They Shoot Mormons, Don't They? Religious Bigotry, alive and well today

“I wouldn’t vote for a Mormon for dogcatcher, much less President of the United States!” There’s a lot of that kind of hateful rhetoric going around since Mitt Romney decided to throw his hat in the ring – as if Mormons are some kind of hideous evil monsters. The loudest anti-Mormon shouts, sad to say, are coming from America’s so-called “Christian right”. How can Mitt Romney hope to get a fair shake in this spiritually polluted atmosphere?

There was another man running for President who faced the same dilemma – John F. Kennedy – only he was the target of anti-CATHOLIC bigotry. In his 1960 speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, JFK said the following: “. . .I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end - where all men and all churches are treated as equal - where man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice - where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind - and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their words in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.” John F. Kennedy Library & Museum (Speeches, 1960). By the way, if you listen to the audio version of JFK’s speech, you will hear the hurt and frustration in his voice and the unfair treatment surely must have caused many a sleepless night.

Fast forward to 2007 where JFK might as well have been “whistlin’ Dixie”. The hostility toward Mormons today, in my opinion, is even worse than that suffered by JFK. Although it is said that JFK lost about a million votes to religious intolerance, Romney stands to lose even more if the anti-Mormon evangelicals hang together.

According to Media Matters for America - “. . . a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media” - FOX News is not reporting accurately on the level of evangelical hostility to the Romney run. Media Matters for America points out that among evangelical leaders rejecting Mormons: Shirley and James Dobson (National Day of Prayer and Focus on the Family, respectively), the Southern Baptist Convention (collectively), Pat Robertson (Christian Broadcasting Network), and Dr. D. James Kennedy (Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Florida). “Among many conservative evangelicals – who comprise a significant part of the Republican base – Mormonism is considered an un-Christian cult.” Media Matters for America (2007)

While stumping in Florida, a man in the audience stood up during the Q&A portion and said the following to Romney: “You, sir, you’re a pretender. You do not know the Lord. You’re a Mormon.” Media Matters for America (2007). This is the kind of un-American, disrespectful treatment Mitt Romney will apparently have to endure throughout the entire campaign – as if just being a Mormon is reason enough to open the floodgates for free flow of pent-up hatred and vindictiveness.

For the record, the Mormon bashers know full well that the official name of Romney’s church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” and the members should rightfully be called “members of the LDS Church” but the words “Mormon” and “Mormonism” have an aura of negativity so they prefer to use the “M” word as if it were dirty.

Less than five minutes cruising around the official LDS website (LDS.org) will show anyone who’s interested that the Church is a Christian organization, with Jesus Christ at the Head. There are no paid clergy – all are volunteers. Humanitarian aid is legendary. Members of the LDS Church believe in strong family values; they are patriotic, they are law-abiding upstanding citizens of their community. Many LDS young men right out of high school go on two-year missions – you know, the guys on bikes – and during their mission they don’t date, read newspapers, go to movies or watch TV; but rather they dedicate two years of their lives to serving others. Many women go on missions as well, and couples, only theirs is 18 months in length but the obligations are basically the same. Most members do not shop or go out to eat on Sundays – reminiscent of the good old days when shops and stores were closed in obedience to the Commandment, “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy”. If they can help it, LDS Church members do not work on Sundays, either, preferring to spend the day at church and with their families. Church members are encouraged to store up a year’s supply of food and water so they will be able to care for their families in the event of an emergency. The LDS Church believes in self-sufficiency and self-reliance but in the event of a financial hardship the Church distributes food and supplies through their welfare (Bishop’s Storehouse) program. Members of the LDS Church do not drink alcohol nor do they use illicit drugs; they do not drink coffee and tea. A Mormon in good standing, therefore, will not be found in a drunken stupor puking her guts out at 3 a.m. anywhere in the world. Furthermore, members of the church are encouraged to dress modestly, be polite and courteous. And members of the LDS Church are faithful tithe payers. Come on, people, what’s not to love?

