| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 03/03/2008 9:42:54 AM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior |
Posted on 02/22/2008 9:11:12 AM PST by Zakeet
They're called the "Lost Boys," the teenagers kicked out of their homes and communities by leaders of the polygamist Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to ensure there's an ample supply of single, young women who will one day become plural wives. Representative Lorie Fowlke (R-Orem), is running a bill to make this abandonment a felony.
"Estimates are that we've had more than 1,000 children - primarily in southern Utah - thrown out of their homes," Fowlke says. "What we were trying to do with this bill is criminalize this behavior and send a message to this community that they can't just throw away their children."
H.B. 23 adds child abandonment to the definition of child abuse, and makes it a felony crime. It also adds an enhancement if a parent or organization benefits from the child's abandonment to further an illegal enterprise, such as polygamy. This is the case with the FLDS church, says Roger Hoole, a lawyer who represents some of the displaced young men and sits on the board for the Utah Association for Justice. He says the church benefits from kicking out young men who would compete for plural wives. This, he says, has devastating consequences.
"There's a huge impact that's coming, like a tsunami, that's going to hit the state of Utah, when these boys get a little older and realize what has happened to them and get angry," Hoole says. "There's a real problem here."
Fowlke's bill gained unanimous support in a Senate committee this morning, and now heads to the full Senate for consideration.
ROFLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
COMMUMMATION????????????????????????????????
roflol!
I don’t know, seems your little one liners are pretty witless.
Glad to know that you are God and making judgments! At least you seem to think you are.
Interesting. Glad to know you, God.
You are God, right? The One who passes Judgment?
Mene, mene, tekel upharsin.
Post 1899 is more frightening than Johnathan’s Sermon! Sliding instituted right before our eyes ...
As usual, you are leaving out half the doctrine. After you do all that you can do, which is NEVER enough, the Lord Jesus Christ forgives us.
Too bad you don’t believe in doing anything much less stating the complete doctrine. Too bad. You don’t really have to lie, you know? And a lie of omission is a lie.
So you believe Jesus ‘adds to your good works’ ... and you don’t comprehend the error of that, eh? ... And I do not lie. Nice try though ...
The Mormon Church has perfected that practice.
I wish you didn’t feel the necessity of rewriting what i post into something i didn’t say. That is also a form of lying.
Well, I won't argue your expertise in witless one liners :)
COMMUMMATION????????????????????????????????
_____________________________________________
Yeppers
Joseph Smith was trying to make a mummmy of Helen Mar Kimball ...
He considered her old enough for sex...
but not old enough to go to dances...
BTW...Why were the mormons going to dances ???
It was considered OK to dance ???
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I guess if adultery is OK...
then dancing cant be wrong...
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Joseph Smith was trying to make a mummy of Helen Mar Kimball ..
The papyri were presented to the Living prophet and seer of mormonism and were accepted by him at that time. If you chose to deny this, then please supply the official press release from the GA, as FAIR, FARMS, jeff Lindsey, et al mormon apologists sites are not OFFICAL sources. The closest they (your living prophet and seer) have come (besides hiding behind unofficial hack job) is a quasi-official statement is Michael Rhodes’ article in the July, 1988, Ensign
The papyri in question are a part of the collection of Egyptian mummies and papyri that the Prophet Joseph Smith bought from Michael Chandler in 1835. After the Prophet’s death, the papyri were lost to the Church. But in 1966, Dr. Aziz S. Atiya, a professor of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Utah, discovered some twenty-two separate papyri fragments in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, which were clearly part of Joseph Smith’s original collection. The papyri were acquired by the Church, and they are now located at Brigham Young University.
