Posted on 01/19/2011 5:37:42 AM PST by Colofornian
Water torture of babies is one way some members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day instil fear of authority, a former member testified Wednesday.
"It's quite common," Carolyn Blackmore Jessop told the constitutional reference case to determine whether Canada's polygamy law is valid. "They spank the baby and when it cries, they hold the baby face up under the tap with running water. When they stop crying, they spank it again and the cycle is repeated until they are exhausted."
It's typically done by fathers and it's called "breaking in," she said.
Ms. Jessop, who is from Arizona, testified about the practice during her testimony in B.C. Supreme Court.
Outside the courthouse, Ms. Jessop said water torture is common enough that there doesn't seem any shame attached to the practice.
In her cousin's baby book, there is a handwritten note by her mother noting that when her daughter was 18 months old, she was becoming quite a handful and, as a result, was being held under the tap on a regular basis.
SNIP
"Polygamy is not pretty to look at. It is nice that it is tucked away in a dark corner where nobody has to see its realities because it's creepy," she told Chief Justice Robert Bauman, adding that her biggest concern is that polygamy and all of its consequent abuses are ignored by the courts and law enforcement.
SNIP
...Her mother's family have been polygamists since Joseph Smith had his revelation about plural marriage in the mid-1800s.
Ms. Jessop was 18 when the prophet determined that she would become 50-year-old Merril Jessop's fourth wife...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalpost.com ...
Honey; be consistant.
The Church of Latter-day Saints should be abbreviated:
LdS; right?
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
is the official name of the religion commonly called the Mormon Church.
We are sorry if our choice of FONT has confused you.
Hiss....
The rotten fruit; again?
It's the lDs THEOLOGY that is DEMONIC!
You haven't favored contrast-and-compare specifics of the branch of MORMONISM [BASIS: Your comment, May 6, 2008: I was discussing the generalization of the comparison between TWO RELIGIONS. I’m not actually discussing THE SPECIFICS of those TWO RELIGIONS, just whether it is a fair comparison to claim they are identical..If someone was arguing that some leader of FLDS compared to some leader of LDS, I wouldn’t bother to join the discussion..] Source: May 6, 2008: LDS rebut N.Y. Times Web articleThat comment was in a thread about the LDS issuing a statement that the LDS practice of polygamy in the 1800s was not like what the FLDS was alleged to be doing in Texas.
I was very rude in that thread. I was snippy to people, I questioned their motives, I made sarcastic comments to them. Not exactly a model of decorum. And that was a religion thread, where I should have been better.
But that specific quote from me does not mean what you suggest. I wasn't making some profound pronouncement of my general opinion of contrasting religions. That comment was in a subthread of the article which was discussing to points: first, what the "normal" age was for marriage in the 1800s (on that point, I showed some suggestive material for a young age, said I didn't know, but thought that others who insisted it was older should provide some actual evidence for their opinion, not just keep SAYING it was true). Second, that in my specific dealings with LDS people, I found them to be in healthy monogamous families where they married at normal ages, not at all like the FLDS practice of polygamous families where they raped teenagers and forced them into marriages at young ages.
SO my argument about being "identical", and about the two religions, was NOT about the entire set of beliefs, but about the issue of whether they were identical in the specific area we were discussing.
The problem with ressurecting these arguments is that every thread is in context, and taking them out of context obscures the meaning.
I'll get back to this some other day.
This is not quite true: NONE of the 'scripture' has been changed, superceded, modified or excised from LdS canon.
It's STILL there.
MORMON (SLC branch) threw their GOD under the bus in favor of statehood.
Read it here for yourself - no PD links needed.
To Whom It May Concern:
Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy—
I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.
One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.
There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.
WILFORD WOODRUFF
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:
“I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.”
The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.
Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.
|
Hebrews 11:35-40
35. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection. 36. Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. 37. They were stoned ; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated-- 38. the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. |
~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President
To Whom It May Concern:
Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy—
I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.
One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.
There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.
WILFORD WOODRUFF
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:
“I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.”
