You must admit that those who are truly obsessed with LDS flew their flag. :-)
There's 51,998 MORE of us where WE can from!!
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 ...
You must admit that those who are truly obsessed with LDS flew their flag. :-)
I am PERSONAGE #1!
This is my son; PERSONAGE #2!!
Listen to him!!!
THX1138
If the mormons had been content to stick to their religion things would have been fine.
Instead, they’re making an attempt to co-opt or supersede Christianity with their own brand. A brand soundly rejected by the majority of the Christian faiths.
They send 10’s of thousands of missionaries out into the world each year to tell folks of all other faiths and denominations that only they, the mormons have the truth.
One would think that a few here on FR who rebut or refute the doctrines and teachings of mormonism should be of no great concern to the mormons.
Yet, it’s the opposite. Words such as “obsessed”, “anti-”, “liars”, “pigs”, the ever ubiquitous “hater”, and many more. Some have even gone so far as lying in “suggesting” that some of us who are ex-mormon are lying about it.
All of this is an attempt to de-humanize the ex-mo’s and Christians who contend for the Christian faith. To marginalize us, like Alinsky promoted in his “Rules for radicals” book. Freeze your opponent with personal attacks so that they get off the topic. Make it about the person, the poster, not the subject material.
The rejection of truth with ad-hominem attacks, denigrating comments, illogical comments and inane arguments does not negate the truth. It exposes the naysayer as either ignorant or complicit in the lie. An enabler of deceit.
So what; you Hateful APOSTATE!
There is not even a place in HELL for the likes of YOU!
--MormonDude(But; we WILL take you back and forgive all. You merely must follow the rules. They are quite easy you KNOW!)
Woo Hoo! "Outer darkness" here I come!
If I posted and was a member of that site, I might comment on it. I didn’t say that the word “Demon” was used in this thread.
But since I'm here:
This thread was originally about testimony of fLDS parents holding babies/toddlers' heads under a faucet. A crime if this really occurred, yeah!
It was actually about the testimony of a former fLDS parent who is claiming that OTHER fLDS parents did this. The former fLDS parent did not say SHE did it. The closest thing the posted part of the article comes to providing direct testimony is a comment that a "cousin's baby book" has a notation; the reporter doesn't say whether SHE saw the book, and if so where she got it, or if that was just stated to her by the former fLDS member.
But back to the original point, you are quite right, I got mixed up with the two contemporaneous threads. Sorry about that. At least one wasn't from 2008.
The first statement was a legal argument, discussing my opinion on whether they could be charged with kidnapping. The second was a shorthand way of describing the action of taking children from their parents without their consent and without proper legal foundation. Since the courts eventually ruled that there was no basis for removing certain children, the loose definition applies, even though it still would not be a "legal" definition of kidnapping.
I'm sorry if that really confused you, and I would have offered that explanation but we were told by the religion mod to stop dragging arguments from other threads here.
Don't you ever argue with yourself before coming to an opinion? How DO you come to an opinion?
However, in a forum where I've been posting since 2004, it would be absurd to think for a minute that I haven't done just about everything somewhere. General motivation should not be confused for rigid conformity to a singular style or goal.
As to the "demon" issue, oddly enough I didn't even comment on it directly here; it rubs me the wrong way, but you'll notice I didn't post that in response to any comment that actually has the term used against another freeper. It was a specific example of the general things that I see has being unduly divisive in the religious discussions at this political forum.
There are wackos in every walk of life. Not wise to paint a whole group of people with a broad brush because a particular wacko belongs to the group. I'm sure whatever "group" you a part of has its share.
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.
