Posted on 03/21/2009 8:22:38 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
Here is the response of a Utahn commenting on a Salt Lake Tribune online blog concerning HBO's attempt in its series "Big Love" to increase its revenues by publicly insulting the religious sensitivity of a minority religion: "Anything that gets the LDS "church's magical Mormon underwear in a twist is all right with me!!"
I write for a regional newspaper in Iowa. During the last election campaign, I suggested that Mitt Romney lost the Iowa caucus to Mike Huckabee primarily due to anti-Mormon bigotry. A reader argued that my opinion had no credence because I was a lay leader in the LDS Church.
The writer was either suggesting that I knew exactly what I was talking about and was therefore credible, or that I shouldn't be believed because I was a Mormon, which implies that the writer was a bigot.
-SNIP-
It is obvious to an outsider that Utah, or at least Salt Lake City, has within itself a deeply held culture of bigotry. A bigotry so ingrained in the cultural norm that the readers posting comments to the newspaper's blogs, apparently believing they are freethinking and ironic, are saying things online that would never be allowed into print if written about other groups.
(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...
Keep researching.
Hey stourme. There is a cemetary in Parowan where this young 23 year old man lived. There are headstones there. Why don’t you see if you can locate his, okay?
Rosmos Anderson - for adultery and apostasy
John D. Lee - For his part in the MMM
Thomas Coleman (or Colburn) - former slave for courting a white woman.
Ike Hatch
The Aiken party
The Francher Wagon train
A Mr. Johnson in Cedar City
Henry Jones
Phillip Klingensmith
The concept of blood atonement is also why Utah had a firing squad for so long.
Yep so you can add anyone killed by firing squad in Utah since the invention of the electic chair or lethal injectionby, like Gary Bishop.
Oh Lord, how long will these false accusations continue against thy Church?
See the FAIR LDS response to these and other false accusations from the so-called ministry of the Tanners.
When will someone produce something other than garbage from anti-mormon sources.
From Wikipedia
“Main articles: Blood atonement, Crime and violence in Utah, Mountain Meadows Massacre, and Oath of vengeance
Despite a number of rhetorical statements by LDS leaders in the late 1850s, there is no evidence that anyone was “blood atoned” at the orders of Brigham Young or any other general authority. Contemporary claims for such actions uniformly come from anti-Mormon books and newspapers with lurid titles such as The Destroying Angels of Mormondom[1] and Abominations of Mormonism Exposed.[2]
The First Presidency issued an official declaration on the matter of killing apostates, as a form of blood atonement, in 1889. This declaration reads, in part:
Notwithstanding all the stories told about the killing of apostates, no case of this kind has ever occurred, and of course has never been established against the Church we represent. Hundreds of seceders from the Church have continuously resided and now live in this territory, many of whom have amassed considerable wealth, though bitterly opposed to the Mormon faith and people. Even those who made it their business to fabricate the vilest falsehoods, and to render them plausible by culling isolated passages from old sermons without the explanatory context, and have suffered no opportunity to escape them of vilifying and blackening the characters of the people, have remained among those whom they have thus persistently calumniated until the present day, without receiving the slightest personal injury.
We denounce as entirely untrue the allegation which has been made, that our Church favors or believes in the killing of persons who leave the Church or apostatize from its doctrines. We would view a punishment of this character for such an act with the utmost horror; it is abhorrent to us and is in direct opposition to the fundamental principles of our creed.”
Oh Lord, how long will these excuses continue?
The LDS church would be greatly served, and taken much more seriously as a faith, if they would just admit the problems in their history and apologize. The Catholics have done it. The protestants have done it. But this constant excuse making and double-speak weakens their credibility.
As far as FAIR/FARMS. I believe they are “lying for the Lord.” I have read their stuff and am yet to be convinced by their arguments (as is every other Religious Historian - even the atheists - that I know). Outside of Mormonism, FARM/FAIR is not taken as serious scholarship, sorry but it true.
Perhaps because none of the incidents spoken of were so-called blood atonement and even the Tanners know it. Talking about lying for the Lord.
It is my experience that people like them and most of the anti’s on FR will say ANYTHING to make us look bad.
In a 1994 article entitled "Concept of Blood Atonement Survives in Utah Despite Repudiation," Peggy Fletcher Stack, staff writer for the Salt Lake Tribune, wrote, "In the past decade, potential jurors in every Utah capital homicide were asked whether they believed in the Mormon concept of 'blood atonement'" (11/5/94, p.D1)
While trying to deny it, McConkie confirmed the practice "But under certain circumstances there are some serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men must then have their own blood shed to atone for their sins" (Mormon Doctrine, Pg. 92).
“I will tell you how much I love those characters. If they had any respect to their own welfare, they would come forth and say, whether Joseph Smith was a Prophet or not, ‘We shed his blood, and now let us atone for it;’ and they would be willing to have their heads chopped off, that their blood might run upon the ground, and the smoke of it rise before the Lord as an incense for their sins.”
- Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 2, p. 179, February 18, 1855
“If men turn traitors to God and His servants, their blood will surely be shed, or else they will be damned, and that too according to their covenants.”
- Apostle Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, v. 4, p. 375
“We would not kill a man, of course, unless we killed him to save him...”
- Apostle Jebediah M. Grant, Deseret News, July 27, 1854
“... We may talk of men being redeemed by the efficacy of his [Christ’s] blood; but the truth is that that blood has no efficacy to wash away our sins. That must depend upon our own action.”
