• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

TruthDig.com is giving me heartburn

Booko

Deviled Hen
jonny said:
The comments associated with this article on TrugthDig.com are really bothering to me. I don't even know what to say. :(

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070108_susan_estrich_the_mormon_question/

Well I can certainly see why!

Sorry but the guy who said that despicable ignorant thing about Mormons buying their way to power clearly has no grasp of Mormons in prominent positions of gov't.

George Romney, father of Mitt Romney, was governor of Michigan for years. He never did anything remotely like enforce his religious views on the state. And the very religious and also conservative voters returned him to office, simply because they liked his policies and found him to be a competent governor.

I wish someone in the press could be bothered to do their homework and find previous examples of Mormons in office. If they show no pattern of trying to enact Mormon beliefs then why should we expect Mitt to? And besides, the guy has a record -- if someone is so worried about it -- just look at what he's done already as a guide.

Honestly...and it gets worse from there.

Don't sweat it, Johnny -- these people are just showing their true colors. It's no reflection on you or your coreligionists.
 

Comprehend

Res Ipsa Loquitur
jonny said:
The comments associated with this article on TrugthDig.com are really bothering to me. I don't even know what to say. :(

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070108_susan_estrich_the_mormon_question/

If we were to be bothered everytime some bonehead made an anti-mormon comment we would all be bothered to death. I wouldn't worry about it. There are zillions of people who have some burning need to attack mormons. I always look at it as validation of our religion. Nobody attacks Protestant religions like they do ours and ours is older than most protestant denomonations.
 

jamaesi

To Save A Lamb
It always drives me crazy to see headlines or people saying things like "Is America ready for *BLANK* President?"

America has ALWAYS been ready for a president from any racial, ethnic, sex, gender, religious, or any other group. Equality of all humans, freedom, and seperation of church and state have been key themes that ran through the first documents this country was founded on to the ones written today.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
Comments made on articles on the internet are mostly crap. There is very little in them that is worth reading, so I don't. I get enough people not knowing what they are talking about on RF :D

(This is also where this particular person who doesn't know what he is talking about makes his comments too - GO RF!!! :woohoo: )
 

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
The article itself, by Susan Estrich, is actually pretty well thought out though and counsels for religious tolerance, IMO.

I think it's actually more accurate to say some of the readers commenting at Truthdig.com are giving you heartburn.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
doppelgänger said:
The article itself, by Susan Estrich, is actually pretty well thought out though and counsels for religious tolerance, IMO.

I think it's actually more accurate to say some of the readers commenting at Truthdig.com are giving you heartburn.
He was pretty clear that it was the comments in the OP. Aside from that, the comments are in fact on Truthdig.com - so I would say his thread title is accurate.
 

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
SoyLeche said:
He was pretty clear that it was the comments in the OP. Aside from that, the comments are in fact on Truthdig.com - so I would say his thread title is accurate.

But Truthdig.com doesn't write them nor does it edit them. It's a community into which anybody could enter - for better or worse.

And Truthdig's article is pretty favorable toward religious tolerance for Romney's Mormonism (the author doesn't like some of his politics though).

Also, these comments are mostly pretty mild compared to some of the Evangelical tracts and books that get circulated about LDS. I got their anti-Mormon garbage hung on my doorknob for months in anticipation of the opening of the new LDS temple up the road.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
doppelgänger said:
But Truthdig.com doesn't write them nor does it edit them. It's a community into which anybody could enter - for better or worse.
I understand that, but he was reading comments at Truthdig.com - and they were giving him heartburn - so Truthdig is guilty by association :). The article was pretty good, for the most part.

RF has given me heartburn before - and I don't blame it on the mods. (Actually, the time I'm thinking of it was AE. How's it going Nate? :tuna: )
 

SoyLeche

meh...
Just for fun:

I’ve worked for Mormons, and my girlfriend has Mormon parents. Religions change in history. For example, the Islamic Spanish Moors were extremely liberal and tolerant. The majority of Muslims do not act like that at all in our time. Perhaps they will again. The present configuration of the Mormons is that they are committed to fascist beliefs. They think that people that wash cars are no better than dogs, while corporate hot-shots are headed for a much cozier spot in heaven. That may well change in time. But at this moment, those are the nazi thoughts that they entertain. Mitt Romney has turned my Commonwealth of Massachusetts into a little spot of corrupt fascist hell. He is a typical modern Mormon fascist. Not all Mormons are fascists, bit 90% are convinced that fascism is the only decent philosophy. So a vote for Romney is a vote for fascism. By the way, they believe that black people are animals. Well 90% of them. That could change, but it is not what they tend to believe presently. So voting for someone like Romney is like insuring someone with a reputation as an arsonist. It’s just the reality. I hope they will change this reality soon. But today, this is how it is.
Apart from not knowing much about Mormonism or Islam...

Is anyone here from Mass.? Can you confirm the Fascist Hell comment?

I've never once heard a Mormon say that wealth has anything to do with salvation. The love of money may, but not money itself. I wonder if he realises that many Mormons have lived and worked among the impoverished of the Third World.