Thus Rhodes admits that the mormon church has the papyri. The silence of the church’s living seer and prophet indicates that the mormon church accepts these documents as those Smith used to create the BOA. The last time there was a silence this big was when the living prophet and seer accepted the Kinderhook plates as being authentic. Lets put this to bed real easy, let the living prophet and seer settle this matter of faith once and for all. (crickets – since 1966)
“Then reading Dr. Nibley’s materials “A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price,” of which writings Klaus Baer himself, one of the translators of the Joseph Smith Papyri, said was delightful and probably ought to be a mandatory read for upcoming and budding Egyptologists. He was very impressed with Nibley’s work.
In a footnote in a paper written by Robert Ritner, The University of Chicago, (“The Breathing Permit of Hor Among the Joseph Smith Papyri, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 62 (July 2003):161-80. by Dr. Robert Ritner, Prof. of Egyptology at the University of Chicago.) regarding Nibley’s scholarship in that document:
Hugh Nibley, “A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price,” The Improvement Era 71 (January 1968): 18– 24, quote on p. 23. Within this and continuing installments, Nibley undercuts this “appeal to authority” by a series of personal attacks: Mercer, “a hustling young clergyman” (ibid., p. 21), is extensively attacked in The Improvement Era 71 (May 1968): 55–57, and vol. 71 (June 1968): 18–22, not “primarily to discredit the authority” of the scholar, but to illustrate “the limitations and pitfalls of Egyptology in general” (June 1968, p. 22). Presumably for the same reason, Nibley notes that Sayce was a “spoiled dilettante” (vol. 71, July 1968, p. 50), that Petrie “never went to a theatre” (ibid.), that Meyer “lacked aesthetic sense” (ibid., p. 51) but had a rationalistic bent that “ineffectively [ sic !] disqualifies himself from the jury” (p. 52), that Breasted was “pro-German” (p. 54), and that von Bissing had “an uncompromising loyalty to a feudal society and feudal religion— hardly the man to look with a kindly eye on the supernaturalism . . . of a Joseph Smith” (p. 54, emphasis added). European “feudal religion,” of course, presupposed the reality of supernatural intervention, but Nibley’s logic is peculiar in these tracts circulated only among the faithful. The Egyptologists are stigmatized as being idiosyncratic and aloof, which should make their unified assessment even more compelling. In any case, Nibley wants a sympathetic audience, not Egyptological fact. The August 1968 continuation derides the careers of T. Devéria, J. Peters, A. C. Mace, A. M. Lythgoe, G. Barton, E. Banks, and E. A. W. Budge. Nibley’s tactic has been adopted by his followers. The earlier version of this article produced internet discussions devoted not to the translation, but to scurrilous remarks concerning my own religious and personal habits. Let the scholar be warned.
Personal attacks like this are a common tactic from Nibley since he cannot hold his own intellectually with true Egyptologists. Ritners review of the papyri in the article indicates that Nibley even stooped to attacking his mentor – Baer.
Sorry, not only I, but I would dare say Dr. Baer as well, would put up Nibley’s credentials against those you have cited any day of the week.
Hugh Nibley: The church’s leading historian who spent many years defending the Book of Abraham. He was a scholar but not an Egyptologist and never (per my search) obtained any certifications in Egyptology later in his career.
Klaus Baer: Associate Professor of Egyptology at the University of Chicago's Oriental Institute Egyptologist at the University of Chicago. Ritner’s former professor. Numerous articles in peer reviewed journals and several (at least) books on the subject. Even wrote article for Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1968.
Some of those “experts” cited by the Tanners & others have been shown to be totally fraudulent in that in some cases, they didn’t have a degree for their research yet presented themselves as experts.
Names please……and while I’m waiting here is a mormon expert often cited.
Dee Nelson: Church member that was one of the first to examine the papyri. He claimed to have a background in Egyptology but was later exposed for misrepresenting his credentials.
For the interested:
http://www.irr.org/mit/lboa-youtube.html
Discuss the issues all you want, but do NOT make it personal.
I really can't stand it. Bring back the old software. There was nothing wrong with it. I can't even find the threads that are active anymore.
The old system was the best on the internet. The new system makes it just another site.
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.