I’m familiar with the tactics of the flying Imams.
“There is nothing quoted that is not true.”
The commentary is where the lies come in, most of which is what constitutes this drivel. Anyone who cares to can read the sources rather than the one liner which were pulled and then convoluted into blatant lies. Have a good day!
You’ve twice made the claim there are lies within the article, but you still haven’t backed it up.
Anyone can make an outlandish accusation like you have, until you back it up with concrete evidence, your assertions are worthless.
Let's look at what this author cited the Mormon doctrine of The United Order -- and then I will comment on that:
Is Socialism The United Order? In a speech by this title, given at the LDS April 1966, General Conference of the Church, Mormon Elder and one of the governing Brethren of the church, Marion G. Romney, of the Council of the Twelve Apostles [and an uncle to Mitt Romney] had this to say about this United Order that Joseph Smith claimed came directly from God for the administration of properties and possessions. Now as to the United Order, and here I will give the words of the Lord and not my words. The United Order, the Lord's program for eliminating the inequalities among men, is based upon the underlying concept that the earth and all things therein belong to the Lord and that men hold earthly possessions as stewards accountable to God. On January 2, 1831, the Lord revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith that the Church was under obligation to care for the poor. (See D& C 38.) Later he said: "I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth ...and all things therein are mine. And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine. But it must needs be done in mine own way...." (D& C 104:14-16.) On February 9, 1831, the Lord revealed to the Prophet what his way was. (See D& C 42.) In his way there were two cardinal principles: (1) consecration and (2) stewardship. To enter the United Order, when it was being tried, one consecrated all his possessions to the Church by a "covenant and a deed which" could not "be broken." (D& C 42:30.) That is, he completely divested himself of all of his property by conveying it to the Church. Having thus voluntarily divested himself of title to all his property, the consecrator received from the Church a stewardship by a like conveyance. This stewardship could be more or less than his original consecration, the object being to make "every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs." (D& C 51:3.) This procedure preserved in every man the right to private ownership and management of his property. At his own option he could alienate it or keep and operate it and pass it on to his heirs. The intent was, however, for him to so operate his property as to produce a living for himself and his dependents. So long as he remained in the order, he consecrated to the Church the surplus he produced above the needs and wants of his family. This surplus went into a storehouse from which stewardship's were given to others and from which the needs of the poor were supplied. These divine principles are very simple and easily understood. A comparison of them with the underlying principles of socialism reveal similarities and basic differences. The following are similarities: Both (1) deal with production and distribution of goods; (2) aim to promote the well-being of men by eliminating their economic inequalities; (3) envision the elimination of the selfish motives in private capitalistic industrial system. Now the differences: (1) The cornerstone of the United Order is belief in God and acceptance of him as Lord of the earth and the author of the United Order. Socialism, wholly materialistic, is founded in the wisdom of men and not of God. Although all socialists may not be atheists, none of them in theory or practice seek the Lord to establish his righteousness. (2) The United Order is implemented by the voluntary free-will actions of men, evidenced by a consecration of all their property to the Church of God. One time the Prophet Joseph Smith asked a question by the brethren about the inventories they were taking. His answer was to the effect, "You don't need to be concerned about the inventories. Unless a man is willing to consecrate everything he has, he doesn't come into the United Order." (Documentary History of the Church. Vol 7,pp.412-413.) On the other hand, socialism is implemented by external force, the power of the state.
My comment:
Joseph Smith not only introduced socialism into the Mormon church, but it was pure communism. Even the following faithful Mormon author described Brigham Young’s communist-built community of Orderville, Utah as “pure communism”:
"When Brigham Young established Orderville and similar United Orders, John Taylor was less than enthusiastic. He realized that enterprises such as Orderville were pure communism and not the law of consecration. He made this plain after he became President, when in 1882 he sent an epistle to all authorities of the Church in which he bluntly stated: 'We had no example of the 'United Order' in accordance with the word of God on the subject...Our relations with the world and our own imperfections prevent the establishment of this system [i.e. the system of consecration and stewardship spoken of at times as the 'United Order'] at the present time, as was stated by Joseph in an early day, it cannot yet be carried out.'" (George W. Givens, 500 More Little-Known Facts in Mormon History, 2004, p. 169)
The truly unfortunate thing for world history is that John Taylor didn’t go far enough, for while he dismantled Orderville, he left another “United Order” community (Brigham City, Utah) alone. Here is Givens again (a faithful Mormon author):
"One of the most famous utopian books ever written was Looking Backward by Edward Bellamy, published in 1889. Some scholars believe Looking Backward had considerable influence in the making of Lenin's Soviet Russia. If this is true, then [ensuing Lds "prophet"] Lorenzo Snow and the Latter-day Saints must receive some of the credit--or blame. Hearing of the success of the United Order in Brigham City, Edward Bellamy made a special trip to Utah in 1886 to study its operation. There he spent three days with Lorenzo Snow, Brigham City's founder and forty-year resident. Impressed with the thirty to forty industries run by its 2,000 inhabitants and the vitality at that time of one of the most successful United Orders, Bellamy returned home and wrote his influential book." (500 More Little-Known Facts in Mormon History, p. 185).
Way to go, 19th century Mormon leader-“prophets” of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, John Taylor & Lorenzo Snow!!! They all unwittingly fueled Soviet Communism!
It was…
…Smith’s original idea of a United Order, something he falsely prophesied would be everlasting- see Doctrine & Covenants 82:20; 104:1 – I mean you haven’t taken scissors to those verses yet, have you Rip? So that must mean you still embrace these concepts as “Mormon truth”
…followed by Young’s implementation of these communistic ideas into Utah communities like Orderville & Brigham City…
…with Lds “prophet” Snow being the founder & long-term dictator of Brigham City, which in turn, influenced Bellamy, who in turn influenced Lenin!!!
…and while Taylor didn’t like the orders, he only did a half-mast job of taking apart Orderville, but leaving Brigham City untouched.
Do YOU care?
Other than to ACCUSE?
SHOW the lies and you'll have wiped out the FI's!