So what on earth is their beef, the anti-Mormon zealots? Why is there such disdain for the LDS Church and its members? In Hugh Hewitt’s book, “Mormon in the White House?” he states his thesis that the fierce anti-Mormon sentiment among main-stream Christians stems from one or two or all three of the following factors (in order of importance):

3) “If there is a Mormon in the White House, Salt Lake City will call the shots, at least on the biggest issues.” Hewitt (2007, p. 221-227)

Hugh Hewitt has written an exquisite book about the Romney campaign and overcoming the “Mormon problem.” It’s a good read and I highly recommend it. Of the three problem points listed in the previous paragraph, Hewitt believes – unless some unforeseen blunder destroys his chances – none of the three is insurmountable for Mitt Romney. (Plus, he has the best hair.)

Well, I’m no Hugh Hewitt, not even close; he’s an icon on the conservative radio talk show circuit. Hewitt could talk circles around me (I’ve seen him in action in Sacramento); he’s brilliant; he’s well educated, well read, no doubt a genius, plus he’s kind of cute. I’m basically a “nobody” – an overweight grandma – but after having researched for this paper, I have come to a totally different conclusion as to why there is such in-your-face angst over Romney’s religion of choice: It’s all about money, power and control (in that order). I think they’re (the evangelical religious bigots, that is) scared half to death and are revving up their attacks, not to save souls, but to save their reputations (which if tarnished would lead to financial ruin).

As I said, all one must do is browse around the LDS official web site to see what the LDS Church believes and stands for. Any reasonable person would conclude that Mormons are not evil monsters at all. In fact, they are God fearing, Christ believing, Holy Ghost following people going about doing good. “You will know them by their fruit” and the LDS has plenty of fruit and they are willing to share.

Earlier, I stated that some high-powered ministries have publicly condemned Mormons: Shirley and James Dobson, the Southern Baptist Convention, Pat Robertson, and Dr. D. James Kennedy – just to name a few. There are hoards of others. Sunday after Sunday, preachers, evangelists, reverends and ministers from all Christian denominations pound the pulpit with anti-Mormon rhetoric. I heard the message loud clear when I was a Baptist and when I tiptoed through evangelical/Pentecostal territories. Was I ever miffed when I later learned for myself the Gospel truth about the LDS Church.

Just think about it, please. If Dr. D. James Kennedy, for example, who wrote the book, The Wolves Among Us, were to admit he’d been wrong in labeling the LDS Church a “cult” that leads unwary ignorant people astray (to hell), what would become of his multi-million-dollar ministry? Suffice it to say, there’s big money to be had by sale of books, tapes, CD’s, videos, and other anti-Mormon propaganda, not to mention speaking engagements and world-wide religious crusades. We’re talking trillions, all told. I realize the anti-Mormon aspect of these ministries is but a small portion of the business, but if the truth came out, that they had been using falsehoods about the LDS Church as a cash cow, their entire empires could tumble.

The ABC News program 20/20 aired on March 23, 2007, exposed the lavish lifestyles of some of the top evangelical preachers – million dollar mansions and personal jets. ABC News - 20/20 (2007) (Again, the LDS Church has no paid clergy.)

It’s nothing new. Severe harassment and persecution has been the lot of the LDS Church since it’s inception in 1820 when a 14-year-old boy named Joseph Smith saw visions and communed with heavenly beings. Rather than discuss the spiritual aspects of the LDS Church, however, let’s stick to facts of history. Taken from a college-level early American history textbook, Joseph Smith, upon experiencing the visions and visitations, believed “that God had work for me to do, and that my name should be for good and evil among all nations, kindreds and tongues.” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 292). The textbook continues, “They were met with hostility virtually everywhere they went . . . . As the movement gathered momentum, hundreds of people joined the church; entire congregations of churches of other faiths joined . . .” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 293)

During the dark time of American history when slavery was flourishing and when Native Americans were forced from their lands, the pioneers of the LDS Church also suffered at the hands of unscrupulous politicians, governmental leaders, and angry hate-filled mobs. “In the face of relentless persecution, Joseph Smith, the founder of the church, had led his flock to Illinois. There they had established the town of Nauvoo, which by the mid-1840’s had become the largest city in Illinois with over 15,000 people. . . In June 1844, a mob of non-Mormons broke into the jail where Smith was being held and killed both him and his brother. . .The Mormons abandoned Nauvoo in the spring of 1846 as anti-Mormons pounded the town with cannon, destroying the Great Temple. In a well-coordinated migration, 15,000 Mormons moved in stages to the Great Salt Lake.” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 334-335) Many walked all the way and many died along the way, including innocent babes.

