And the author is Mormon, of course, and works for the church.

Yawn.

The author is a dishonest tool.

He characterizes the federal confiscation of "church" (really Brigham Young) property in the late 1800's as "persecution of a religious minority." Ignoring that the church was intentionally and willfully violating federal law (polygamy).

He says polygamy "officially ended" in 1890, when it clearly didn't (hence the need for a "second manifesto" in 1902).

So if we point out (and laugh at) that many mormon beliefs are not just implausible and "wacky," but often flat-out proven false, we're engaging in religious persecution...

Which is, of course, bullshit.

I borrowed some of your wording, here, for the comments section on the article. If you object, I'll paraphrase instead. I was trying to be quick about getting some objections up so the readers would get an alternate viewpoint.

The author is the current editor of the Deseret News. I believe "dishonest tool" is a requirement for that position.

:)
It's right in the official job requirements!

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> it clearly didn't (hence the need for a "second
> manifesto" in 1902).

Minor point of fact: the "Second Manifesto" was in 1904

I stand corrected :)

Baura, print and frame this thread--it's a keeper! :-)

Didn't read the article, but I'm guessing it's the Atlantic's straw-man argument to show that they are not hostile to religious conservatives.

Of course they are.

The Ignorance of Believing Mormonisms.

I prefer the mocking of ignorant Mormonism, but that's just me.

As usual, don puts up a winner :)

For those who believe that the mormon church is the only true church, any amount of mocking is too much. For those who do not agree with the church, no amount of mocking of the church is enough.

I'm dangling in the wind in the article comments. Come comment!

At least come confirm that you learned about "planetary fiefdoms" in church, so the readers can see that he's flat lying about that.

Sounds like Mitt’s PR team is planning a run for an office higher than the US Senate.

Or, the story was planted by Jeff Flake’s people as he may be starting a presidential run.

I got to the end of the first sentence and then had to quit or moon my computer.

>It’s precisely the beliefs of Latter-day Saints that critics dismiss as strange which produce the behaviors those same critics often applaud.

Okay, I gave it a second go after installing a clean bullchip filter... I see there are over 1200 comments; I want to put something about LDS historical revisionism and their LiarsRUs operation... Or perhaps Edward Abbey's cosmic statement about the LDS Church: "Nothing that ridiculous could be all bad."

Aww, forget it...

Well I confess, I mooned my computer.

Aw, I miss all the good stuff...:)

Well don't everybody comment at once.

In multi-level marketing, some doubters who nay-say the whole scheme are labeled as "dream stealers". The article is just more of that. It is written under the assumption that the church is true, and ignores any possible merit to the claims of which they refer to as "mocking mormonism" or anti-mormonism. As long as the words in the article are framed by someone who believes in the mormon cult, anything outside of that paradigm doesn't get a fair hearing, nor can the outsider's words in that case win any arguements that are supportive of mormonism, to claim otherwise.

The ignorance isn't in mocking mormonism, it's in believing in mormonism to begin with, or for non-members to judge the mocker (uninformed) those who mock mormonism after spending some significant time and life experiences from within a church member or former member's life experiences that occured while involved with mormonism's institutional dysfunctions. The article lacks credibility to any informed person. Let the mocking begin/continue. Just keep it honest and accurate, to maintain credibility.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 11/16/2017 04:21AM by azsteve.

I read at least a dozen of the comments and found not one intelligent one in the bunch.

“Critically examining” M?
This is an absolutely BEAUTUFUL example OF CONTROLLING THE DISCUSSION BY DEFINITIONS.
Nobody mocks m.
But they do CRITICALLY EXAMINE IT.
Not allowed in this discussion!

M play some SERIOUS HEADGAMES,
No one notices???



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/17/2017 06:35PM by itzbeen20.

And they claim such status (as a culture, a tribal culture with various tribal normns an d tribal mores) enmeshed or submerged in a multi cuktural setting,

Then they cannot claim any of their cultural tribal ideas, statements, are "truye"
"Truth" anymore.

Nor can they extend their statements of what i s truth anywhere to anyone b beyond their own tribal culture without persecution and expressing bias even bigotry towards other cultures, and actually not qualifying that they were expressing a tribal more or tribal custom, but expressing lds doctrine as a "truth" outside of a Mormon tribal group might be aggression and hostility to other cultures, which, as such, cultures various tribal norms and tribal mores deserve equal respect.

From a cultural anthropomogi sta perspective, is a Mormon 5th al member saying his doctrine as truth to members of othger tribes snbd cultures, an act of overt hostility and disrespect to the tribes and cultures the Mormon cultural tribe in a biased bigoted disrespectful inpinges on other societal tribes culturally imposing a Mormon tribal historical norm they reference and imposinbg it is bigotry against other cultures in society.


Hmmmm I can tell I am ready for thanksgiving #1 among Mormons
And thanksgiving number 2 among Pentecostals in ministry.
As such I will look serve compliment say pass th e turkey and respect unique cultural variants expressin g themselves at the family gathering, set firm boundaries and protect myself against any Mormon or Pentecostal family member project g their own quainbt tribal customs onto others. My families Catholics are sort of secular when eating turkey among Mormons who seem to keep expressing theu r tribal customs or utilize tribal vocabulary outside of tribe, whereas famikky Catholics seem invisible when eating turkey they're not constantly describing every moment utilizing tribal jargon which between tribes becomes almost incomprehensible in it's rudeness.