pinky, you're trying to be fair to the mormons.
I would rather not be fair.
but then i just watched September Dawn.

I would rather ask.... is Mormons more or less of a con game, than say, Scientology? I actually liked L. Ron Hubbard, can't say the same for Joe Smith.

Mormonism = the church of the latter day saints and the elders and the corrupt and etc.

This is pretty much a straight delivery of the churches belief, and isn't attenpting to proselytize as you are Marinara. What's wrong with this basic statement of belief?

i think what's wrong with it is: it's kinda bullshit from a lot of perspectives, both in content and by omission. but upvote because it's interesting to see all sides.

What about the magic underpants?

Oh and one thing: Full immersion baptism = Proto wet t-shirt contest.

I was a Mormon for several years (lived in a rural area, was the closest church in town until I was about nine and a new Presbyterians church was built closer). I have to say I'm a bit confused at all the hate that's delivered towards them. Of all the churches I ever attended (and I attended lots as a kid), theirs had the most caring and active community I've ever seen. If you were sick, church members were there the same day with food and asking what they could do to help. They had lots of great family activities all year round, such as picnics and camping trips.

But what impressed me the most about the Mormon church is that they basically taught me the morals I hold true today. They didn't just teach the kids in Sunday school not to lie because "God says so." They explored the consequences of things like lying and stealing. We'd do role-plays where they'd make us think about the consequences our actions had on other people. Like, for instance, if you shoplifted a toy you really wanted, how would the toy store owner feel? How would he feed his family if people kept stealing the stuff in his shop? The fire-and-brimstone Christian churches I later attended never impressed me much with their Bible beating compared to this style of teaching.

This is not to say Mormons aren't without their flaws. In some ways, they do resemble a cult. When my family left, they hounded us for years trying to "save our souls" and get us to come back. They would just show up unannounced at our house or call at random hours. It was more annoying than anything else.

Another downside was the whole proselytizing thing--I distinctly remember being told as a child that if I wanted to be able to play with my friends in heaven that I'd have to convince them to become Mormons too. Otherwise I wouldn't see them there. To put that into perspective though, my Dad's priest told him the same thing about his Protestant friends back when he was a kid. The Mormon religion hasn't got a lock on the conversion market by any means.

All things considered, I find the Mormon religion to be relatively harmless. Yes, they believe in some odd things like the Book of Mormon, but at the end of the day, unlike a lot of self-proclaimed Christians, I found the Mormons to do more than just give lip service to their values and actually practice what they preach.

Obviously those of the Mormon superstition have not been enlightened about the great, holy, and sacred Flying Spaghetti Monster. Be saved from DEATH! Be saved from being EVIL! Be a GOOD person and live FOREVER in Spaghetti HEAVEN!
Praise Flying Spaghetti Monster!! There is but ONE Flying monster - Flying Spaghetti Monster!!!!!!! YES!~ Become a Pastafarian BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!!!

To Marinara:

I looked up some info on "September Dawn" for you:

The film has received extraordinarily unfavorable reviews, and holds a 13% overall rating and a 0% Cream of the Crop rating at the aggregate site Rotten Tomatoes as of February 6, 2008. It received a rare "zero stars" review from film critic Roger Ebert, and the New York Post gave the movie an unusual 0/4.

The film has been described by various critics (most or all of whom are not LDS) as "the year's first honest-to-goodness exploitation flick," as "carrying an anti-Mormon agenda," as "some sort of attack piece on the Mormon religion," as "little more than wild-eyed anti-Mormon propaganda," as "a stridently anti-Mormon and cliché-heavy melodrama," as "unbelievably ugly and an insult to Mormons," as a "Swift Boating of Mormonism that advocates the religious intolerance it’s supposedly condemning," as "clearly anti-Mormon," as an "anti-Mormon broadside" that is "certain to fan the flames of hatred toward America's largest homegrown religion and continue the persecution that terrified the original Mormons."

The movie has "the chilling certitude of the self-righteous" that goes beyond "mockery" and is "practically a call to jihad [against Mormons]." It "equates the institution of the Mormon church with Islamic extremism at every opportunity," it is "propaganda pure and simple," is "filmmaking at its worst...full of propaganda," and it "goes way beyond history into the realm of speculation, rumor, myth and gossip." Critics further state that the movie "feel[s] like blatant propaganda," and that there is an "unmistakable air of evil about this enterprise, and not just an atrocity the Mormon church caused to happen 150 years ago" and its negative portrayal of Mormons is "unsubtle (in the manner most closely associated with Dr. Goebbels)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dawn

Ummmm...soooo...I wouldn't exactly base my opinions about Mormons on that movie.

Furthermore, Mormons do not pay their clergy and so are FAR FAR FAR less likely to be corrupt than other religions. I don't really see how corruption plays a role at all.

Every Mormon I have ever come into contact with has been extremely kind, happy, and helpful. I think that the media and other ignorant people choose to focus on the most unusual elements of the religion, take them out of context, and call them crazy. It is incredibly bigoted, intolerant, ignorant, and unkind. I think it is EXTREMELY unfair to compare the LDS church with Scientology. Ridiculous, in fact. For goodness' sake, they're good people. They're just misunderstood.

>> ^budzos:
What about the magic underpants?


>> ^MINK:
i think what's wrong with it is: it's kinda bullshit from a lot of perspectives, both in content and by omission. but upvote because it's interesting to see all sides.


I appreciate the upvote and the comment that it is good to see all sides. I agree, and I think the Mormon side is sadly underrepresented, especially on videosift.

See, what this video does is it states the IMPORTANT elements of the church. Because most of the time people choose to focus on the unusual things and take them out of context, people think certain things are far more important to the church than they really are. For instance, the sacred garments that they wear (which, by the way, is not unheard of in other religions) are not by any means a main focus of their faith. You won't hear them talking about them in church because they are sacred to them, and they don't want the issue misunderstood and trampled under the feet of cruel people like Safran. They are not considered magic in any way, they are simply a reminder to the members of the church of the covenants that they make with God to keep his commandments. People choose to make such a big deal out of them it amazes me. I watched that video where Mormons are seen talking about how the garments protect them from danger and all of that, but most members don't believe that stuff. Those people are just superstitious wackos that you get in any religion. That kind of Mormon is pretty common in Utah, as you can imagine. The symbols are not supposed to protect you from evil. They are just symbolic reminders to resist temptation. I love how that guy asks Mormon critics for information about the garments instead of, say, a BISHOP? Wouldn't that be a novel idea?

What about the content is misleading? And what did they omit that is more important than what they included?

>> ^thepinky:
Every Mormon I have ever come into contact with has been extremely kind, happy, and helpful. I think that the media and other ignorant people choose to focus on the most unusual elements of the religion, take them out of context, and call them crazy. It is incredibly bigoted, intolerant, ignorant, and unkind. I think it is EXTREMELY unfair to compare the LDS church with Scientology. Ridiculous, in fact. For goodness' sake, they're good people. They're just misunderstood.


