LDS

[Agatha]

Yeah. About that:

Does the 'Lord' sanction Warren Jeff's perversions, Janadele? The words you posted on that forum implies that you feel the authorities were wrong to prevent him from continuing to polygamously marry and have sex with girls who were legally (in that jurisdiction) too young to consent to either marriage or sex.

Later in that thread, on page 2, you say that you believe that at the time of the marriages, the girls and women were all over the age of consent in that jurisdiction (Texas), but I've looked at the history of the law in Texas and you are incorrect; Jeffs was 55 in 2011 so his offences took place after the 1920s, which was when the age of consent was raised to 18 (it was lowered in the 1990s to 17). If his offences took place in any other state it will make no difference, since every state in the Union had an age of consent of 16 or greater from the 1920s. See the table on page 15 and 16 of this pdf.

Now that you know that all of Jeff's 'wives' who were 16 or younger were legally incapable of consent, will you withdraw your apparent support for Jeffs?

Come on, level with us - you're not promoting LDS at all, are you? You're online on all these different forums to show the worst bits of the Mormon faith in order to ensure nobody joins it. You're doing a fantastic job of demonstrating the bigotry and hatred, and now you're condoning statutory rape of girls as young as 12 in the name of the FLDS.

Brilliant, carry on. You've done more to damage LDS than a thousand anti-Mormons could do in the time you've spent just on this thread.

 

[Akhenaten]

That's a quote from the Christian bible.

Nothing whatsoever to do with the evil, bigoted and hate-inspired cult of LDS.

The Christian Bible is one of the three central scriptures of the LDS church, so yes, it has a lot to do with the LDS church.

Fair enough.

I should probably have said that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the evil, bigoted and hate-inspired cult of Janadelism.

The Bible has also been used to justify evil, bigotry and hate by many other Christian religions the same way Janadele is using it, so her interpretation isn't unique to LDS beliefs and is in line with many Christian sects.

I might just revert to what I've always thought then. Any religion based on two-thousand-year-old fairytales is going to have to do so much fudging to justify itself in the real, modern world that it ends up adhering to nothing more than a parody of its silly book.

 

[RandFan]

I see no hatred for Janadele, only for the bigotry she espouses. I don't hate her, I just pity her. It must be a nightmare for her to be living in the 21st century, seeing most of the world move towards love, compassion, tolerance and equality for all, and knowing that the hatred she has for her fellow men is poisoning her mind and separating her further from her God.

I could have thanksgiving with Janadele and I'm sure I would have a great time. I'm certain of that because some of my relatives are bigots. We get together, discuss and debate. I still love them even though some of their rhetoric is odious.

I suspect Janadele is an otherwise kind and decent person. Humans are quite capable of compartmentalizing empathy and contempt based on subjective values.

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

Sexual orientation has nothing to do with the content of one's character.

 

[catsmate]

Attending a Religious Wedding? Let’s Hope It’s Not As Bad As These

Pretty classic cult behaviour, control the victim's access to non-cult family.

 

[skyrider44]

Is this thread closed?

 

[Slowvehicle]

Is this thread closed?

...not as of 7:58 MDT 9/27/2013...

 

[Empress]

Is this thread closed?

Why would it be closed?

You could tackle that list of BoM anachronisms, if you've the time.

 

[Pup]

You seem to be arguing the letter of the law Pup. Which is fine. But clearly gays and lesbians are a class of citizens that have been historically discriminated against.

I'm arguing that US anti-discrimination laws aren't based on the religious establishment clause in the Constitution, in response to this claim by Crossbow:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9513311#post9513311

I want us to be the side that gets information right, rather than saying anything just to support an anti-religion agenda.

If I'm misunderstanding the basis for civil rights laws, hopefully someone will correct me, but as far as I know, businesses are perfectly free to "[push] their version of religious morality on to the public," as long as it doesn't conflict with secular laws. They can put religious tracts in their packages, recite a religious message to every customer, or refuse to sell to people their religion tells them not to do business with, as long as those people collectively aren't a protected class.

