...and I find myself enjoying it. The unsigned essays they published are finally getting real media attention....and from the comment sections I have been reading, they are getting battered! The few faith defenders come across as crazy or have their comments disproven (often by exmormons who really know what they're talking about!)

Think of how many people that will bring these questions up, innocently, to TBM's! "So, what exactly is the difference between Joseph Smith and Warren Jeffs?"

The amount of bad publicity here cannot be overstated. As somebody who once defended the church to people, I can assure you, this will trouble the most ardent supporter. They can hide behind tired lines like, "this is old news!" or "God called a prophet not a perfect man!" but they can never hide these facts again.

How many TBM's, over the next months/years, will try to share a testimony with a non-mormon (hoping to interest them into meeting with the missionaries) to be rebutted with, "Oh, I read the JS essay about the 40 women he married. Your church works for you, but it would never work for me. I don't believe God would have a prophet behave like that. I'm surprised you do, but that's for you to decide."

The best part of it is this: the leaders of the church 1) believed that the internet would lead to mass conversions as the truth would finally be free to everybody. 2) the leaders of the church believed it was time to publish articles about topics that they've covered up for 150 years. 3) it's all backfiring.

Who can believe these men are inspired?

My family relationships suffered when I left the church. I was told by believing members that I was deceived by Satan. Now, the points I brought up are being published by the church.

I am loving this and hope it reaches the millions of active members....

Think of all the people they angered with Prop 8 when LDSINC acted as the defender of traditional marriage.

fantastic point! the mormons believe they are the defenders of traditional marriage....but based on the actions of their founder, how can they pretend to define "traditional marriage?"

Ditto - this is an excellent point to those who support "traditional marriage." Nothing traditional about having 40 wives - at least in the U.S.

I truly enjoy reading the talks of the day, when they would demand that that govt stay of of their marriage and state that marriage sohuld never be a state controlled ceremony. They also go on and on about sealings having nothing to do with the marriage and that polygamy is the only true form of marriage.

I asked that question when Dr. Grant Hill (P.C. Member of Parliament from LDSLand Alberta) voted in some gay marriage issue a number of years ago. He is descended from the polygamists who fled to Alberta. I emailed him to point out that it was rather ironic for him to support a motion that marriage is between one man and one woman, given his family histor, but never got an answer from him.

jkjkjkjk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Think of all the people they angered with Prop 8
> when LDSINC acted as the defender of traditional
> marriage.

...and then lied about their contributions, broke CA election laws by not reporting what they'd contributed on time (which was deliberate, as doing so would have made the news *before* the election and shown their dishonesty), and got slapped with a fine for violating election laws...

They're being regularly caught being dishonest. And people are noticing.