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

Nah, I don’t think I’d win. I’m young and inexperienced.

Still, not to point at you personally, one can still have prodigious amounts of grey matter, and it still be looney.

As for you, I think you simply have a different perspective than mine, and the two will never be reconciled. I’m alright with that. But, like you, I still think I’m right, and there’s nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

I’d much prefer to be discussing politics, but it seems that those who would denigrate my faith are quite tenacious. What can I do but match their tenacity?

Little was known of what they talked about until recently when it came to light that Huntington (apparently speaking for Young) told the chiefs that he ‘gave them all the cattle that had gone to Cal[ifornia by] the south rout[e].’ The gift ‘made them open their eyes,’ he said. But ‘you have told us not to steal,’ the Indians replied. ‘So I have,’ Huntington said, but now they have come to fight us & you for when they kill us they will kill you.’ The chiefs knew what cattle he was giving them. They belonged to the Baker-Fancher train.” (”Forgotten Kingdom: The Mormon Theocracy in the American West,” David Bigler, 1998, pp. 167-168.)

Lied to them and enticed them to sin.

“Still, not to point at you personally, one can still have prodigious amounts of grey matter, and it still be looney.”

I wholeheartedly agree - genius magnifies insights, but also magnifies the errors. That’s why when someone questions my sanity, I offer real money in a bet to separate out the name callers. I have yet to find anyone who will take me up on it.

“As for you, I think you simply have a different perspective than mine, and the two will never be reconciled. I’m alright with that. But, like you, I still think I’m right, and there’s nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

I’d much prefer to be discussing politics, but it seems that those who would denigrate my faith are quite tenacious. What can I do but match their tenacity?”

Morality is at the very root of politics - to deny the religious question is to found the political structure on sand. That does not imply everyone must convert to a true faith, but it does mean there are certain basic assumptions. Man as God steps over the line in so many fundamental ways that I cannot look the other way. Plus, I’ve seen the effects in real life by Mormon bullies who misuse their power.

No, unfortunately we are not all on the same side. There is absolute truth, and whatever doesn’t agree with it is not truth, but falsehood. There is no “kinda halfway truth.” If orthodox Christianity is true (which I believe it is), then anything that is not orthodox Christianity is not true but is falsehood.

If a group of people call themselves Christians, but do not believe the Bible, and add their own writings like the BOM to the Bible, and hold beliefs that are not based on the Bible, and believe in a prophet that is not in the Bible, and have a different means of salvation than that which is found in the Bible, and have a different view of God than that revealed in the Bible, etc., then it misrepresents Christianity. It also confuses people as to what Christianity is, and what orthodox Christians believe.

Jesus said he is the way, the truth, and the life. There is no other way. There is no other truth. There is no other life.

I imagine it is confusing for Mormons who are taught that they are Christians, or are taught some of the beliefs of Christianity, and therefore consider themselves Christians. Like I said in another post, Mormons don’t get to decide if they are Christians or not, orthodox Christians get to decide if Mormons are or not, and they are not, I am sorry to say.

Why do Mormons want to be considered Christians? And if you know that LDS is not orthodox Christianity, does it bother you to be “unorthodox”? By orthodox, I mean the basic, fundamental beliefs of a religion. If one doesn’t accept these, then they necessarily do not believe in that religion, but in an adulteration of that religion or in some other religion entirely.

The universe is governed by a head god and his council. "The head God called together the Gods and sat in grand council to bring forth the world...In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it" (Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, PP. 348-49).

Oh Pulease, I had these before I was 12. Who is the head God? I’ll take God the Father for all the points Alex. Who sits on the council of the Gods?Bonus round? All God’s children (that’s us).

Um, me.

Who taught you that God "was a “man” on another planet who “became” God after going through a mortal test on an earth like ours?".

Is that something that the LDS Church taught you?

How did you come to that opinion?

