As for being zealous, why be apologetic about it? It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always and not just when I am with you. (apostle Paul, Gal. 4:18)
I mean, what, Reno? Lds missionary zeal is commendable, but other zeal from other sources is condemned?
I suppose Mormon missionaries can give up 2 full years of their lives to go around & weekly, if not daily, talk about the universal apostasy & restoration...yet if Christians object to this term of "apostate" imposed upon them by Mormons & Mormon missionaries, and if we do so zealously, then you trot out your list of labels...and liberal-tactic like, treat other posters the way we see liberals do it all the time.
Little substantive discussion & dialogue. Just paint them as extremists so they can be readily dismissed. (Reno, that's also what the MSM does)
...they are fanatical in their actions & beliefs. Psychologically, fanatics tend to be somewhat unstable.
So are we to conclude, then, Reno, that anyone who yields two years of prime-time life, leaving family, girlfriend, family contact, behind to follow 70+ rules that effectively treat you like a 10-12 yo, riding a bike for two years along with a backpack, bothering people door-to-door to impose their religious viewpoint upon others during their 70-hour work weeks...that these "fanatics" are "somewhat unstable"? Fanaticism for thee but not for others?
Jihadists of any kind tend to try & impose their will/opinions upon the rest. They believe that it's their way or the highway. There's no room for opposing opinions, theirs is all that matters.
So, do you realize that also qualifies most Mormon missionaries as "jihadists." The Lds missionaries I've encountered "tend to try & impose their will/opinions upon" their unwilling subjects answering doorbells & knocks. These Lds missionaries tend to "believe that it's their way" -- 'cause if they feel they are not making headway with a given prospect, they hit "the highway. There's no room for opposing opinions, theirs" (their version of the Mormon "gospel") "is all that matters."
Does that translate into the possibility that one of the fanaticals here could actually shoot a Mormon bishop?, someone, a poster, we really know virtually nothing about? Perhaps, but I would think it highly unlikely in this case. Stranger things have happened..
You know if I thought the way that you do, I'd be all over the supposed "propensity" that there's something about being a one-time member of the Mormon church that somehow "weighs in" & produces mass-murderers. What do I mean? If you combine this shooting with the last church shooting in Colorado Springs, CO, what did the shooters have in common? One-time membership in the Mormon church.
I mean, if I took your line of thinking, I'd say, "Hmmm...we don't see all these ex-Presbyterian shooters, or ex-Methodist shooters, or ex-Nazarene shooters...or ex-charismatic shooters...but here we see these ex-Mormon shooters." If I took your line of thinking, I might wonder, "Hmm...are they brainwashing their members to leave the church & go shoot up other churches?"
Sometimes behavior is indeed contagious & epidemic; yet, these shooters also had mental issues apart from any religious standing.
Otherwise, though, why the constant barrage of going around & labeling people as "anti-Mormons" and "Christian jihadists?" Is that so you don't have to deal with what they're saying? You can just label them up front, so that you don't have to deal with them as individual people making truth claims that competes with yours?
I find this interesting Colofornian - I have not seen a single post advocating closing mormon churches, denying the missionaries their works, or any other freedom to believe what ever they want. However, when they find themselves on the losing end of the discussion of theology, suddenly it is hate, jihad, etc. Well, I see the mentality that resulted in the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor is still alive and well.