++++++++++++++++++
Not saying it was justified, it just seems to me that the anti’s here at FR, and other places, want to make it seem that all of the LDS history is bad because of ONE, REPEAT, ONE such incedent, while ignoring the hundreds of “good christians” that did many , many times worse.
I think that it is amassing that the Saints controlled their feelings and actions so well that only ONE group was attracted, given the thousands of opportunities to act like the “real christians” who caused the deaths and suffering of thousands of Saints.
Fred,
Do you have one bit of proof to back up this outrageous accusation?
If so, would you please post links to credible references.
Thanks
/Zak
That all the time in IL, the Mormons just ‘took it’?
They didn't. It was called the Mormon Wars for a reason.
Mormons were killed by non-mormons. Non-mormons were killed by Mormons.
It wasn't just ONE incident. Good grief, if you are a Mormons, you sure are lacking in your knowledge of your own religion's past.
Of course they tend to dwell on only the ones where the Mormons were the victims.
THAT, is a "full-true lie!" What, pray tell, is "many, many times worse" than ambushing from secret and killing every man, woman and child over the age of eight?
Source and links for these acts you are accusing Christians of.
You didn't answer my post about the "friends and relatives" claim you made, Fred...can't you back up your "half-true lie"?
Come on, add this with the illegal destruction of the Nauvoo Examiner, murderous raids by the Danites and ripping the people of Kirkland off, just for starters. During the period of the massacre, mormons were either denying or extorting the immigrants of there limited resources for supplies. Young was ranting about his 'blood atonement' and all. No, the Christians time and again didn't pick the fight, but they wouldn't cowtow either to the general and king smith.