Scripture? Tradition? A burning busom? A Doctrinal Book published by Deseret Book Company? Joseph Smith? Brigham Young? Milton Hunter?

Is there any other church on the face of the earth other than the LDS Church that believes that?

Who is the head God? I’ll take God the Father for all the points Alex.

So you believe that God the Father is the "head God" of the council of the Gods on Kolob?

Is that what the Mormon Church teaches?

Who sits on the council of the Gods?Bonus round? All God’s children (that’s us).

So did you sit on the "Council of the Gods" in the beginning, when "the head of the gods called a council of the gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and (the) people in it."

Were you there? Were you sitting on the council? Were you a god then? How did you vote?

This isn't a Romney thread, this is a Mormon thread accusing us of bigotry.

CC, I respect your history, but here is some of mine. There are a few records of genealogy my mom has forbidden us to do until after she dies (sound familiar? I thought it would)

You see we are related to Governor Boggs. (yes, the guy who signed the extermination order)

She won’t put that in her genealogy. I know a bit about the persecution in Missouri. You were born and raised a Mormon, whatever your status now, you don’t qualify as a Bigot against Mormons, and I’ll defend you against any one who says otherwise.

So you are a descendent of John D Lee, and I am a descendent of Govoner Boggs, kind of gives us a weird link huh?

Cheers

It has always to be God plan to grant joint heirs to those who quality!
Those who qualify for eternal life are those who

(a) have been qualified by the substitute life & death of Jesus Christ; and

So you think all will be saved and received the same reward be they living a righteous life or rebellious one?

(b) trust in that substitute.

You believe all you go to do is believe and your safe!

I read the scripture and believe it mean what it says!

As for godhood, God doesn't share His throne with any of us. He shares heaven with us, which is what we inherit. But an heir doesn't work for anything left to him. It's given upon the death of the heir. In this case, we receive upon the death of Christ, and knowing Him as He is and for what He's done.

Romans 8
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Otherwise, you're telling me that if you have a great inheritance, and you leave a will for your pet dog, you're implying that just because "you've always planned this" that this somehow = your dog being converted into a human in the afterlife.

"Heir" does not = becoming divine.

Ps 82
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

John 10:
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

Thank you for your reply.

“Jesus said he is the way, the truth, and the life. There is no other way. There is no other truth. There is no other life.”

Agreed. 100%.

“Like I said in another post, Mormons don’t get to decide if they are Christians or not, orthodox Christians get to decide if Mormons are or not, and they are not, I am sorry to say.”

This statement really surprises me. To me, you are saying that you are taking upon yourself the power of Christ to say who follows Him, and who doesn’t.

I firmly believe that He retains the privilege of making this judgment to Himself. I can only hope I qualify; but you do not get a vote in the matter. Please, do not try to abrogate such authority.

“Why do Mormons want to be considered Christians? And if you know that LDS is not orthodox Christianity, does it bother you to be “unorthodox”?”

We are Christians, because we believe in, worship, and follow Jesus Christ - independently of whether or not you would consider us such.

We do not shy away from the word “unorthodox.” There are many things that we believe that flatly contradict orthodoxy; and we are not embarrassed to admit it. To be frank, many “orthodox” doctrines are extra-Biblical in nature - they are traditions, handed down by men who didn’t have any better answers. I believe that God provides better answers through contemporary revelation to His church via His prophets. Not one such conflicting doctrine has yet been disproved to my satisfaction. For myself, if being unorthodox means being closer to Christ, then I will embrace the description.

You saying I am not a Christian is like me saying you have three feet. As much as I may repeat myself, it just doesn’t make it true, no matter how many reliable sources I have telling me that it is so.

Best regards.

“Is that something that the LDS Church taught you?”

I thought we went through this already? It is not an official doctrine of the LDS Church. Given what I understand - flawed as you may view it - of the purpose of life, the nature of God, etc., it tends to make sense.

