Sorry, that is just not accurate.
The LDS Church spoke out forcefully against radical Islam both before, and particularly after 911.
Many LDS have gone off to fight (my son in law is one of them) and many have been injured and died. Service in the Armed forces of the US is respected and encouraged in the Chruch and there are many who serve.
There are church members who do seek ways to speak with what they deem as peaceful Muslims who are open to discussion and try and find common ground so there can be understanding and peaceful reltions...but the two belief systems at their core or diamterically opposed. Fundamental Islam seeks world domination at the point of a sword, either you join, are enslaved, or die.
The LDS Church prosilytes through pure free choice and tries to speak with and discuss with people and let them make up their own mind...and does not seak to “rule the world”. We believe Christ will rule the world when he returns.
The LDS Church proclaims Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Atoner for all mankind and the only path for mankind back to God. Islam denies the divinity of Jesus Christ and the Atonement.
One quote is repeatedly used by Joseph Smith when he indicated that if persecutions continued at the time (when He and Far West Missouri, a town of several thousand Mormons that were surrounded by Militia and Regular Armies of the State of Missouri in the 1830s acting under the infamous Mormon Extermination order by Governor Boggs at the time) that he would be the next Mohammed to his enmies. Smith was emotionally involved to the extreme, facing the defeat and potential butchery of his friends and neighbors and members of his church and trying to defend them with less than 1000 men against many times that number.
He made this statement during that highly charged encounter. Most people on the western frontier did not even know of islam, and those that did were certainly not acquainted with its bloody reality as we are today. I beleive he was wrong to say it based on all of that, but I do not believe he meant at all to equate the LDS church at the time then, or now, with Islam.
As it was, he surrendered, was imprisoned and his town ransacked and all of the people, men women and children forced to give up their lawfully owned possessions, land and hoses and leave the state on foot in the dead of winter. they literally left a trail of blood as they walked across the state to Illinois and crossed the river to safety at the time.
So, I will give Joseph Smith some understanding and leeway on that quote, given the circumstances and emotions, even though I disagree with what he said.
As it is, the LDS church is not confederated with, or like fundamental islam in the least and IMHO it is a grave insult to the blood of those LDS Americans who have shed their blood in the fight against it to try and marginalize and demonize their faith in this manner.
You’re getting pretty adept at your LDS brand of political correctness, Jeff. How well do you think it will work during a media onslaught? And just between us two, your using the service and sacrifice of our soldiers, LDS or Methodist or atheist, is offensive since you’re exploiting their memory to try and squelch exposure of MormonISM. You’re becoming disgusting, Jeff.
SURE they were!
11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
How about a link to the factual description of this: "Smith was emotionally involved to the extreme, facing the defeat and potential butchery of his friends and neighbors and members of his church and trying to defend them with less than 1000 men against many times that number." from actual, factual state history sources...not from mormon propaganda sources.
Since Utah has almost the lowest enlistment rate in the United States, that is one church teaching that isn't taking hold in the Mormon population.
I respect and admire the writing and thinking of Thomas Jefferson. He seems to have been a man of strong faith, as well as a man of strong reason. Whatever his personal faith, his reasoning delivered to us a higher value on equality and unity, with every person having the right to worship, or not, as one sees fit.
If God, Himself, were here today, which religious group of the many thousands would He claim as His own, if any?
Would He favor the Baptists on the one side of the river, who prefer a quick dip of the victim into the water; or would He side with the Baptists on yonder's side, who hold them under until they bubble and turn blue?
Would He favor the kneelers, with their spotless frocks and candles; or would he favor those hardy souls who feel just as comfortable praying while working, fighting, sitting, standing, or running full blast?
Would he favor the sainted folks on the far hill who properly bite the heads clean off their rooster to paint their alter red; or would he side with the clearly anointed in the valley who properly handle the writhing viper?
To the great sorrow of my old family, I long ago departed from the church of my youth, some memories of which I hold in fondness; and wandered around and about, until now in my older age, I find myself in a congregation of one, praying to a God that, in all honesty, none of us can fully define or comprehend. I defy anyone who tells me that I am on the wrong path, while I respect the rights of others to choose a different one.
Some folks think it necessary to condemn me to Hell for not adhering to their particular brand of babbling, but I talked to God about that, and He said it's alright for me to return the favor, and even fight to the death to defend my freedom, in this and other matters.
I might complain about the music of one group, or the preaching of another, but I defend the absolute and unalienable right of any person to join any religion, or to leave any religion, as they so choose.
I believe, as Jefferson wrote in dozens of different ways, that each person has the right to choose his manner of worship, or none; that the coercion of one belief over the other is divisive and tyrannical; and that the unifying principles of freedom necessary for this nation's endurance preclude the establishment of any particular religious belief, and preclude the prohibition of any particular religious belief, so long as such religion does not infringe on the rights of others.
I will not vote for any individual who cannot correctly articulate that Constitutional principles will and must guide their official conduct and policies. It is commendable if their personal life includes sound spiritual guidelines; but religious tyranny is no better that any other sort, and I will not vote for a tyrant.
As for the muslims, who supported and cheered as their fellows hijacked our planes, destroyed our buildings, and killed many of our people, I just don't see them as a religion. Their history, their ongoing actions, and their stated intentions clearly define them as an ongoing threat to human civilization.
As for Romney, I don't care what religion he claims, or which one claims him. His political and business behavior is best described as crony communism. His entire adult life is one long train of lying, cheating, stealing, destroying; pretending to be this or that, while having no core principles, except to enrich himself and his cronies.
Best wishes for your continued recovery, my friend.