Joseph Smith at one time was tarred and feathered by a mob. No jury, no trial, no judge – and they had planned to castrate him, too. On October 27, 1838, the then governor of Missouri issued an “extermination order”: “The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the State if necessary . . .” Far West History (n.d.) Please note that the order called for exterminating “Mormons” making no distinction between men, women and children, and indeed women and children were subject to the extermination order.

In an event known in LDS history as “the Haun’s Mill Massacre”, precipitated by the extermination order, 30 to 40 LDS families were surprised by some 200 to 250 militia. After the smoke cleared, seventeen LDS people lay dead including a ten-year-old boy. Thirteen LDS members were wounded including a woman and a seven-year-old boy. “A few Missourians returned the next day and took plunder.” LDS FAQ (n.d.) No Missouri militiamen were killed but three were wounded. Just a few years earlier, the LDS folk who died that day had been members of other churches - Congregational or Methodist or Baptist or Presbyterian.

In l976, Governor Bond of Missouri officially rescinded the extermination order and presented apologies for the “unfortunate developments” it caused. Quoting from Governor Bond’s Executive Order: “WHEREAS, Governor Boggs’ order clearly contravened the rights to life, liberty, property and religious freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, as well as the Constitution of the State of Missouri; and . . . Expressing on behalf of all Missourians our deep regret for the injustice and undue suffering rescind Executive Order Number 44 dated October 27, 1838, issued by Governor W. Boggs. . .” Far West History (n.d.) The individuals who harassed, abused, and even murdered Mormons in cold blood were never tried for their crimes.

I read Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail and it really touched my heart. There he was, suffering for the Lord in jail, and these religious leaders with highfalutin titles on the outside wrote an open letter (“A Call for Unity”) in which they criticize King’s tactics and basically blame King for the racial turmoil of the time. Though you can tell King is upset and hurt by the attack – made worse because he’s stuck in jail and can’t confront the religious leaders face-to-face – his response is gentle genius. “I wish you had commended the Negro sit-inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer, and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes.” Barnet and Bedau (2005, p. 881)

King has a few choice words for the Church, too: “If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust.” Barnet and Bedau (2005, p. 880)

There’s an eerie commonality between what JFK and MLK endured at the hands of the religious bigots of their day and what Mitt Romney is facing today. I hope and pray that Romney will be able to fend off these undeserved attacks from the religious hypocrites with the same grace, dignity and God-inspired resolve displayed by the other two.

A few popular bumper stickers read: “Honk if you love Jesus” and “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven” or “Jesus is my co-pilot”. Yet, apparently, these same bumper-sticker Christians are the ones waging war against Mitt Romney’s run for the Presidency solely on the basis of his chosen faith in a Church that bears the name of the Savior of the world.

ABC News - 20/20 (2007). Philanthropic donations come from your heart, but where do they end up? Ex-money manager says "enough!" to secretive Christian Ministry spending. Glenn Ruppel & John Stossel. United States: ABC News.

Ayers, E. L., Gould, L. L., Oshinsky, D. M., & Soderlund, J. R. (2004). American Passages - a history of the United States - Volume I: to 1877 (2nd ed.). Belmont, California: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Barnet, S., & Bedau, H. (2005). Letter from Birmingham Jail. Current Issues and Enduring Questions - a guide to critical thinking and argument, with readings (7th ed., pp. 867-882). Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin's.

Far West History. (n.d.). The Extermination Order and how it was rescinded. Retrieved April 28, 2007, from http://www.jwha.info/mmff/exorder.htm

Hewitt, H. (2007). A Mormon in the White House? 10 things every American should know about Mitt Romney. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc.

