Posted on 10/29/2007 8:28:33 AM PDT by Invisigoth
I'm from an area in the Southwest that had at one time a rather large contingent of "penitentes" a sect that believe in self-flagellation...their meeting houses were called "moradas" as I recall, and those had no windows.
Angry and ignorant. A heart attack waiting to happen....
One could argue that consistency is a virtue.....
Yes. And you should be ashamed.....
For one of the pictures to which I refered, see #400. I wasn’t “on vacation,” but simply visiting more worthwhile threads here. My curiosity is satisfied, knowing that vileness still exists on many threads to which you gravitate. Bye, now.....
|
LOL
Wellll...how 'bout this?
Y. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC
The physics of 9/11 including how fast and symmetrically one of the World Trade Center buildings fell prove that official explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a Brigham Young University physics professor. In fact, it's likely that there were "pre-positioned explosives" in all three buildings at ground zero, says Steven E. Jones.
In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds his voice to those of previous skeptics.
Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar energy at BYU, is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation "guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations.
"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/01/wbelgium01.xml
http://groups.google.com/group/Bible-Prophecy-News/browse_thread/thread/b27ca8346f4971ac/01974186e6a28f6d
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2007-05/30/content_883774.htm
http://www.click2houston.com/sh/news/stories/nat-news-82890620010620-120635.html
AND THOSE BABY KILLING MORMONS ARE EVERYWHERE!!!! AAAAHAHHHHHHAHHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHH!!!! HIDE THE CHILDREN!!!! EEEEEKKKKK!!!!!
Yep, it's cuz she was Mormon. No other problems. No mental illness. Nothin'. Purely the Mormon card. Yessir, boys, just make a woman a Mormon and watch her go killing children. Just yesterday I saw an entire herd of Mormon women out harvesting babies. In fact, that will be a new holiday in Utah. The Baby Killing Mormon Day. That's when the Mormons come out in force and begin to kill babies at random. Any baby they see, whacko, it's history.
It's grieving, it is tragic, it is agonzing to see ANY woman do something like this, but to use it to promote your theory that the woman's choice of church was responsible for her actions thus making your position on Christianity more palatable, your position on this candidate the only RIGHT position, and of course your religion the only TRUE RELIGION is more than ludicrous. It's NAUSEATING.
Aw, are you leaving without tossing out a few threats? Buh bye
No need for threats at this point....
Gee, I visited your home page one day and saw the dreaded "blue page"....are you going to entertain us again? Be sure and ping me. I've enjoyed using your posts.
Bwahaahhaha ... you’re a powerful legend in your own mind.
Drama queen strikes again!
Meant to ping you...
I’m sorry, but did you happen to read the article or my post. I said a Mormon woman killed herself and her children. It is a fact. period.
This is from the article....
“Sharon Al-Shimmary was also very religious, according to Harper. But he believes her strong LDS faith caused a lot of problems with her husband, who is a Muslim. The family was still struggling Monday with whether the children would receive a Christian or traditional Muslim funeral”
Now, I will ask if your ward assigned you the task of putting words in my mouth or following me around on FreeRepublic to distort what I say and lie about me?
You’re weird - an ex-mormon who gets hysterical if someone says an LDS woman commits suicide and takes her kids out with her. I think you are misrepresenting your self. Do you care to post any proof at all that you are what/who you say you are - an ex-mormon? Of course you aren’t required to do so, but until you do, I will assume you are lying about that too.
Thanks for the example. Now tell me if he still teaches there? You wouldn’t want to let that fact escape you, would you?
ROTFLH!!!!!!!!!!!!! (H=hysterically)
(Perhaps, if only some folks would Come Up Higher, they wouldn't wallow in hypocrisy. Frankly, if that's the kind of consistent integrity we can expect of Mormon gods as they look down on us "Gentiles" and wave, "Come on up higher," then no thanks, but no thanks...that ladder to heaven looks awfully unsturdy).
Caiaph . . . er, MHG, I know from your posting history that understanding the difference between ad hominem attacks and actual expression and exchange of ideas are hard to understand.
“Your post documents a number of cases where the Mormon prophets held to a doctrine as long as it was not politically unpopular (slavery, polygamy, inferiority of blacks).”
The church was never in support of slavery. Part of the reason they were persecuted in some areas was because they were against it.
The church also endured a great deal of hardship and persecution at the hands of the US Government and others over it’s practice of polygamy and it was willing to continue doing so if that was God’s will. Just because you see a practical reason for something doesn’t mean that it was not commanded by God, and even before they started practicing it the BoM was clear that there were times it was apporved and times it was forbidden.
It was never the position of the church that blacks were inferior, only that they were not permitted to hold the priesthood at that time, something that has historical precedent in the Bible with the preisthood being limited to only the Levites. Brigham Young also said way back then that a day would come when the ban would be ended, clearly indicating it was a temporary thing.
If it was based on blacks being inferior, why would it be temporary? If it was ended today instead of in 1978, or any day after today, would you see it as being any less poll driven? The only way to appear not poll driven would be to make it permanent, but that would be contrary to what we know God wanted, and we knew that before there were polls.
“Because I reject that faith does not mean I hold any animus against Mormons personally or as political candidates. I would vote for Mitt over a Democrat without a second’s hesitation.”
That’s fine. People should look at relevant factors like experience, record, platform, qualifications etc. instead of basing their decision on religious differences that really won’t have any impact on how they would preform their duties.
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.