If you ever get a chance, read the biography of Howard Hughes.. particularly the last few chapters (if you don't have time to read the whole thing)... he hired only mormons to attend to his needs near the end of his life (you see only a glimpse of them in the DiCaprio movie near the end). He hired them because of their "principles", because they never drank, never smoked and were supposedly saintly people. This couldn't have been anything further from the truth. They ended up keeping him bed-ridden with sores from such treatment, kept him constantly deleriously drugged up, they drained his checking account quite often, forced him to sign a will that they wrote and these are only the documented parts. This was a group of them that actually conspired to defraud, degrade his health and deceive those that had previously interacted with him.

This isn't to say that Mormons are more prone to this type of behavior than any other set of people, from any other set of religious beliefs.

The fact is - they are people. People are flawed. Religion is flawed. From what I've seen, religion cannot truly alter the basic primal instincts that people have. I cannot trust someone merely because they are a member of a specific religion. In fact.. from my experience investigating many churches in my youth I find all religious members suspect to potentially unpredictable and damaging behavior.

Thank you for your great comment! Finally someone who can see both sides of the issue!

The negative points that you brought up about their faith are true. They do go after "lost sheep" in a way that I understand must be annoying for members who leave. We do have to remember, which I think you do, that they believe that they are commanded by God to be his instruments in bringing souls to him. They honestly believe that the best thing for you is to come back, and their sincere desire to help makes them a little overexcited, perhaps.

What I find really interesting about anti-Mormon criticism is that people have major issues with Mormons claiming that their church is the "true church". Isn't it logical, though? If ANY religion believes that they teach the truth and nothing but the truth, aren't they claiming to be the only truth? Because anything that contradicts them would be lies, right? Mormons believe that other faiths teach truth, just not the WHOLE truth.

I think that it was definitely wrong for people to teach you that your friends wouldn't be able to play in Heaven with you. I know it sounds horrible to most people that in order to get to Heaven you have to become a Mormon, but again, I believe that issue is misunderstood, even by some Mormons. I read that book, Mormon Doctrine, by the way. They believe that certain ordinances that Jesus taught, like baptism, are neccesary for salvation. They also believe that the priesthood is neccesary for baptism. They further believe that the priesthood was lost from the earth after Jesus' death and after all of the remaining holders of the priesthood died, and that through Joseph Smith, the priesthood was restored to the Earth. Therefore, only Mormons have the authority to baptize, and so you have to become a church member to recieve the saving ordinance of baptism. So, again, people blow that way out of proportion. I don't think you do, though. I'm just using your comments as a springboard for things I've been dying to say to videosift people. Sorry. But thanks!

>> ^SDGundamX:
I was a Mormon for several years (lived in a rural area, was the closest church in town until I was about nine and a new Presbyterians church was built closer). I have to say I'm a bit confused at all the hate that's delivered towards them. Of all the churches I ever attended (and I attended lots as a kid), theirs had the most caring and active community I've ever seen. If you were sick, church members were there the same day with food and asking what they could do to help. They had lots of great family activities all year round, such as picnics and camping trips.
But what impressed me the most about the Mormon church is that they basically taught me the morals I hold true today. They didn't just teach the kids in Sunday school not to lie because "God says so." They explored the consequences of things like lying and stealing. We'd do role-plays where they'd make us think about the consequences our actions had on other people. Like, for instance, if you shoplifted a toy you really wanted, how would the toy store owner feel? How would he feed his family if people kept stealing the stuff in his shop? The fire-and-brimstone Christian churches I later attended never impressed me much with their Bible beating compared to this style of teaching.
This is not to say Mormons aren't without their flaws. In some ways, they do resemble a cult. When my family left, they hounded us for years trying to "save our souls" and get us to come back. They would just show up unannounced at our house or call at random hours. It was more annoying than anything else.
Another downside was the whole proselytizing thing--I distinctly remember being told as a child that if I wanted to be able to play with my friends in heaven that I'd have to convince them to become Mormons too. Otherwise I wouldn't see them there. To put that into perspective though, my Dad's priest told him the same thing about his Protestant friends back when he was a kid. The Mormon religion hasn't got a lock on the conversion market by any means.
All things considered, I find the Mormon religion to be relatively harmless. Yes, they believe in some odd things like the Book of Mormon, but at the end of the day, unlike a lot of self-proclaimed Christians, I found the Mormons to do more than just give lip service to their values and actually practice what they preach.

>> ^Constitutional_Patriot:
>> ^thepinky:
Every Mormon I have ever come into contact with has been extremely kind, happy, and helpful. I think that the media and other ignorant people choose to focus on the most unusual elements of the religion, take them out of context, and call them crazy. It is incredibly bigoted, intolerant, ignorant, and unkind. I think it is EXTREMELY unfair to compare the LDS church with Scientology. Ridiculous, in fact. For goodness' sake, they're good people. They're just misunderstood.

If you ever get a chance, read the biography of Howard Hughes.. particularly the last few chapters (if you don't have time to read the whole thing)... he hired only mormons to attend to his needs near the end of his life (you see only a glimpse of them in the DiCaprio movie near the end). He hired them because of their "principles", because they never drank, never smoked and were supposedly saintly people. This couldn't have been anything further from the truth. They ended up keeping him bed-ridden with sores from such treatment, kept him constantly deleriously drugged up, they drained his checking account quite often and these are only the documented parts. This was a group of them that actually conspired to defraud, degrade his health and deceive those that had previously interacted with him.
This isn't to say that Mormons are more prone to this type of behavior than any other set of people, from any other set of religious beliefs.
The fact is - they are people. People are flawed. Religion is flawed. From what I've seen, religion cannot truly alter the basic primal instincts that people have. I cannot trust someone merely because they are a member of a specific religion. In fact.. from my experience investigating many churches in my youth I find all religious members suspect to potentially unpredictable behavior.


Yes, I totally agree with you. I didn't mean to sound as if Mormons are universally good people. You get bad eggs in every group of people. Mormons are just as human as anybody. However, I have seen an unusual tendency for Mormons to be the sort of church-goers that go every week and that practice what they preach for the most part. This is not true in many cases, but in the majority that I have personally witnessed. Thanks for calling me out on that.

Speaking as a Mormon myself, the video seems to be pretty straight forward. As with everything else in life there is always a great deal more in the details but if you really want to learn all that then YouTube is probably a poor place to look.

I'm not nearly eloquent enough to join in this debate though and thepinky seems to know what she is talking about.

>> ^raddishs:
Speaking as a Mormon myself, the video seems to be pretty straight forward. As with everything else in live there are always a great deal more in the details but if you really want to learn all that then YouTube is probably a poor place to look.
I'm not nearly eloquent enough to join in this debate though and thepinky seems to know what she is talking about.