Also, are the 10% who aren't fascists the same 10% who don't think black people are animals? Or are there only 1% who fall into both categories?

I believe his definition of "reality" is very loose.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
I just realized that the earliest comments are at the bottom, so I'll go there for a few minutes:

Susan Estrich writes from profound ignorance.
Mormons believe:
1. That the U.S. government is divinely inspired and divinely protected.
Fairly accurate. We believe the Founding Fathers were inspired. I'm not sure I believe the current government is being inspired much, but I still ask that they might be in my prayers. I've never heard that it is divinely protected
2. That Native Americans are descendants of big-time sinners and therefore God wanted white people to take the land from them. And just as in the Book of Joshua of some 5,000 yeras ago, it is perfectly okay to kill the Indians before - or after - you take their land away from them. That’s how Utah and the rest of Zion was settled.
This is Manifest Destiny, and it’s still alive in Mormon Country. You won’t find that among Catholics, Protestants, or even among many Jews.
Obviously ignorant of both the Book of Mormon and history in general. The Mormon settlers were more tolerant of the indians than most other groups. Brigham Young said something to the effect of it being easier and cheeper to feed the indians than to fight them. It didn't always work that way, but moreso than in other areas.
3. That dark skin is a mark of sin, even though a modern “miracle” now allows them to be in the priesthood.
At best a straw-man - but we've gone over that one enough in other threads
4. Mormons believe in a practical form of predestination, in which being rich is proof of being in a state of grace. Like some Protestant sects, Mormonism inverts Christ’s dictum about “the eye of the needle” and ties wealth to being holy. All 200 of the top CHurch officials are multi-millionaires. It’s actually an unofficial - but no less real - qualification, proof athat the man (yes, always a man) is favored by God and deserves that “high office”.
Never heard that being rich is proof of being in a state of grace. I wouldn't mind being in both categories though.

I'd like to see the evidence of the claim about the leaders being multi-millionaires. I know that some of them are, but I highly doubt that all of them are.

I have a couple of thoughts on the fact that many of the General Authorities are well off. 1) The LDS church does not have a paid clergy. Some of the General Authorities may receive some sort of living allowance, but most live off what they earned before they were called. It stands to reason that a wealthy person is in a better position to stop everything and take on this full-time responsibility. 2) These men have been trying their best to follow the Spirit in all of their decisions for years. It isn't really surprising that they have been successful in what they have done.

Susan Estrich can suggest you all go drink the purple Kool-Aid, but my advice is maximum prudence.
If you go visit a Mormon you very well may be offered Kool-Aid. Cookies too :)
 

SoyLeche

meh...
The so-called “Mormon” religion has as much credibility as the Church of Scientology and Heaven’s Gate. They are cults created in recent years by people desperate for attention. That you can believe there was a person named Jesus who lived 2000 years ago is one thing (I don’t, personally); it’s kind of hard to disprove it. But to believe that
1. Smith found METAL tablets, which not only cannot be produced to this day, but which have actually never been seen by anyone else.
2. That at least SOME Native Americans are THE LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL!!!!!!!
Sorry, but it’s hard for me not to wonder whether such a person can realistically have access to the nuclear codes.
I find it interesting that it isn't the fact that someone believes that a person is unfit to hold office not because they believe strange things, but that they believe that the strange things happened recently. You want to believe that Elisha made an ax float? That's fine. But if you believe that Joseph Smith had METAL PLATES that were then taken away - you can't have the nucular codes.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
The Enclyclopedia Dramatica notes that “Mormon” and “moron” are derived from the same Greek root word.
That might be interesting if the word Mormon had anything at all to do with Greek.

I would vote for Romney if he renounced the poor behavior propigated by his church and practiced by so many of its members. This will not happen and this is the problem. JFK would have disassociated himself from the negative practices of Catholics in a minute. Romney does not have the gumption to call his church out when they do wrong and people want a president with this ability. God knows the Mormons are committing numerous crimes in Utah that are currently being investigated by the state and feds. The state has had to take over a school district becuase the Mormons let their beliefs get in the way of properly administering a school district. These investigations and corrective actions need to continue. The ball is in Romney’s hands and he will fumble. He will not act against fellow Mormons when they do wrong
I haven't heard about the school, but I'm fairly certain that everything mentioned here is the Fundamentalist LDS church (FLDS) - not the LDS church. That is really going to be the biggest problem for Romney. People don't know that there is a difference.
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
doppelgänger said:
The article itself, by Susan Estrich, is actually pretty well thought out though and counsels for religious tolerance, IMO.

I think it's actually more accurate to say some of the readers commenting at Truthdig.com are giving you heartburn.

