Posted on 11/13/2014 8:53:33 AM PST by greyfoxx39
As the new essay unintentionally hits the fan, Mormons are reeling and responding with their classic denials, claim of victim-hood and their typical repertoire of logical fallacies.
Soon, their favorite defender, the straw man argument will be in full regalia, culminating in a passive aggressive indirect platitude statement (such as doubt your doubts, you have to go around the BOM, etc.) in the next general conference to which members will cling to for life.
Already I have been contacted by members with their "straw man babies". So I have compiled a list of the quorum of the 15 straw men arguments that Mormons are making about this already:
1) It’s not that some girls were married “back then” at age 14. It’s that she was NOT married to Joseph, since he was married to another person who was not aware of the situation. 14 years old were by no means older back then. He had sex with his foster daughter, period. He has sex with the wives of men who he sent away on missions and made the women lie about their liaisons, full stop.
2) Joseph was forced to practice it by an angry angel. Joseph must have been one hell of seer to know to start practicing it before the revelation AND the angry angel came. It’s that none of the 40 women, suspiciously, including Emma, ever saw the angry angel. It's that he didn't have 40 wives, he had one, and 39 KNOWN affairs that he spend most of his time and efforts trying to conceal.
3) It’s not that the church is being "honest". It’s that there is a term for when before you are being honest, for 180+ years.
4) It’s not that some marriages MAY not have had sex, it’s that some did. It’s that some were married to other men and some were children. It’s that the ones that turned him down were destroyed and shunned. It’s that all were coerced or forced to practice it. It's that the church has, for the past 180 years, trying to collect, destroy, deny or file away any reference to these relationships being physical.
5) It’s not that it's OK because Emma accepted it and felt peace about it, it’s that Joseph got her best friend pregnant and did not tell Emma, and she in turn threw her pregnant friend down the stairs and she miscarried, maybe the peace came after that, or after she threw Fanny Algers on the street. Maybe the peace came after she left the church.
6) It’s not that people are demanding that Joseph smith be perfect, it’s that maybe a convicted con-man, polygamist, bank defrauder, fugitive, liar, pedophile, wife-thief, serial adulterer, plagiarist and murderer might not be the best person to trust with a story about an invisible gold book. it was Jesus when speaking on how to tell false prophets that said "by their fruits ye shall know them"...well, here's your sign.
7) It’s not that it was about raising children, or marrying a virgin, or being approved by the first wife, or about being more women than men or that it was OK after 1834…because NONE of those applied to Joseph.
8) It’s not that it is OK because “it was a long time ago”. It’s that it happened at all. It’s that those girls were children. It’s that it was a revelation and then he denied over and over and in May 1844 (he had 30+ wives by then) he offered to prove his accusers to be perjurers and to provide (falsified) affidavits.
9) It’s not OK because you have a testimony. It’s that your testimony is based on a fictitious character carefully created by the church media department. If you have a testimony, you don’t know the real Joseph.
10) It’s not about the church discontinuing the practice by the commandment of God. It was that they were forced to by the US government and therefore it shows that the church will change its history, doctrine, practices, and policies to make sure that the corporation survives.
11) It’s not that it is not practiced now. It’s that Gordon Hinckley lied on national TV a few years ago and said it was only practiced after they came out West and it was not doctrinal. Well, the thing is that an angel appearing 3 times is pretty doctrinal and so is The DOCTRINE and COVENANTS,which is canonized doctrine. It's that thousands of now ex-Mormons were excommunicated, attacked, gas-lighted, called names and shunned for even suggesting what these essays contain.
12) It’s not that it’s a fleck of history. It’s that thousands of children suffer in sexual relationships with adults in cults TODAY because of the practices and doctrines you cowardly failed to address, up until now, and which your founders taught as a requirement to enter heaven.
13) It’s not about polygamy; it’s about your church pretending that they are the defender of monogamous marriage, between one man and one woman as stating that this has always been so. It’s that you are stepping on the civil rights of others, just like you did those women, all in the name of religion. You can't claim those relationships to be marriages and at the same time, use your sudden love for the law, to deny other people their right to marry, so, pick a side.
14) It's not that the church has abandoned it. It’s that the concept of men forcing women and children into their bed using revelation is "a thing" in your doctrine. It’s about Warren Jeffs being JUST like Joseph Smith. He did not die an innocent lamb at the hands of evil men, he died because he slept with children and other men's wives, he died because he violated masonic oaths, he died because when his adultery was exposed by his former close associate, whose wife he tried to shag, he destroyed the printing press. It's that men can be sealed to more than one woman TODAY in the temple and women can't do the same.
15) It is not that the media and world does not understand Mormonism; it’s that you don’t understand Mormonism.
Ping
Anonymous exmormon has some issues.
Get over it dude.
I haven’t heard of any Mormon suicide bombers yet.
I have heard of Mormon mass murders, though...
I recall Delphi User claiming these marriages were spiritual and never consummated sexually. And he was supposedly an high IQ Momronism apologist.
Real.
Who doesn’t know this stuff all ready?
Dude is obsessed in a bad way with it.
This massacre was up close and personal.
Yep, that makes debasing those young girls in the name of a cult ok....got it.
Are you anonymous exmormon dude?
Or just an acolyte?
And it isn't about some exmormon NOR their issues, dude. It is about YOUR false Prophet - get over him, he is sickening, disgusting, sexual predator, psycopath and decidedly NOT a prophet of God. You obviously still don't get it.
Around 15 million Mormon sheeple. So let him have his passion - I applaud that. We occasion obsess over other topics in this forum.
Let’s not forget TWO other wagon trains that were also attacked. The Shepherd Train and the Miltmore train. Both suffered loss of life in those attacks and the people said the attackers were white men dressed as Indians.
For many years, Mormons considered the Mountain Meadows Massacre area to be haunted.
Then there is the internal massacre of the Morrisite Mormons by the Brighamite Mormons.
It appears you are using a "straw man argument" here...has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.
"You put forth a straw man because you know it will be easy for you to knock down or discredit. It's a way of misrepresenting your opponent's position."
Well said!
I believe Anonymous neglected to add this to the list of strawman responses.
then you missed the Mountain Meadow Massacre
Sounds like he and Mohammed would get along real well. Bet they go on a lot of double dates together in Hell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.