-truths.

The printing press was destroyed as a public nuisance, which was allowed to the City Councel under the Nauvoo City Charter.

I fail to see how it was treason, since they weren't doing anything that advocated the uprising of people against the US government. And indeed, no indictment was ever brought against Joseph Smith for treason. or for any other crime, which is why he was killed as he was, just finding the baby is a trick!

Answer 3

Well, all I can say is, that as long as most of you here are bashing my church and its founder, you are leaving someone else's religion alone! God Help you find something better to do with you time!
And as for treason/ Trying to protect members from obvious enemies is not treason!
Was the destruction of the tea in the Boston Harbor vandalism! Well, I guess that definition is up to you! Fighting for what you believe, sometimes takes drastic measures!

Answer 4

I will not say that what he did was not an act of treason... It more related to a criminal act... Joseph Smiths was not a traitor but a savior of the church and it people and history are not aways a fair judge of those things... But God is and I feel that his being judged should be left up to God and not the mind's of man-kind who's mind can be swayed by Satan very easily......... What it means to me me is that this crime was totally justifiable... why do I feel this way.. Well, part of Joseph Smiths Job description was to protect the Church and it followers.. And when you take on that responsibility then you must also protect them from themselves.. I ask you how drastically could the church and the unity that the church help create if certain people were able to maintain a greater access to that press.... No saving the Mormon Church was a greater act then that press destruction... To me freedom and peace of mind and compassion Stayed with those who's mind that could be swayed all to easily... I also feel that Joseph Smith decision was guided by stronger hands then mine... So how will Joseph Smith be judged by history is in God's hands where it belongs...A church divided is a church easily conquered by Satan... And his action prevented that.............................................................................................

Answer 5

It was an act of rage on the part of Smith. The Nauvoo Expositer had just printed it's first (and last) expose' that asserted Smith's liasons with married and teenage women, plus the similar actions of other "Gospel Leaders".

The public was outraged that a printing press had been destroyed by an individual (the one identifed as the 'moral culprit'), thus preempting one of the main reasons the recent America Revolution was fought for, and that was the origin of the 'treason' charge.

Dallin Oakes makes a 'brilliant' defense of Smith's action on the exmormon board, but as usual makes a complete donkey out of himself - and Smith.

Answer 6

There is no need to defend Joseph Smith for his action. He was acting in his capacity as a city official. That his actions were right or wrong was why he was awaiting trial in Carthage. Before he could legally defend himself, he was murdered. So let's toll the contitutional violations to each side. Against Joseph - freedom of the press. Against the mob - freedom of religion, freedom of assemby, right to a trail by a jury, the right to own property, the right to vote, and at various times when Mormon papers were vandalized, freedom of the press.

So how will history defend the traitors and tyrants who spilled the best blood of the 19th century?

Answer 7

I don't understand how destroying a printing press is an act of treason....destruction of property yes, but not treason.

Answer 8

I do not think that history can defend many of us. We are all just a bunch of psychotic animals. I could care less if Smith spoke to God or if he was smoking in that barn. I wish we could all just get the main point. LOVE I think we all get so distracted with the details.

Answer 9

I fail to see why destroying a privately owned printing press has anything to do with treason which is "violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign."

Answer 10

Anything that threatens free speech is an offront to the constitution.

The treason issue aside- it was an illegal destruction of property. I guess the article of faith about being subject to kings, presidents, magistrates, etc... didn't apply to the "prophet".