No, thanks for the great comment that you made about YouTube not being the place to look. I couldn't agree with you more. We could definitely use more of your perspective around here. I just think that Mormons need a few non-Mormon friends to combat all of the RIDICULOUS anti-Mormon propaganda that goes around. The amount of persecution and the way that it is tolerated by intelligent people is SHOCKING, really. I'd like to see them meet a few non-Utah Mormons, go to the church a few times, and come out calling it a cult. I might sooner call evangelical churches cults, which I wouldn't. Not to say that all Utah Mormons are crazy, but I think a much higher percentage in that area may have some superstitious tendencies. Perhaps because they need to defend themselves from opposition less often, some just follow the crowd and don't really "get it".

I grew up Mormon and attended services till the age of 17. I would say that by and large it was a positive experience and my giving up the faith had nothing to do with anything negative that occurred. As far as the beliefs stated in the video, its pretty accurate on what is preached on any given Sunday. The only thing they didn't really bring up was the teaching (not worshiping or preaching) of the early church history from Joe in IL to Brigham in Missouri and out to Utah. Its not that there is any practice of praying to Joe or anything that occurs (people praying to saints always seemed really weird to me) but is definitely emphasized, especially the persecution and suffering of early worshipers. They sort of gloss over the fact that http://www.videosift.com/video/History-of-Mormonism-by-South-Park actually is an accurate account of what founded the religion (if anything its even fishier), past polygamy practices, and racism (mark of Cain, no longer church doctrine).

The only other thing that sticks out in my mind as being very different from the usual Christian teaching would be the whole trinity thing. Mormons believe in three distinct personages that don't have that weird separate but one thing I've heard of.

Oh, crap. PLEASE don't refer people to that stupid South Park video! There are a few things wronf with it. One very big one is that there are ar least 14 other people who saw the plate, 11 of whom gave solemn witness to that fact which can be read in the pages before the Book of Mormon. 3 of them saw it, 8 of them touched it and saw it. Another thing is the whole translating out of a hat thing. I've never heard of that before. I thought that there was a sheet between Joseph and the scribes who wrote down what he dictated? I'll have to look that up. And as for the Martin Harris thing, they're trying to make Mormons look like idiots for believing that. What they believe is that God told Joseph 3 times not to give the manuscripts to Harris, but he did anyway. And then Martin lost the manuscripts. We know that there was an insane amount of persecution going on at the time. Smith kept having to relocate because people would attempt to steal the plates and manuscripts, torture Smith, etc. Since it was likely that some enemy of Smith's had their hands on the pages, it would have been stupid to translate them again in exactly the same way. Someone could have changed the manuscript and then shown how it was different from the new translation, thus proving Smith a false prophet. I know it seems unlikely to us, but it isn't as if Mormons have never thought about it. They aren't "dumb".

Thanks for the comment, by the way. I find this part of your wording a little confusing, though:

>> ^theaceofclubz:
The only thing they didn't really bring up was the teaching (not worshiping or preaching) of the early church history from Joe in IL to Brigham in Missouri and out to Utah. Its not that there is any practice of praying to Joe or anything that occurs (people praying to saints always seemed really weird to me) but is definitely emphasized, especially the persecution and suffering of early worshipers. They sort of gloss over the fact that http://www.videosift.com/video/History-of-Mormonism-by-South-Park actually is an accurate account of what founded the religion (if anything its even fishier), past polygamy practices, and racism (mark of Cain, no longer church doctrine).


Were you trying to say that they should have addressed the early church in the video? I can understand them not bringing up Polygamy, given that it is controversial, no longer practiced, and not as widespread among church members as one might think. I think only 1% or something like that ever practiced it. And, yes, they do talk about Joseph Smith a good amount in church. After all, faith that he was a prophet is essential for members to have.

I need to read some more about the whole Native American thing, which is probably yet another doctrine oversimplified by most people. I can't really give an accurate defense for that at this point. Although, I do have some ideas.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Thepinky - you're great. I don't believe a word of what you're writing above but I still find it entertaining and welcome the fun discussion it will bring on.

I'd just like to preface the comments below this comment - with a request to keep it civil. Now, excuse me I have to go make the popcorn.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Who's up for a bit of late night god talk - *promote.

I'm not calling Mormons dumb - I've met some very sharp Saints. Anyone who calls a religious follower dumb, doesn't get it. Religious faith is not an intellectual exercise - there's no connection. Sure you could say that intellectuals and scientists are more likely to be atheists - but I would venture that this is because they are living much more within the natural world of math, biology and physics and less in the philosophical realm.

So, while I don't find the followers of mormonism "dumb", may I at least say that the tenants of Mormonism seem a bit far-fetched? Beyond all the plates and seeing stones- I find the religion built on very shaky foundations. J Smith was a first rate showman, polygamist and philanderer but hardly a prophet of god - unless you mean in the Jimmy Swaggart model.

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Tuesday, June 10th, 2008 9:17pm PDT - promote requested by dag.

>> ^dag:
Thepinky - you're great. I don't believe a word of what you're writing above but I still find it entertaining and welcome the fun discussion it will bring on.
I'd just like to preface the comments below this comment - with a request to keep it civil. Now, excuse me I have to go make the popcorn.


Why, thank you! I think you're great, too. I don't mind that you don't believe me. I just think Mormons are misunderstood. A lot of my defense of them comes from experiences I had in Colorado Springs, where many of my Mormon friends were treated ABOMINABLY by members of other Christian faiths in the area. I mean, you wouldn't even believe the stuff that went on or that it could be allowed to happen. I won't go TOO far into it, but I will mention that it involved rocks thrown at Mormons, defacement of Mormon homes and other property, Mormon children being called "devil worshipers", Mormon students given failing grades for no apparent reason, children being forbidden to play with Mormon kids, and oh so much more. Sickening. The sad thing is that the people who do these sorts of things claim that they are more Christian than Mormons. Ironic, isn't it?

>> ^dag:
Who's up for a bit of late night god talk - promote.
I'm not calling Mormons dumb - I've met some very sharp Saints. Anyone who calls a religious follower dumb, doesn't get it. Religious faith is not an intellectual exercise - there's no connection. Sure you could say that intellectuals and scientists are more likely to be atheists - but I would venture that this is because they are living much more within the natural world of math, biology and physics and less in the philosophical realm.
So, while I don't find the followers of mormonism "dumb", may I at least say that the tenants of Mormonism seem a bit far-fetched? Beyond all the plates and seeing stones- I find the religion built on very shaky foundations. J Smith was a first rate showman, polygamist and philanderer but hardly a prophet of god - unless you mean in the Jimmy Swaggart model.


Yes, they can seem extremely far-fetched. I admit that whole-heartedly. I just think that if people really invested some intelligent and unbiased thought into the whole deal, they would be surprised by how logical it can be. I agree with Safran when he said that he doesn't believe that Mormonism is any LESS logical than other religions. That is the primary point I'm trying to make. Don't single poor Mormons out. They are severely misunderstood, and perhaps people take for granted just how grounded other Christian faiths are. They can get pretty darn nutty, if you ask me. Often nuttier, more sheep-like, meaner, and less apt to follow the teachings of Christ than Mormons, in my opinion.

Views about Joseph Smith are hard to form objectively. We didn't know the guy. I think philanderer is probably the most innapropriate term for him that you used, but that's just my opinion.