But, since it’s not a doctrine of the LDS Church, and has no significant scriptural backing, it’s pointless to argue it with you.

“Is there any other church on the face of the earth other than the LDS Church that believes that?”

Not that I’m aware of; but then, the LDS Church is unique in many ways. Still, it bears repeating that the LDS Church does not officially recognize the principle you describe as doctrine.

[This statement really surprises me. To me, you are saying that you are taking upon yourself the power of Christ to say who follows Him, and who doesn’t.

I firmly believe that He retains the privilege of making this judgment to Himself. I can only hope I qualify; but you do not get a vote in the matter. Please, do not try to abrogate such authority.]

That is quite an inherently flawed argument and the reason we believe Mormons will spin anything. If Hitler said he was a Christian, by your logic we would have no right to cull him from the Church. God decides who gets into heaven, but we have free will to decide what is right and wrong. Myself, and many others, believe Mormons are false prophets, we would be wrong not to speak up.

Here is a counter example. You probably don’t know this but I believe 100% in the BOM and Joseph Smith. I also believe in the Satanic Bible and blood sacrifices. I want to marry your sister - tell me why you object to another Mormon marrying your sister - but remember, don’t be judgmental.

stop trying to prove my faith wrong.

Y'all have some issues.

I have never, unlike a good many on this thread, attacked a single Mormon theological doctrine. I happen to think some are a little odd, but doctrines generally do look odd to outsiders.

I believe every single post I have made has been objecting to attempts to deny or change historical facts to protect the reputation of "The Church," or the historical accuracy of the Book of Mormon or in the service of the odd Mormon fixation on getting in on the victim as saint business by portraying their early history as one of totally unprovoked persecution like that of the early Christians.

Y'all are absolutely entitled to your own doctrines. I don't care what kind of underwear you wear (or indeed whether you wear any), and I don't care whether you think you will become Gods in the afterlife, and I don't care if your definition of the Trinity differs from that of most Christians or if you practiced polygamy in the past. We will all someday find out who's right about these issues, and I suspect all of us will find out we are at least partially wrong.

I do object to attempts to justify mass murder and betrayal, and to attempts to hide or distort historical facts to promote an inaccurate picture of past events.

I'll even give you the whole Indians as Jews business. That is so ludicrous to anyone who has studied pre-Columbian history that it is self-refuting. But there are very dangerous distortions about my history, the history of America, being promoted by some Mormons, and I will fight those.

I will, however, try to fight fair. I don't think anybody can review my posts and legitimately accuse me of attacking your religion.

Everybody is entitled to his own opinion (or doctrine). Nobody is entitled to his own facts.

When someone makes an assertion like the following, they haven't much of a clue regarding the way the Israelis are able to use DNA to trace descendants of the twelve tribes all over the world:

The Jewish people do not assimilate people easily into their culture, so it stays genetically pure. As far as markers go.

I said”I would not expect them to be able to find anything because DNA tracking does not work that way.”

Have you gone and looked at the site we were talking about? It was written by an actual geneticist, instead you are quoting..yourself.

The poster has thus implied that the Israelis are not finding what they are surely finding because the Israeli's methods are not making a connection to Native Americans for the LDS researchers who cannot find evidence to support Joe Smith's big lie. I think we have another dancing hamster ...

You have no manners. On this forum if you are going to denigrate someone in this case, me. It is customary to ping them to the post. In essence say that to my face.

That said, the Israelis were a closed pool, comparing with another closed pool (closed pool = people who did not marry outside of their group and genetic purity is important to them.) From these closed pools, remarkable finds were made by the very talented Geneticists in Israel.

The Indians were a promiscuous genetic people, and would marry anyone and kept no record of genealogy, thus connecting anything to them is hit or miss (mostly miss) To deny valid points in an argument and then running off and have a conversation behind your opponent’s back where you congratulate yourselves on your non-victory, well smacks of cowardice.

Please prove this impression wrong.

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.