The article wasn't from Truthdig. It was reposted on their site from another news source.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
I'm curious, and maybe it belongs in a different thread - but can anyone reproduce the actual court records of when Joseph Smith was suposedly convicted of fraud? From what I've heard, the only thing he was ever "convicted" of was casting out a devil - but then they realized there wasn't a law against that.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
Danny Quintana… if you really are an Attorney, you should know that “a person’s religion should have no bearing on his running for office as president.” Therefore, your claim is highly suspect. You should also know that most Christian Churches reckon that only approx’ 7,000 yrs have elapsed from the time of Adam and Eve leaving Eden up to the present time. And BYW, I know that far-left dems and liberals have a penchant for the word fascism. I would suggest that you check out several dictionaries and educate yourself on the meaning of the word and then do an honest comparison with the LDS Church. You are way off base.
Dr. Knowitall...right, I’m not gay but I don’t mind the people at all. The good that Mitt has accomplished in MA in one term has been quite astounding. His final act before leaving office as Gov. was to ensure that the voices of more than 70% of the people who voted against gay marriage was heard and counted...by the Courts and by (a rogue) Congress. That’s the kind of leader we need. One who fearlessly acts for the people first and foremost and for good. More than 12 million Mormons can’t be wrong...lol!
Jerry...if the governent were to tax all Churches as businesses it would be a foolhardy decision. Cities and communities everywhere would lose out on millions of dollars of charitable donations, volunteerism and manpower help that is constantly in place. I don’t know of any Church that is supported in any way by Government monies...it’s against the law. Check your facts please.
jimbobuddy...sorry Buddy, but you evidently don’t know what you’re talking about. You obviously have had a negative experience or two with a member and just need to ‘forgive and forget’ and get on with your life. BYW, the LDS Church is the 4th most prominent Church in the Nation now, and the fastest growing through converts. True cults are smallish and they come and go and generally die off. Twelve million members and counting is not a cult...neither is Scientology, Jehovah’s Witness or RCC. We need to vote without fear of a candidates religious beliefs...unless he is Athiest or Muslim, in my view.
Jon… how old are you young man? I don’t watch cartoons but know of Southpark. Clever creators but they slander and denigrade many people and things that are good, just for a laugh. Not nice! Being on a website like “Truthdig” does not affect an LDS persons temple recommend. The Church is not controlling...everything is based on choice. Also, Romney’s religion never came into play, not once as MA Gov. Neither does the Church advise Orin Hatch, Bill Bennett, Harry Reid or other LDS in government positions on political matters. YunginS
This guy had it down pretty well, but what in the heck is that part I've bolded???? Why in the world would he say that???
 

SoyLeche

meh...
Thank God, the people have learned a bit of a lesson from this present “Evangelical” “chief decider.”
Everyone has to admit the idea behind mormonism is “lofty” to say the least.
However, the power of the Mormon church to raise money and purchase votes must not be underestimated.
They are probably the next wealthiest organization after the Catholics.
They are building up mountains of wealth on earth and for no reason other then to buy power!
Actually, mostly they are building up mountains of wealth in order to build buildings. That, and to educate people. And to help out in times of need.
 

Comprehend

Res Ipsa Loquitur
SoyLeche said:
I'm curious, and maybe it belongs in a different thread - but can anyone reproduce the actual court records of when Joseph Smith was suposedly convicted of fraud? From what I've heard, the only thing he was ever "convicted" of was casting out a devil - but then they realized there wasn't a law against that.

Hugh Nibley wrote Tinkling Symbols and Sounding Brass and pretty much destroyed this claim.

From page 139-140 (lucky I am sitting in my library)

the court conviction was first reported by Daniel S. Tuttle, an Episcopal Bishop in Salt Lake City and published in the article on "Mormonism" in the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. The trial was supposedly before a justice of the peace in Bainbridge, Chenango County, New York on 26 March 1826.

The problem???? uh well. Chenango County did not keep court records before 1850.

OOPS!!! Nice try by mr. Tuttle but he obviously had a little axe to grind with the Mormons.

--the following sources taken from footnote 74 on page 152 of Nibley's book.--

[see also, Marvin S. Hill, "Joseph Smith and the 1826 trial: New Evidence and difficulties," BYU Studies 12 (Winter 1972): 223-33; and Gordon A. Madsen, "Joseph Smith's 1826 Trial: The Legal Setting," BYU studies 30 (spring 1990): 91-108.]

edit: see also pp. 243-262 for more coverage of the same issue.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
comprehend said:
Hugh Nibley wrote Tinkling Symbols and Sounding Brass and pretty much destroyed this claim.

From page 139-140 (lucky I am sitting in my library)

the court conviction was first reported by Daniel S. Tuttle, an Episcopal Bishop in Salt Lake City and published in the article on "Mormonism" in the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. The trial was supposedly before a justice of the peace in Bainbridge, Chenango County, New York on 26 March 1826.

The problem???? uh well. Chenango County did not keep court records before 1850.

OOPS!!! Nice try by mr. Tuttle but he obviously had a little axe to grind with the Mormons.

--the following sources taken from footnote 74 on page 152 of Nibley's book.--

[see also, Marvin S. Hill, "Joseph Smith and the 1826 trial: New Evidence and difficulties," BYU Studies 12 (Winter 1972): 223-33; and Gordon A. Madsen, "Joseph Smith's 1826 Trial: The Legal Setting," BYU studies 30 (spring 1990): 91-108.]

edit: see also pp. 243-262 for more coverage of the same issue.
Thanks. (note to self - need to get that book)
 
Top