Arguing in your favor for the moment, gays and lesbians are gaining political and social clout at both the local and federal level and in the end SCOTUS could rule that because of that fact they don't qualify for protected class status.

Wait a minute. Do you think I'm against making gays and lesbians a protected class? You're completely wrong.

What I'm against is playing into the hands of the US Christians who claim they're persecuted, by exaggerating the control the US government has over private religious expression.

That said, there is, IMO, compelling interest to grant gays and lesbians protected class status regardless.

I couldn't agree more. Fortunately it's happening at the state level already.

 

[bruto]

Is this thread closed?

No, just curling up in a fetal position and yelling "stop already."

 

[Pup]

Fair enough.

I should probably have said that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the evil, bigoted and hate-inspired cult of Janadelism.

I might just revert to what I've always thought then. Any religion based on two-thousand-year-old fairytales is going to have to do so much fudging to justify itself in the real, modern world that it ends up adhering to nothing more than a parody of its silly book.

I can fully agree with that whole post^

If Janadele supports the FLDS and modern-day polygamy, she's off on her own and deep into Janadelism, as far as her own church (the main Salt Lake one) is concerned (edited to add--or at least the church she claims to be promoting). Here's the party line from the Salt Lake LDS church: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/protecting-the-churchs-identity

 

[dafydd]

You might have meant this facetiously, but in actual fact American Christians, like many people, do judge which side God was on in retrospect by the course of history.

God moved to America with the Pilgrim Fathers.

 

[dafydd]

Why would it be closed?

You could tackle that list of BoM anachronisms, if you've the time.

That is one subject that he will never address.

 

[tsig]

God moved to America with the Pilgrim Fathers.

According to Mormons Jesus beat them here but the bad guys killed all the good guys so Joe had to restore the gospel.

 

[skyrider44]

That is one subject that he will never address.

Only if I were inclined to believe--as you apparently do--that conditions preceding the millennium have been fulfilled.

 

[Akhenaten]

Is this thread closed?

Yes. It's no longer possible even to reply to stupid questions.



No, wait . . .

 

[skyrider44]

. . . Nothing whatsoever to do with the evil, bigoted and hate-inspired cult of LDS.

Your own words convincingly condemn you of the very faults you assign to the Church and to Jan.

 

[Akhenaten]

God moved to America with the Pilgrim Fathers.

Yes. And was somehow rendered even more potent and magical by the journey.

Europe grew up and yet its funny little colony never did.


It's an amazing irony, isn't it?

 

[RandFan]

I'm arguing that US anti-discrimination laws aren't based on the religious establishment clause in the Constitution, in response to this claim by Crossbow:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9513311#post9513311

I want us to be the side that gets information right, rather than saying anything just to support an anti-religion agenda.

If I'm misunderstanding the basis for civil rights laws, hopefully someone will correct me, but as far as I know, businesses are perfectly free to "[push] their version of religious morality on to the public," as long as it doesn't conflict with secular laws. They can put religious tracts in their packages, recite a religious message to every customer, or refuse to sell to people their religion tells them not to do business with, as long as those people collectively aren't a protected class.



Wait a minute. Do you think I'm against making gays and lesbians a protected class? You're completely wrong.

What I'm against is playing into the hands of the US Christians who claim they're persecuted, by exaggerating the control the US government has over private religious expression.



I couldn't agree more. Fortunately it's happening at the state level already.

Thanks Pup. We are on the same page.

 

[Akhenaten]

Your own words convincingly condemn you of the very faults you assign to the Church and to Jan.

Ignoring that the tortured English of your accusation makes little to no sense as it's written, I must point out that the "fault" to which you refer is the twisting of the words of the christian bible to suit the nefarious and self-interested ends of the LDS.

I think its pretty obvious that the Ruler of the Two Lands is unlikely to be guilty of such a thing.

 

[Akhenaten]

According to Mormons Jesus beat them here but the bad guys killed all the good guys so Joe had to restore the gospel.

As always, my apologies to you and yours for the crude generalisations that I sometimes make in pursuit of whatever point I'm trying to make.