Mind if I rant about polygamy for a while? No? Thanks!

I think that to view polygamy as some kind of twisted sex game as a rule is ignorant at best. Ethnocentric, too. As a woman, I am deeply abhorred by it at times, but when I really try to think about it with an open mind, I am surprised by what I find. And I'm a feminist, if you can believe that. And if you read early accounts of it among Mormons, you might be surprised by what you find. People jump to conclusions about Smith quite easily when they hear "polygamy".

This is a hard topic to discuss in light of what just happened with those TOTALLY NOT MORMONS in Texas. That is polygamy at its worst.

I heard this guy on the radio years ago and he made a point that made me laugh and ultimately think about polygamy differently. He said that people have less and less of a problem with infidelity these days, and polygamy isn't much different except that you're married to the women, and your wife gives her permission. I don't agree with him, and I think infidelity is disgusting, but there you have it.

If you study ethics and philosophy, there is this concept that I agree with. I can't remember the name of it. Whether or not something seems wrong to you, it should not be against the law if it does not hurt anyone (increases the happiness in the world) and is done between consenting adults. If two men and a woman go into a hotel room and all three of them come out smiling, what difference does it make what happened in there as far as the law is concerned? Now, in the case of this polygamist colony, abuse was occuring. But in the case of the early Mormon church, polygamy was HIGHLY exclusive, monitored, and to my knowledge everyone was perfectly happy and the families were functional. Often the women were widowed and needed support. Or they had no marriage prospects. So, what's the big problem? Well educated and dedicated Mormons don't even try to distance themselves from polygamy like some do. That's because there isn't anything wrong with it if it's done for the right reasons. If a guy is just horny and wants sex slaves, it's obviously immoral. But if he is just trying to do what he thinks is right and treats his wives and children well, more power to him, I say. Mormons actually only discontinued it because the U.S. government started imprisoning, fining, and otherwise abusing church members. A dark chapter in the history of famous U.S. "religious tolerance", in my opinion.

I might be crazy, but at least I'm open-minded-ish?

Oh, and don't you love how Christians conveniently forget that Abraham, David, and Solomon were all polygamists when they criticize Smith? In fact, wasn't Christ a descendent of polygamists? It's FASCINATING.

Wow, I never meant to be so controversial in my statements. In the interest of full disclosure, I am an atheist/agnostic who finds religion in general to be convoluted. Mormanism specifically stands out to me because I have first hand experience with it and feel qualified to address it.

I fell out of theology in general approximately 10 yrs. ago because I failed to reconcile the concept of hell with just and loving god. For 10 yrs. I was the only deconvert in my family.

My brother was a priesthood holding member and church attendant for 35 yrs. and only confessed to the family that he was no longer a follower this last Easter. He lost his faith by specifically looking into church history and my criticisms of it are informed on conversations I've had with him. Unfortunately it is 5am here and I won't be able to call him for another 2 hours, at which time I will offer a more substantive critique.

Based purely on my own experience, it seems the church sort of attempts to set up a persecution complex in its members, an us against them mentality if you wish. I was very aware of the fact that there is antimormon literature and people actively seeking to bring down the church. I never read any and it is seen as purely blasphemous material. Any reading of it is highly frowned upon by church members. When I was a member I had never heard of Joe being anything but a standup guy. Indeed, even Dag's statement that Joe was a "showman and philanderer" would have shocked the shit out of me. Of course its possible that this is only because I fell out at a young age and I would imagine that with the advent of the internet this is very different today.

"Were you trying to say that they should have addressed the early church in the video?"

No, I was only trying to point out that the emphasis on early church history is probably an area in the mormon church in which they part ways with most denominations of Christianity.

"Oh, crap. PLEASE don't refer people to that stupid South Park video!"

I stand by my previous statement that this is a factually correct portrayal of how the word of god was received by Joe, including the sheet. Nobody was allowed to see plates as he translated them. You forgot the magic stones.
http://www.mormonwiki.com/Translation_of_the_Book_of_Mormon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_plates

"And as for the Martin Harris thing, they're trying to make Mormons look like idiots for believing that."

How else do you think I would see it?

"Since it was likely that some enemy of Smith's had their hands on the pages, it would have been stupid to translate them again in exactly the same way. Someone could have changed the manuscript and then shown how it was different from the new translation, thus proving Smith a false prophet. I know it seems unlikely to us, but it isn't as if Mormons have never thought about it. They aren't "dumb"."

I can honestly say that the thought never occurred to me or came up in church at all. I wouldn't say dumb, but naive.

I left this response recently on pinky's page in response to her critique on http://www.videosift.com/video/What-Mormon-Theology-Is-Really-All-About-1975 and thought it was applicable to the thread so I am pasting it.

"After watching the video it was my intention to write a scathing refutation of the blasphemy. However, after doing a little web searching I found the facts weren't going to support me. First the only glaring inaccuracies I found in the video were:

Mormons don't believe that physical sex took place between Mary and Heavenly Father. Jesus was definitely the son of the father and impregnation occurred somehow but the Mary is a virgin thing is still in effect so I think it rules out a physical union. I'm not completely 100% on this though, so I'm going to ask my mom tomorrow.

The quote at the end by Joe is almost certainly fake, but I have no proof of this and may be wrong.

On the more shocking theology that isn't necessarily broached in Sunday School:

Elohim - Yup, thats Gods name. It also refers to the belief in multiple gods that aren't worshiped or thought to have any relevance in earth life. see
http://www.mormonwiki.com/Elohim
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim#Elohim_in_the_Latter_Day_Saint_movement

Kolob - Yes, there is literally a freakin' star in the universe that you could literally point to and say "thats where god lives." (Heavens Gate creepy) Its exact location is disputed and not addressed by church authorities, try a search for "Kolob constellation"
http://www.mormonwiki.org/Kolob
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob#Literal_reading
http://lds.about.com/library/bl/faq/blkolob.htm

Celestial Polygamy - It was my understanding when in the faith that Polygamy was a celestial practice that had be suspended during our time on earth due to prophetic revelation, and that when you do get in heaven men can marry multiple wives, but women can only marry one man. The whole prophetic revelation occurring at the same point in history that the US government made the ultimatum that Mormons had to give up polygamy before they would receive statehood is just seen as a coincidence. (seriously) After searching a little though a guess there is a little dispute over it.
http://www.mormonwiki.org/Celestial_polygamy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_marriage

I'd say that anything not outlined in this message is about 95% accurate, and certainly presented in the most sensationalist fashion.
I wasn't aware of most of this theological stuff while in the church and can understand when Mormons claim its inaccurate. However, if you believe church doctrine to be true then you sort of carry the theology indirectly."