The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.
Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.
|
Hebrews 11:35-40
35. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection. 36. Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. 37. They were stoned ; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated-- 38. the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. |
~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President
That is a long, detailed comment, one which I would love to discuss, and which would be a great discussion for our board.
But I have to object to this entire exercise. Yes, I challenged you to back up your claim that I defended the FLDS. But this has nothing to do with that claim, or your attempt to provide evidence.
Instead, you have taken a post out of a thread from a long time ago, injected it into a thread about something entirely different, and did a detailed response to it.
If you had posted that IN the thread where the original comment was, at the time we were discussing that, it would have been great.
I think if you took those 5 points and posted them as a religious vanity, we’d have a great discussion (although you wouldn’t need my quotes for that, since your quotes from me are some straw-man “rebuttal” of your 5 points.
In general, I have disdain for the practice of making some new argument, and then finding random quotes from someone and suggesting they are “responses” to your new argument. Better to post your argument as a standalone thread, and see if I disagree with it.
The official name of the Church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This full name was given by revelation from God to Joseph Smith in 1838.
While the term "Mormon Church" has long been publicly applied to the Church as a nickname, it is not an authorized title, and the Church discourages its use.
When writing about the Church, please follow these guidelines:
WHY won't these LOVING and CARING men reach out to the people who actually follow MORMON scripture (D&C 132) and ALLOW them to be called MORMON?
Since the SLC hierarchy is afraid of the Government and NOT of GOD, THEY should be the ones who CANNOT be called MORMONs: NOT the FUNDAMENTALISTs!
2 Nephi 3:18 And the Lord said unto me also: I will raise up unto the fruit of thy loins; and I will make for him a spokesman. And I, behold, I will give unto him that he shall write the writing of the fruit of thy loins, unto the fruit of thy loins; and the spokesman of thy loins shall declare it.
Joseph Smith Translation Gen. 50: 27 Thus saith the Lord God of my fathers unto me, A choice seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins, and he shall be esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins; and unto him will I give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy loins, his brethren.
Joseph Smith Translation Gen. 50: 31 Wherefore the fruit of thy loins shall write, and the fruit of thy loins of Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins, and also that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins of Judah, shall grow together
Diaboli virtus in lumbis ist. Diaboli virtus in lumbis ist.
This is on your homepage.
You just MIGHT want to SOURCE the video that it's from; it USED to be on your page; remember?
HAve I EVER thanked you enough for pointing it out to me?
Hee heeee heeeeee....
I guess what I SHOULD have said was that SOMEBODY here APPEARS to be very unhappy here on FR since all he or she SEEMS to do, IN MY OPINION, is whine, complain and gripe about the rules, the mods, the management and the other posters. PERHAPS. Nothing personal ;-)
I ridicule you and your beliefs :-)
Resty, honestly, if the LDS church is THE ONE TRUE CHURCH, then how could a choice of fonts have the slightest power over it. Please.
I didn’t say anything about waterboarding babies. Mike and Debbie Pearl are famous for their advocating beating of babies and there’s family of trial now for the death of their child, while they were following the Pearl’s methods.
Growing Children God’s Way has been changed to BabyWise, because of the negative publicity.
http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/2010/02/when-child-training-leads-to-abuse-and.html
I saw some stuff about Baby Wise but didn’t know if it was the same thing.
Well, awful as the situation is with that kind of discipline, there’s something about the response of, *Well,it’s not just them. So-and-so over here does it too.* that is just inherently dishonest.
The waterboarding infants by the FLDS needs to be condemned, period. No, *if’s*, *and’s*, or *but’s*.
No distracting others with accounts of others who do bad things, too. No changing the subject to attack others. It smacks too much of excusing the FLDS and steering attention away from the rightful condemnation they deserve for it.
The Ezzo’s are not relevant to the thread. Why bring it up?
So, I checked your posting history and didn’t see any condemnation of this action.
Why not?
Are you LDS or FLDS?
You are correct.
That does not excuse what is happening here.
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.