John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum. (1960, September 12). Address of Senator John F. Kennedy to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://www.jfklibrary.org

Lds Faq. (n.d.). What was the Haun's Mill Massacre? Retrieved April 28-2007, 2004, from Brigham Young University Web Site: http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/view.asp?q=57

Media Matters for America. (2007). Fox News whitewashes evangelical hostility to Romney's faith. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://mediamatters.org/items/printable/200702280002

No, and I get the feeling you are purposefully missing the point here.

I get the feeling that you are purposefully dodging the issue.

When I was an LDS I was explicitly taught that our Father in Heaven had a Father in Heaven and he had a Father in Heaven, etc. I was explicitly taught that God once walked an earth like this as a mortal and sinful man and that he obeyed the laws and ordinances of the Gospel and that ultimately he progressed to the point where he was exalted to the position of God and given the earth to rule over. I was taught that God was not always God and that if I was a good Mormon and tithed and went on a mission and got married in the Temple and did my duties as required by the Church that I would be entitled to go to the Celestial Kingdom, where someday I could become a God of my own planet somewhere in the universe and that someday people on some distant planet would call me "Eternal Father" or "Father in Heaven".

Now I don't know if that is still taught in Mormon Priesthood classes, but it was taught in the 1960's and the teaching materials were being sent to our ward from Salt Lake City.

Now is what I described above accurate? Is this something that is still taught? Do you believe it? Or has the LDS Church abandoned this doctrine?

I know from Prior threads that you are not really here to learn, so I will not waste my time, trying to teach you.

Try teaching the lurkers. Answer my questions completely and honestly and let the light shine. What have you got to lose?

Cat got your tongue now that the DNA is inconclusive??

Critics of the Book of Mormon have argued that DNA evidence has demonstrated once and for all that the book was contrived by Joseph Smith and is hence a fraud.

They appeal to the precision of DNA evidence and tout their conclusions as being objective, verifiable, assumption free, and decisive.

However, these critics have not given us anything that would pass the muster of peer review by scientists in this field, because they have ignored the real complexity of the issues involved.

Further, they have overlooked the entire concept of hypothesis testing in science and believe that just because they label their results as “based on DNA,” they have somehow proved that the results are accurate or that they have designed the experiment correctly.

At best, they have demonstrated that the global colonization hypothesis is an oversimplified interpretation of the Book of Mormon.

At worst, they have misrepresented themselves and the evidence in the pursuit of other agendas.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1828301/posts?page=1419#1419

Someone is pulling your leg. The early church didn't teach any sucha thing.

I'm sure he is referencing some obscure statement from St. Athanasius that goes something like this "God became man that we might become God." I don't think he meant it in the LDS sense, and I do believe that the statement is heresy. I believe Athanasius meant it in some mystical sense, but the LDS mean it in a literal sense.

Well, it seemed to have hit the mark, as the victim mentality has been replaced by the attack mentality. You are nothing if not versatile. I certainly didn't use the work "liar" in any of my posts, here or any place else.

pot meet kettle (grin) about the versatility.

I have also (to my memory anyway) never referred to you as less than honest.

Does it bother you at all that the things you keep accusing us of are the very tools you anti's use?

I suppose you are correct. Some people will never look at evidence as proof, but rely on a burning bosom in determining truth.

This increasingly hypothetical person would not be me.

I have asked for facts and am rejecting supposition and third party testimony as unreliable. To me (and that is who I have to live with) this is only one reasonable way of coming to a conclusion about how surely you can know something.

BTW my testimony is NOT an issue here, whether BY did or did not get involved it will not impact my testimony, so I do not have a “Dog in this hunt”. You on the other hand have stated that your conclusions on this “Prove” that the church is not true, and that is something that you are most defiantly influenced by. You are the one suffering from objectivity problems here; you are the one who has family entanglements here. The outcome of my analysis will not effect me except as an interesting footnote in history.

Most of the those who know the story are utterly convinced that Brigham Young knew and covered it up. Some are even convinced that he ordered it.

