Posted on 03/29/2009 2:35:03 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
I understand there is a new anti-freeper site started by disgruntled former and present Mormon FReepers and it is their intention of bankrupting FR during the coming Freepathon by withholding their donations and disrupting our activities. Well, all I can say is, if they feel that badly against FR, by all means they should withhold their donations and drop out of FR. But it they attempt to disrupt our operations I will guarantee they will no longer be members of FR. If that is their wish, so be it.
I'm not going to try to defend FR from their claims of religious persecution, but I will say that Mormons have and always have had free reign to post their threads on FR just as all other religious groups have enjoyed. Free Republic defends the right to freedom of religion and has always welcomed religious discussion and always will. And Mormons have always been welcome here. I have absolutely nothing against Mormons.
If you are one who has left or is leaving, I wish you well, but disruption of FR is not welcome and will not be tolerated.
And this is not the first time such activity has been attempted by groups of disgruntled former FReepers. Good luck with that. There is always some group that feels FR should be bent to their way of thinking and end up saying my way or the highway. Well, I don't know about you, but I'm not changing so I guess it's the highway. Is it Feb 8 yet?
God bless.
Hey, that’s my act...
Well then; I have!
(Are you SURE you're a TRUE [wink - wink] ANTI???)
I don’t have to justify any thing it was all settled years ago!
So it is best you end this because I will not play any of your games!
You are not important!
Maybe it's DISinformation.
Maybe he lives next door and that place is home to an ANTI!!!
Me, too!
That’s OK. The pics of reptiles and amphibians are more than enough antidote for the spider pic. heh I’ve always liked those kind of critters. They’re all beautiful pics, even the spider pic.
Yes, I am a true “anti”, just a real slick one ;-)
Sweetie; you have to use his REAL e-mail address to get to him for a while...
Dang, I'd forgotten about Illbay...
Thanks. Some of the spiders out here are gorgeous (they look mor like jewel boxes with stubby legs).
Maybe it’s DISinformation.
Maybe he lives next door and that place is home to an ANTI!!!
I hadn’t thought about that.
You spelled HEAD wrong.
Isn’t this untrue about Presbyterianism?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2038427/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2044024/posts
sorry, must be channeling SnarkyMormonTeen again.
Perhaps the MORMON Mod (you know who you are... ;^) ZOTTED him for the Kingdom's sake!
"No need to let a good conspiracy theory go to waste."
LOOK!!
Over THERE!
Come into my parlor...
Where?
Well, then, you haven't seen all of my many "pro" comments about what the LDS have done to defend marriage of late. Not just Prop 8...but also the previous defend marriage proposition on the ballot in CA numerous years before. [Which I've previously mentioned on posts, plural] Many people don't realize that LDS also was financially & man-power wise involved in protecting marriage in CA then.
Several times, I've written "kudos" to the LDS church for defending marriage in CA.
But CA is just one state. I frankly think that LDS officials who also serve as Utah-based law enforcement in the polygamy realm have done a terrible job of defending monogamy there. Cultural realities + truth means that we come together with CA Mormons to defend monogamy. But cultural realities + truth means that we distance ourselves from LDS officials who have been in a position to rescue "child brides" from the Utah polygamists -- and crack down on welfare fraud, etc. -- but haven't.
These things cut both ways. Can we not agree on that?
The same is true with other cultural issues. Most Mormons morally oppose porn. Perhaps I've haven't given enough "kudos" to LDS for that (so if you want to chide me for that, I'll take your correction). But again, it cuts both ways. Because if you are going to chide me for not recognizing Lds mindset opposition to porn, then you'll need to be consistent and immediately call up Marriott hotel and ask them to stop being part of the porn industry. Or you'll need to contact LDS Church, Inc., and ask why Bill Marriott, though he's been an exec in this porn industry, has two hierarchical positions in the LDS church.
LDS are also attitudinally pro-life, and Utah has had a low abortion rate. I've pointed out on previous posts this attitude -- and I've neglected to mention Utah's low abortion rate. But frankly, I seriously disagree with LDS' abortion policy -- which defines abortionists as "competent medical counsel" and says abortions are A-OK if a person prays about and God personally reveals it to LDS to have the abortion. That makes God out to be a de-facto premeditated accomplice to baby murder. And it's outrageous that LDS general authorities slough off their free agency and say, "Well, God gave a personal revelation for this baby to be dismembered."
The bottom line here:
Old-timers used to use a certain phrase. It was "sin in the camp." Before a church could make an impact on a culture, it often had to deal with the "sin in the camp." Just as that's true in the church, 'tis also true in political camps and socio-political alliances.
(As Peter said, judgment begins in the household of God)
You're missing the point my good FRiend. The question is not about whether religious differences should be debated, but whether this, a conservative website & quasi think-tank, is the forum for these issues...If you feel the need to satisfy yourself by tearing down LDS, perhaps you could do it where it doesn't affect the conservative cause & stopping socialism & the other evils we now face.
And you're missing the point. Part of our culture's problem is that it wants to draw this hermetically sealed line as to what is "religion" and what is "secular." Is your god only lord of your "religious" life, Reno? Does God exercise sovereignty/control in arenas beyond that?
Imagine for a moment that your argument you just made "sticks" -- but imagine a slightly different venue:
Imagine you've just made a lobbying effort to a Nevada legislator that legal prostitution should be discontinued because it exploits women. Or you've just approached the same legislator and made an argument about some pro-life legislation on the basis that our long-standing ethic in this country is one that embraces the sanctity of life. Now imagine this legislator quoting your words back to you in response:
The question Reno is not about whether religious differences about prostitution and abortion should be debated, but whether this, a body of legislators who are informed by think tanks and quasi think-tanks, is the forum for your perspectives to be presented. [I mean, after all, Reno, we know quite well that opposition to porn and abortion are rooted in faith-based notions -- so we're going to keep them there]
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.