- Apostle Amasa M. Lyman, Apostle, Journal of Discourses, v. 7, p. 299, 1859
“Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf. This is scriptural doctrine, and is taught in all the standard works of the Church.”
- Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, v. 1, pp. 135-136, 1954
“Just last month, attorneys for condemned child-killer James Edward Wood in Pocatello, Idaho, argued that his defense was undermined by a visit from local [Mormon] church leaders who talked to him about shedding his own blood.... “His [Wood’s] attorneys contend Wood is a victim of a Mormon belief in ‘blood atonement.’ ... Judge Lynn Winmill... heard hours of testimony during the past week about Mormon doctrine on apostasy and forgiveness of sin. Wood’s lawyers even asked the bishop who presided over the church court that excommunicated Wood about secret temple rituals involving symbolic throat and slashing or disembowelment, but Winmill did not require him to respond.”
- Salt Lake Tribune, Nov. 5, 1994, p. D1, D5
“To whatever extent the preaching on blood atonement may have influenced action, it would have been in relation to Mormon disciplinary action among its own members. In point would be a verbally reported case of a Mr. Johnson in Cedar City who was found guilty of adultery with his step-daughter by a bishop’s court and sentenced to death for atonement of his sin. According to the report of reputable eyewitnesses, judgment was executed with consent of the offender who went to his unconsecrated grave in full confidence of salvation through the shedding of his blood. Such a case, however primitive, is understandable within the means of this doctrine and the emotional extremes of the [Mormon] reformation.”
- Dr. Gustive O. Larson, BYU Professor, Utah Historical Quarterly, Jan. 1958, p. 62, note 39
There is a legal doctrine of “incitement”. If someone teaches something or says something that causes another person to commit a crime, they can be held liable. So, the LDS leaders taught Blood Atonement, and if people, even ON THEIR OWN, committed it based upon their teachings, the leadership is culpable.
Love or hate the Tanners, Jerald was a very good and accurate researcher, and I have vetted many of his sources.
Incase omm missed it -
“To whatever extent the preaching on blood atonement may have influenced action, it would have been in relation to Mormon disciplinary action among its own members. In point would be a verbally reported case of a Mr. Johnson in Cedar City who was found guilty of adultery with his step-daughter by a bishop’s court and sentenced to death for atonement of his sin. According to the report of reputable eyewitnesses, judgment was executed with consent of the offender who went to his unconsecrated grave in full confidence of salvation through the shedding of his blood. Such a case, however primitive, is understandable within the means of this doctrine and the emotional extremes of the [Mormon] reformation.”
- Dr. Gustive O. Larson, BYU Professor, Utah Historical Quarterly, Jan. 1958, p. 62, note 39
If it was never taught - why do so many mormons believe it?
In a 1994 article entitled “Concept of Blood Atonement Survives in Utah Despite Repudiation,” Peggy Fletcher Stack, staff writer for the Salt Lake Tribune, wrote, “In the past decade, potential jurors in every Utah capital homicide were asked whether they believed in the Mormon concept of ‘blood atonement’” (11/5/94, p.D1)
When I lived in Utah, I knew one of the psychologist who worked at the prison. He was LDS. Part of his job was counseling those who were to be executed. We were discussing blood atonement one day and he told me that those who wanted firing squad execution almost always wanted it becuase they believed their blood would atone for their sins (blood atonement).
John D. Lee - For his part in the MMMJust off the top of my head
I gave you several names not just Lee. Lee was a scapegoat. Utah was not a state then, it was a theocracy. Incitement still makes the LDS church culpable.
Of course the LDS suspect anything us “antis” say, I know I didn’t trust the “antis” when I was LDS. But I learned differently.
No one can be argued into Christ’s kingdom. Christ does the convincing. Take or leave my proofs, I really do not care. The fact of the matter remains that the LDS church consistently lies and makes excuses and leads many to damnation.
According to the report of reputable eyewitnessesIs this the same "eyewitnesses" that saw all danites running around killing everyone...but for some reason couldn't produce any bodies or names of the dead.
In point would be a verbally reported case of a Mr. JohnsonVerbally reported from "reputable" eyewitnesses.No names, No body, no grave, just some people who said they saw a "Mr. Johnson"..or "Mr. Jones" or "Mr. Smith"....
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTrials/mountainmeadows/leeexecution.html
Thus John D. Lee was led on, step by step, from one crime to another, until his leaders had made all the use of him they could, and then they sacrificed him to a felon’s death, in order to save themselves and cover up the sins of the Church.
I gave you several names not just Lee. Lee was a scapegoat. Utah was not a state then, it was a theocracy. Incitement still makes the LDS church culpable.You just don't get it. And it totally baffles me as to why.
Take or leave my proofs, I really do not care.Obviously you don't care. That's part of the problem. You have yet to actually provide a "proof" ....ever.
Thus John D. Lee was led on, step by step, from one crime to another, until his leaders had made all the use of him they could, and then they sacrificed him to a felon’s death, in order to save themselves and cover up the sins of the Church.Standard Operating Procedure.
You have yet to actually provide a “proof” ....ever
Watch it, you are getting real close to “making it personal”.
That is just your opinion. You are making a general reference, yet I have provided several proofs of this and other things, you just fail to see it.
I posted Lee’s name regarding the doctrine of Blood Atonement. He asked to die by firing squad becuase of Blood Atonement.
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.