Do you have a survey, or is this more supposition on your part. And how did you measure their knowledge in your survey anyway, LOL.

And then there are those Mormons who fail to even explore the possibility.

ROTFLOL!

So I reject some evidence as being too shaky for me, and don’t disagree with you, but don’t agree either and suddenly I am the one jumping to conclusions? Do you know how this sounds CC?

What we have here is a failure of perspective inhibiting communication and I am not talking about you, and me, I am talking about the whole thread including you and me.

I ceratinly don’t trust Romney to select the next SCOTUS justice. Look at the ones he put on the Massachusetts court.

I can accept the idea that a Republican governor must govern the bluest of the blue states in a way that is radically different from the way that a Republican President (no matter how RINO) would govern the United States. It does make it most difficult, however, to tell where that governor REALLY is when he makes pronouncements on what he would do as President. I understand that many will decide that any man put into that situation is better not trusted, at least at the primary level. But I'd prefer Arnold Schwartzenegger (or his domestically born clone) over ANY of the Rats even thinking about running.

...our Dark Horse - DUNCAN HUNTER...

While I share your enthusiasm for the political views of Duncan Hunter, he blew an opportunity at the first debate to make it out of the back of the pack. He's got to do something potentially radically dangerous in order to make a name for himself, and quickly. I just don't see it happening.

Yea, Missionaries are extremely rule bound.
However the issue wasn’t are missionaries controlled. I believe that most would agree they are.

The issue in #1364 was are Mormon members controlled. I think not. For all mankind can choose as they wish. We may not always have the inner strength to choose what we want but choose we do.
The deeper issue in question is are some Mormons overly controlling.
Do some use manipulation and coercion? Yes.
Manipulation and coercion exists in all the 25 states I’ve been in. All men/women have a propensity to use it. So unless a church or religion teaches that force and manipulation are acceptable then the problem is most assuredly the members. As far as I know the Mormon church does not teach that manipulation/coercion/force are acceptable but I believe Islam does.
Therefore this issue about “control” is an issue about some Mormon members and their actions.
There are 5 catagories:
1. Those who manipulate on purpose.
2. Those who don’t realize they are manipulating.
3. Those who are being manipulated.
4. Those who choose to see manipulation even when it’s not being used.
5. Those who understand/see manipulation but choose their own choice which may are may not be the same as a given request. (For the lurking teen. Choose the right choice even if it is what your parents asked!)

We all try to see ourselves as good. It’s often difficult to see/admit that we are often our own worst enemy. That the very problem we see in others is really in us. Or what we hate the most about our parents actions is often what we have the propensity to do.

My we all choose to teach and learn in a manipulation free environment. My we all forgive ourselves and forgive others when there is manipulation. Only then can we be remove the dam that blocks our connection with Jesus.

P.S. If you think this doesn’t apply to you then it probably does.

Of course I am advocating. If I were to write a thesis on this subject, you would be foolish to only look at MY evidence.

Indeed I would not and have not restricted myself to sources you have referenced in this thread.

Just like it is foolish to only look at evidence from the LDS apologists.

I am not, Google is my friend…

I am simply asking you to read all material facts. But ultimately you will decide.

And when my decision is not liked by you, you make fun and call names?

I've asked you before Delphi, are all who do not support your narrow viewpoint "anti?" It really appears that this is the case.

No, but all who do not agree with me are not intelligent (I just couldn’t resist, no insult but humor intended)

And you are trying to adbvocate that YOU DON"T have a horse in this race? Compared to your team of Arabians, my Shetland just doesn’t count.
CC, BY being for or against the MMM involved or unaware, covering up, or frustrated at the lack of cooperation. Will not affect my testimony one iota. So no, I don’t have a very big horse in this race. I do however want it to be a local thing because that justifies my general belief that everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Come on now Delphi, we are not stoopid nooobs.

FM = Former Mormon, remember?

And it’s spelled n00bs (zeros instead of the o’s)

Now is what I described above accurate? Is this something that is still taught? Do you believe it? Or has the LDS Church abandoned this doctrine?