My response to this is/was:

Come back to me with this argument when you've found better sources. A lesson about church doctrine: You cannot believe that Mormons believe it unless you get it straight from the source. That is, it has to come from canonized scripture, church lesson manuals, or at least General Conference talks from the 12 apostles or the prophet. Someone with authority has to have declared that it is doctrine in order to claim that it is doctrine. Okaybee? Wiki does not count. I'm not talking history here. History can be filtered by the church and you can't neccesarily get all of the information from their sources. But doctrine, yes. BECAUSE IT IS ONLY DOCTRINE IF THEY SAY IT IS DOCTRINE, NOT IF YOU SAY IT IS DOCTRINE! Why don't people understand this about religion? Catholics are often the victims of this, too. You can site as many sources as you want, but it isn't church doctrine unless it is official church doctrine. I can't stress this enough. And I have a feeling some people will still fail to understand it.

>> ^theaceofclubz:
I left this response recently on pinky's page in response to her critique on http://www.videosift.com/video/What-Mormon-Theology-Is-Really-All-About-1975 and thought it was applicable to the thread so I am pasting it.
"After watching the video it was my intention to write a scathing refutation of the blasphemy. However, after doing a little web searching I found the facts weren't going to support me. First the only glaring inaccuracies I found in the video were:
Mormons don't believe that physical sex took place between Mary and Heavenly Father. Jesus was definitely the son of the father and impregnation occurred somehow but the Mary is a virgin thing is still in effect so I think it rules out a physical union. I'm not completely 100% on this though, so I'm going to ask my mom tomorrow.
The quote at the end by Joe is almost certainly fake, but I have no proof of this and may be wrong.
On the more shocking theology that isn't necessarily broached in Sunday School:
Elohim - Yup, thats Gods name. It also refers to the belief in multiple gods that aren't worshiped or thought to have any relevance in earth life. see
http://www.mormonwiki.com/Elohim
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim#Elohim_in_the_Latter_Day_Saint_movement
Kolob - Yes, there is literally a freakin' star in the universe that you could literally point to and say "thats where god lives." (Heavens Gate creepy) Its exact location is disputed and not addressed by church authorities, try a search for "Kolob constellation"
http://www.mormonwiki.org/Kolob
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob#Literal_reading
http://lds.about.com/library/bl/faq/blkolob.htm
Celestial Polygamy - It was my understanding when in the faith that Polygamy was a celestial practice that had be suspended during our time on earth due to prophetic revelation, and that when you do get in heaven men can marry multiple wives, but women can only marry one man. The whole prophetic revelation occurring at the same point in history that the US government made the ultimatum that Mormons had to give up polygamy before they would receive statehood is just seen as a coincidence. (seriously) After searching a little though a guess there is a little dispute over it.
http://www.mormonwiki.org/Celestial_polygamy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_marriage
I'd say that anything not outlined in this message is about 95% accurate, and certainly presented in the most sensationalist fashion.
I wasn't aware of most of this theological stuff while in the church and can understand when Mormons claim its inaccurate. However, if you believe church doctrine to be true then you sort of carry the theology indirectly."

Edit: According to MY definition of agnosticism and atheism as I studied them in school, you cannot be atheist and agnostic. I apologize. I temporarily forgot that people have diluted the definitions when I said this: By the way, you can't be atheist AND agnostic. That's just downright silly. I say this in the kindliest way possible.

But, seriously, Ace, I like you. You give me a good challenge. I was delighted to see that you lost your faith because of the age-old "problem of evil," which is the name for the whole hell+justgod=wtf? phenomenon you described. I wrote a ridiculously long paper on JUST THAT TOPIC about a year ago. Edit: Did you know that Mormon theology deals with that problem rather naturally? This is what got me so into that book, Mormon Doctrine. It's crazy! I can send you my paper sometime if you want.

The dilemna is:

1. All-good
2. All-powerful
3. Evil exists

Does that look familiar? Man, I love this stuff. We should chat.

Simple question: If this video is trying to give a realistic depiction of the mormon faith, why does it quickly pass over Joseph Smith? Is Joseph Smith and the history of the origins of the church not important?

^ An atheist, by definition, is agnostic. In the same way that we are agnostic about leprachauns, zeus, fairies, dragons, frost giants, thor, etc... To be atheist does not imply certainty. It just means that you require proof through observation and have no interest in practicing belief without proof. (The whole teapot agnostic argument applies...)

All I know is that Mormons are unusually happy and nice, and have a hard time living amongst New Yorkers lol

"In worship, a believer in immanence might say that one can find God wherever one seeks."
^
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanence

The below gnostic gospel, made notable in stigmata, provides that you can find "god" every where around you. All types of "god", the angry "god", the happy "god", the sad god. etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

So in a way all church's are useless under the gospels words. I was raised catholic, until I grew up. Any organization that requires me to go to a 'Mass' of some sorts on a Sunday in the morning will not ever get my patronage. Not because I want to sleep, but because I don't want to be around all those people who I don't agree with.

>> ^braindonut:
Simple question: If this video is trying to give a realistic depiction of the mormon faith, why does it quickly pass over Joseph Smith? Is Joseph Smith and the history of the origins of the church not important?


Um, yeah. It said about all it needed to say in a 6 1/2 minute summary...? Would you have liked them to give a rebuttal to all criticism of the early church? Joseph Smith is certainly the beginning of the modern church, but he isn't the cornerstone of their beliefs. Christ is, and they talked about Him a lot.

I apologize. You're right. See my edit. I was thinking of what is now "strong" Atheism. That is, a belief that god does not exist. Actually, I have a rather stuck-up opinion on the subject. I think Agnostics shouldn't call themselves Atheist, and Atheists who call themselves Agnostic are chickens.

>> ^braindonut:
^ An atheist, by definition, is agnostic. In the same way that we are agnostic about leprachauns, zeus, fairies, dragons, frost giants, thor, etc... To be atheist does not imply certainty. It just means that you require proof through observation and have no interest in practicing belief without proof. (The whole teapot agnostic argument applies...)

>> ^legacy0100:
All I know is that Mormons are unusually happy and nice, and have a hard time living amongst New Yorkers lol


Good call.

>> ^NordlichReiter:
"In worship, a believer in immanence might say that one can find God wherever one seeks."
^
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanence
The below gnostic gospel, made notable in stigmata, provides that you can find "god" every where around you. All types of "god", the angry "god", the happy "god", the sad god. etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas
So in a way all church's are useless under the gospels words. I was raised catholic, until I grew up. Any organization that requires me to go to a 'Mass' of some sorts on a Sunday in the morning will not ever get my patronage. Not because I want to sleep, but because I don't want to be around all those people who I don't agree with.


I fail to see how this is relevent. Sorry.

Anti-Mormon propaganda?

Come again....

???
What's the problem? I'm confused.
???

>> ^Farhad2000:
Anti-Mormon propaganda?
Come again....

You sound like a nice person whose trying to defend a religion that has questionable origins and backgrounds.

It's like Scientology. Also based on questionable facts, but am sure there are some nice folks who practice it.

I don't really understand what you mean by anti-Mormon propaganda, I would love if you could show me some sources.

Yep. Atheists who call themselves agnostics are often doing it because they don't want to have to deal with the ire of people who hate the idea that their world view can be questioned - or ignorant people whose perspectives are a hold over from the cold war era. Atheists, believe it or not, are more prejudiced against, and widely misunderstood, than mormons. But, agnostics can certainly call themselves atheists, imo, because being atheist isn't like being religious - you can change your point of view as soon as you find reason to, rather than continuing to maintain a point of view no matter what. There's no god of atheism threatening us with damnation if we change our minds.

However, the comment about Joseph Smith - I only bring it up because most of what this video states is VERY similar to mainstream christianity. The differences are mainly in the book of mormon, no? Which has a lot to do with Joseph Smith, no? And both of those aspects are pretty much only briefly mentioned.

I have nothing especially against mormons that I don't have against all other religions. They are all equally false, be it Christianity, Islam, Scientology (...).

"Men are that they might have joy" - Hehe, I can get behind that. Hedonism for the win.

Furthermore, ugh, that music is soooo *happy and *sappy. Blurgh.

Adding video to channels (Happy) - requested by gwiz665.

there were probably nice members of saddam hussein's secret police but that doesn't legitimise saddam's ideology.

i think the thing is that all organised religions are kinda flawed and to say that one is "better" than another, or should be "excused because it's followers are nice" is really weak.

if the magic hat part of mormonism is so unimportant, why not just say you are a happy active jesus follower, instead of insisting on specifically following the guy with the magic hat? it might be a fine system to use in your community if you are brought up in that tradition, but these days we have contact with other peoples and ideas, and going around with a book that you literally pulled out of a hat is always going to be controversial.

jesus died on a cross, not in a gunfight. that IS important.

>> ^gwiz665:
I have nothing especially against mormons that I don't have against all other religions. They are all equally false, be it Christianity, Islam, Scientology (...).
"Men are that they might have joy" - Hehe, I can get behind that. Hedonism for the win.
Furthermore, ugh, that music is soooo happy and sappy. Blurgh.


That's awesome. Treat 'em all the same. Thanks for playing.

>> ^MINK:
there were probably nice members of saddam hussein's secret police but that doesn't legitimise saddam's ideology.
i think the thing is that all organised religions are kinda flawed and to say that one is "better" than another, or should be "excused because it's followers are nice" is really weak.
if the magic hat part of mormonism is so unimportant, why not just say you are a happy active jesus follower, instead of insisting on specifically following the guy with the magic hat? it might be a fine system to use in your community if you are brought up in that tradition, but these days we have contact with other peoples and ideas, and going around with a book that you literally pulled out of a hat is always going to be controversial.
jesus died on a cross, not in a gunfight. that IS important.


It's like you're trying to make a false analogy. How is a church that encourages people to be good, that promotes strong and happy lifestyles and families, and that does an incredible amount of humanitarian work anything like Saddam Hussein's secret police?

Who's asking to be excused? Yes, the followers are nice. If the church creates more good in the world than it does bad, if the people are happier than they would be had they not been members, why need it be excused? Yet it does on a regular basis receive ridicule and real live persecution because of ignorance and intolerance (see my reply to dag), and the users of videosift are perpetuating that attitude toward them. It's sad.

I didn't mean that it is unimportant, I just mean that it isn't doctrinally significant enough to put in a short summary. And can you hear yourself suggesting that Mormons become like other Christians? Can you really not see why that's wrong? Heck, why don't Muslims become mainstream Christians, too? Then they won't have to deal with controversy.

Mormons believe that Jesus died on Calvary, was resurrected after 3 days, and following his ascension into...heaven or whatever you want to call it, he visited Christians in the Americas. I don't really know what you meant by that.

TFYQA

Here are some interesting talks on why Mormons believe they are Christian and some reasons that they believe in the Book of Mormon, respectively.

http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-775-15,00.html

http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-775-16,00.html

Another very interesting one about why Mormons need to establish the facts because of misconception and instead of letting others define them (or something like that):

http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-775-9,00.html

>> ^Irishman:
TFYQA

True dat.

>> ^thepinky:

How is a church that encourages people to be good, that promotes strong and happy lifestyles and families, and that does an incredible amount of humanitarian work anything like Saddam Hussein's secret police?

Both are organisations with an ideology and a uniform.
The fact that followers of the ideology might be pleasant people does not support the ideology, whether it is Saddam's or Smith's or anyone else's.


... on a regular basis receive ridicule and real live persecution because of ignorance and intolerance (see my reply to dag), and the users of videosift are perpetuating that attitude toward them. It's sad.

Some people would say that insulting Christianity by claiming that Jesus visited your country and ordained a magic hat is both ignorant and intolerant. I think almost all organised religion is by definition intolerant of others. You can't tolerate justifiable attacks on the integrity of your organisation, you have to demand they stop. Why should they stop? Sure the retards going on about polygamy should update their criticism, but you're still gonna get criticised. You got a big temple and stuff. That's a legitimate target.


I didn't mean that it [the magic hat] is unimportant, I just mean that it isn't doctrinally significant enough to put in a short summary.

it undermines the validity of your organisation. it is a "dirty secret".


Mormons believe that Jesus died on Calvary, was resurrected after 3 days, and following his ascension into...heaven or whatever you want to call it, he visited Christians in the Americas.

And Smith died how? Resisting arrest with gunfire? Isn't that a bit weird for a Christian?
Now do you see my point?

Relax, I am not saying you are a bad person doing bad things. I am just saying it's highly debatable whether or not there is any foundation for your insistence on the particular strand of religion called "mormonism" ... other than you were born into it.

I get the feeling I'll bring the tone of this down, however:

'I'd lay my hands on the redhead at 2:09'

*gah* I'm glad that's done, feel free to continue

Actually he was already in jail awaiting trial when a mob of 200 men stormed his jail cell, shot his brother in the face, and shot Joseph Smith several times.

That's hardly resisting arrest.

...and I can't believe you just compared Joseph Smith to Saddam Hussein. I mean, c'mon.

It seems to me like 95% of people I talk to have heard wild stories about what we believe and the only motive I have here is to ensure that everyone understands our beliefs 100%. Take them or leave them. I don't want to convert the whole world, I know that's impossible. Everyone is going to make their own mind up. It would just be nice if everyone could make their mind up about accurate information rather than false accusations and exaggerations.

I'm not one to argue that the things I believe, everyone has to agree with. Neither do I attempt to sugar coat anything, or hide anything about my religion because I'm ashamed of it. I'm not ashamed of what I know to be true. I want to tell it straight so that everyone has an accurate picture in their mind of who I am and what makes me a Latter Day Saint.

If you're honestly open to discussing my beliefs, than I welcome the comments. If you're just out to prove how crazy I am. Don't bother.

Time and time again throughout my life I've questioned my own faith in various ways and under various circumstances. Time and time again I prayed and received answers to those prayers that my faith was, and is, well founded.

I try to be a kind, loving, responsible, respectful, sensitive, and successful man. I hold myself to a high standard because I know that God wants me to. All I ask of others when discussing faith and religion is to respect my motives and keep an open mind.

>> ^MINK:
And Smith died how? Resisting arrest with gunfire? Isn't that a bit weird for a Christian?