It is not quite right. There is no “Entitlement” you can’t earn heaven, but you can apply the atonement in your life and be found worthy through Jesus’ grace. No planets, you can however “inherit all that the father hath” exactly as the bible teaches.

As for “Grand-Gods”, it’s irrelevant to my salvation, so I am not going to argue it.

Try teaching the lurkers.

LOL! I am, or I would not be answering you at all.

Answer my questions completely and honestly and let the light shine. What have you got to lose?

I have been completely hones in answering the questions you pose in spite of the twisted “When did you stop beating your wife” tone they have. Experience tells me you are baiting some kind of juvenile “Logic Trap”, I will stand on what I have said, you’ll have to try to spring your trap from there.

You appear to be confused as to who should bear the burden of prood in this case.

100% of non-Mormon scientists (and a probable majority of Mormon scientists) with expertise in the fields of DNA, archaeology, linguistic history, etc. do not see any credible evidence whatsoever for the Mormon story of the peopling of the Americas.

Someone making an extraordinary claim is expected to produce extraordinary evidence if they expect to be believed.

I’m fairly sure your claims that DNA is not dispositive are another example of special pleading, but I don’t have the time (or interest) to research it and prove it as I have your other claims in this thread. I find history research interesting, but DNA causes my eyes to glaze over. :)

You go right ahead and believe whatever you want to, regardless of the evidence. You won’t convince me without some real evidence, whereas your claims to date have mostly consisted of assertions that I cannot absolutely, positively prove your position wrong. Well, I don’t need to.

Y’all have a nice day.

BTW, the cat NEVER has my tongue, although maybe I’d be better off if it did, but sometimes I have to earn a living.

“All the great bows through antiquity were compound and made of bone and wood, but Nephi had something no one in the whole region had, a pretty special people in 600BC.”

Please, FastCoyote, do some opposition research before posting assertions that are so easily debunked. This took me about three minutes to locate. From http://www.meridianmagazine.com/ideas/050801steel.html
***
An interesting key to the problem is Nephi’s steel bow (1 Ne 16.18). My assumption here is that this phrase is meant to describe the same weapon that is called a “steel bow” in the KJV Bible. (I think this is obvious whether Joseph Smith invented the text or it is ancient.) The phrase “bow of steel” occurs three times in the KJV: 2 Sam 22.35, Job 20.24, and Ps 18.34. In all cases it translates the Hebrew phrase qeshet nechushah, which modern translations consistently, and correctly, translate as “bronze.” There is one other reference to “steel” in the KJV at Jer 15.12, also referring to bronze. The metal is apparently called “steel” in the KJV because bronze is “steeled” (strengthened) copper through alloying it with tin or through some other process.
***
In other words, the translation of the Book of Mormon is accurate as to the terms used in the period in which it was written.

No planets...

Then obviously LDS Doctrine has changed in the last 40 years.

As for “Grand-Gods”, it’s irrelevant to my salvation, so I am not going to argue it.

O Contraire'. To even acknowledge that there might be a God above our God or a God besides our God could be very detrimental to your eternal destination. God leaves no room for other Gods either before him, after him or contemporaneous to him. There is one God. Not simply one God for us. But one God, period. You will not become a god or a God or a GOD. You have God's word on that one.

Answer this one question: Does the LDS Church teach that God "became" God by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel?

I have been completely hones in answering the questions you pose in spite of the twisted “When did you stop beating your wife” tone they have.

I'm looking for clarity. I'm not baiting you, I just want you to explain what it is that you believe. I told you what I believed when I was an LDS. Apparently the LDS Church either doesn't believe that anymore, despite the fact that you have a 130 year history of expressly teaching that doctrine, or you are attempting to conceal it. Let's get it out in the open. Lets show the world our differences.

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: (1 Peter 3:15 KJV)

Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. (Isaiah 43:10 KJV)

How does that square with LDS beliefs?

So what is my horse in the race (from your perspective, of course)?

It certainly isn’t going to change my lack of LDS testimony. My ggggreat grandfather is dead and has been for 130 years.

Regardless of whether or not BY was involved, my people from Southern Utah definitely WERE. What is my horse?

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.