What's questionable about Mormonism as it relates to Scientology? I fail to see any similarities, other than the amount of scrutiny the two receive.

Scientology has a known history of abuse, illegal activity, and motives for world domination, for lack of a better term.

Where are the parallels?

In reply to this comment by Farhad2000:
You sound like a nice person whose trying to defend a religion that has questionable origins and backgrounds.

It's like Scientology. Also based on questionable facts, but am sure there are some nice folks who practice it.

I don't really understand what you mean by anti-Mormon propaganda, I would love if you could show me some sources.

I consider myself both an atheist and an agnostic. Atheism is based on belief without evidence, while agnosticism is based on the fact that metaphysical ideas cannot be proven or disproved by physical means.

>> ^thepinky:
Edit: According to MY definition of agnosticism and atheism as I studied them in school, you cannot be atheist and agnostic. I apologize. I temporarily forgot that people have diluted the definitions when I said this: By the way, you can't be atheist AND agnostic. That's just downright silly. I say this in the kindliest way possible.
But, seriously, Ace, I like you. You give me a good challenge. I was delighted to see that you lost your faith because of the age-old "problem of evil," which is the name for the whole hell+justgod=wtf? phenomenon you described. I wrote a ridiculously long paper on JUST THAT TOPIC about a year ago. Edit: Did you know that Mormon theology deals with that problem rather naturally? This is what got me so into that book, Mormon Doctrine. It's crazy! I can send you my paper sometime if you want.
The dilemna is:
1. All-good
2. All-powerful
3. Evil exists
Does that look familiar? Man, I love this stuff. We should chat.

pinky, you use lots of words, but all any of us guys care about is...are you that beauty in your avatar?

*boring

deedub, you got me, "resisting arrest" wasn't the right way to put it.

but you also aren't being open.
who shot guns in this story, just the mob?
was smith inside or outside the building when the dust settled?
these things have got to make you wonder. jesus died in a more appropriate way, wouldn't you say? i get the feeling if jesus had tried to jump off the cross and run away, his message would be a little weaker. you have to admit smith had a messy ending to his story.

and... comparing smith to hussein doesn't mean i am saying they are the same.
i am saying that they both led organisations, are you denying that?
i am saying that some people in their organisations were nice. are you denying that?

so then, given those facts, it doesn't make sense to defend mormonism by saying "mormons are mostly nice people" because then you are also defending a lot of other crazy organisations by implication.

it's just logic, man, don't be scared of it, it can help you work out what's going on.

^I never said that Smith wasn't afraid for his life or that he didn't want to die. I know the men had a gun and were prepared to use the gun for self defense when they found out a mob of 200 was coming to murder them in their cell as they awaited trial. The men in the cell shot and hit two men who both survived. He was still, however, the victim of murder. He was outside when the dust settled because he fell or jumped out the window after his brother was shot in the head. He was struck several times before and after he jumped/fell out the window. What would any of us do?

I never compared him to Jesus. Next to Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith is a tiny man, indeed.

...and yes, I agree that the argument that Mormons are "mostly nice people" is completely irrelevant to any meaningful discussion about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and Joseph Smith. Couldn't you illustrate that point without referencing one of the most evil Dictators of our time?

I'll answer your questions MINK.
the members of the church that were detained in Carthage jail had between them one pepper box revolver. It was fired twice at the over two hundred members of the mob that had surrounded and stormed the building. There was one other weapon, a cane that was used to deflect muskets aiming through the door to the room where Joseph and Hyrum Smith were shoot.

Smith was inside the building when the mob entered, when his brother was shot Joseph was at his side until his last breath, then he walked towards the window and was struck from bullets outside and then from behind as some of the mob had breached the door. He landed near the water pump for the well about 2 stories below.

And please tell me what 'crazy' organizations the LDS church is supporting. I'd be interested in your source for that comment.

And don't compare Jesus to Joseph, that's just asinine. Read the bible and then if you still don't understand I can point out distinct diffrences between Joseph Smith and Jesus Christ, namely one was perfect the other not so much. Are you suggesting that Joseph should have just thrown himself in front of a gun? I know that I for one would not be willing to die so calmly as he did. I suspect you would, if your being rational agree on that.

>> ^MINK:
deedub, you got me, "resisting arrest" wasn't the right way to put it.
but you also aren't being open.
who shot guns in this story, just the mob?
was smith inside or outside the building when the dust settled?
these things have got to make you wonder. jesus died in a more appropriate way, wouldn't you say? i get the feeling if jesus had tried to jump off the cross and run away, his message would be a little weaker. you have to admit smith had a messy ending to his story.
and... comparing smith to hussein doesn't mean i am saying they are the same.
i am saying that they both led organisations, are you denying that?
i am saying that some people in their organisations were nice. are you denying that?
so then, given those facts, it doesn't make sense to defend mormonism by saying "mormons are mostly nice people" because then you are also defending a lot of other crazy organisations by implication.
it's just logic, man, don't be scared of it, it can help you work out what's going on.

MINK:

You're debating a claim that nobody made about Mormon ideology being true because the people are nice? You only have to tolerate something if it doesn't decrease the amount of happiness in the world i.e. hurt anyone. Thus, I don't have to tolerate Hussein's ideologies because they hurt people. Mormons are pretty good people and the church does good things. So, you could be called intolerant not to tolerate them. That is the only reason I brought up the whole "nice" thing.

All organized religion is not "by definition" intolerant of others. And how is it insulting for Mormons to make claims about Christ? Does somebody own him? I don't demand that the attacks stop. My whole reason for defending the faith is:

1.) An egocentric perpetuation of the belief that the Mormon faith is so very ridiculous that Mormons must be brainwashed, stupid, ignorant, or crazy to believe it, as opposed to other religions that are "more believable", is an intolerant practice.
2.) This intolerant practice leads to discrimination, hatred, and cruelty.
3.) Such ill-informed and unsupported treatments of Mormon beliefs should end because they are intolerant and prejudiced and they have an adverse affect on the people.

That's all I'm trying to say. Honestly, if you can't undertand how the typical Mormon video on VS is intolerant, I don't know what I can say to help you understand it. I would and have done the same thing for Catholics a few times.

Your weird and extraneous argument about Joseph Smith's death baffle me. I'm glad someone else already set you straight so I don't have to.
And will someone please explain the source of the "magic hat" thing to me? I've never seen it anywhere but on South Park.

>> ^Farhad2000:
You sound like a nice person whose trying to defend a religion that has questionable origins and backgrounds.
It's like Scientology. Also based on questionable facts, but am sure there are some nice folks who practice it.
I don't really understand what you mean by anti-Mormon propaganda, I would love if you could show me some sources.
Do a VS search for Mormon and click on any video?

>> ^NordlichReiter:
The below gnostic gospel, made notable in stigmata, provides that you can find "god" every where around you. All types of "god", the angry "god", the happy "god", the sad god. etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas
So in a way all church's are useless under the gospels words. I was raised catholic, until I grew up. Any organization that requires me to go to a 'Mass' of some sorts on a Sunday in the morning will not ever get my patronage. Not because I want to sleep, but because I don't want to be around all those people who I don't agree with.


The beauty to gnostic works is they are all of questionable origins. You can find them that say just about anything you like, but they hold about as weight as quoting the apocrypha. Unless a religion is willing to accept them as canon, then that argument is not valid because there is no way to ascertain the validity of the content. Even if the book is as old as it purports to be and was written by who it is credited it still begs the question of the creditability of the author.

>> ^MINK:
so then, given those facts, it doesn't make sense to defend mormonism by saying "mormons are mostly nice people" because then you are also defending a lot of other crazy organisations by implication.


I think we're stretching a bit here, we need to focus more on the big picture. I think the point of the argument follows the lines that you must check the result of something to determine weather it has been good or bad. I think I can safely say there were no nice guys to work at concentration camps, so there are not nice guys everywhere. Hitler may have hired many nice guys, but by the time the camps closed, I would say they certainly were not nice anymore. On the other hand, I have known many people who were not-nice guys decide they wanted religion and suddenly make the shift to the nice side.

So let's review: concentration camps produce bad things and bad people. I won't say all religion produces good things (crusaders were probably bad, for example), but producing good people is definitely a good start.

Holy crap pinky, you've got an AWFUL lot of time on your hands! That's a lot of comments! (Still, that's the way of uni students... At least it was for me)

Ignoring whether you believe in a supernatural being or not, my issues with pretty much all religions, but especially the Christian ones:

* The belief that the bible is the word of god... even though it is:
a) A bunch of things written by a group of different people, all with their own points to get across and axes to grind.
b) Proven to have been altered and changed over time by whoever happened to be in power at the time (the Romans changed it, it's been changed during translations etc.)
c) That it's full of things written by the people of the day which reflects the beliefs of the time and includes things like slavery being ok, and so Christians pick and choose what they wish to believe from the book while still trying to say that it's all god's word.

* The attempted forcing of what they believe onto the rest of us:
This forceful pushing of Creationism and refuting of the proven facts of Evolution is damaging the countries where this is becoming mainstream (the US in particular). Creationism was a way for people who DID NOT UNDERSTAND how things worked to explain them, now that we do, it should be relegated to the history books as where we've come from.

* The heinous hypocrites that most of the organized Christian churches are:
Do unto others as you would have done unto you... except if you're gay, or of another faith, or believe in something we don't believe in, then we're going to treat you like dirt and try and pass laws to stop you being YOU.

* Believing that there are those that have 'authority from God':
Under what proof? That the existing ones who have authority from god give them that authority? Who gave them it? Those before... and so on until you get to someone who just said 'Yeah, you know, God spoke to me and kinda told me I speak for him...' It's an utter cop out in general life to hand over your entire moral code to someone who just says that they speak for some being that you believe in, and so anything they say goes. 'I don't like gays, they're unnatural'. 'Why is that then?' 'Well, because my pastor says so'... 'Riiiight'.

Issues with Mormon's in particular from this video:

* The excluding or including things in your life just because someone said so
With nothing to back it up other than that Joseph Smith said so, you're going to give up all alcohol, coffee and tea? Why? Tea has antioxidants, as does coffee. Red wine has been shown time and time again to have many positive health benefits. Sure you can overdo any of these, but that's MODERATION, not outright shunning of something with no rational reason behind it.

* Handing over of 1/10th of your income for the 'work of God'
So, really, you're handing over a HUGE amount of what you earn to those that have self proclaimed themselves to be in communication with god to do with as they please... wonderful

But most of all demonstrating their amazing gullibility in believing the charlatan that was Joseph Smith. Even from a LDS website itself, which is obviously PRO him, the story comes off as just plain ridiculous.

And it mentions the hat and if you read that, then watch South Park THEY TELL IT LIKE IT IS. That is truly the insanity of the beliefs.

But hey, if people want to believe that, good on them, just DON'T COME TO MY DOOR TRYING TO MAKE ME BELIEVE IT.

But the good thing about Mormons... because so many more people can see their beliefs as being pretty ridiculous, it allows us to say, "Really, so a guy who puts a hat over his head and rambles off things from 'sacred stones' is a pretty insane thing to follow? OK, what about people who believe that there really was a Garden of idyllic majesty with no sin, and a talking snake with a magic apple? What about believing that you can fit two of every single species of animal onto a wooden boat built by ONE GUY and then live on it without them all dying for 40 DAYS? That doesn't sound a bit loopy to you? Good luck with that."


Surely religion should be about passing on a GOOD moral code, to teach a 'right and wrong' way to treat people. As SDGundamX said he received from his Mormon church, teaching WHY things are not good to do to people from a humanistic point of view, not just because some book says so.

I think one should invest more time in organisations that aim to help their community with NO bias as to beliefs at all, but just aim to treat everyone fairly and equitably.

If you believe something that I don't, and if it doesn't mean that you treat myself or anyone else in a poor manner, then go for it. But when you try and force you beliefs on others, try to tell others that they are wrong, try to force people to change who they are (no, you've only CHOSEN to be Gay, repent now), THAT IS WRONG.

^Who tries to force? Our motive for missionary work is to bring our message to all who are willing to hear. If you're not willing to listen, we leave.

Coffee and Wine both contain addictive substances. We've all heard about the benefits that go along with the risks, but there's nothing those drinks do for my body that is essential or that I can't get somewhere else. I know plenty of people who never drank a lick of coffee or wine and were very healthy all their lives. We just choose to steer clear of habit forming substances. I can't understand why what we choose to drink or not to drink would be listed as an "issue" that you have with the Mormon religion.

In regards to giving up our money: A significant dollar amount gathered from tithes and offerings go toward humanitarian efforts around the world.

^actually, the mere presence of the guys in the white shirts freaks me out and i consider it a mild "force" in my face in the street. I can take the pain, i just think it's what some people call "offensive", for example if i wore a "fuck god" tshirt all day and asked people in the street if they would like to talk about Satan. It would be... rude.

one thing i am noticing is the need to tell us how persecuted you are. that's interesting. I would say you choose persecution if you follow an unconventional path, whatever that is. if it was purely your skin colour it would be unfair to persecute, but it's your chosen belief, you have to take the knocks.

As for the defences here of Mormonism, they seem to amount to "don't worry about that part". I am afraid I consider all the parts, and I wouldn't want to be part of an organisation with parts like that, even if it contains nice people in other parts.

all your life you were told mormonism is good, and you seem to find it hard to understand that some good people simply weren't born into that tradition, and that from the outside, it looks ridiculous (like most religions). some retards will throw retarded accusations, but other people will read a lot about your religion (from many sources) and simply decide it's not believable or coherent.

^Here we go again.

I'm fine with people that read accurate information and make the decision that they're not interested.

Q:When did I say anything about being persecuted?
(I simply want to put a stop to incorrect information being spread on THIS website.)

Q:When did anyone say "don't worry about that part"?
(I consider all parts too, my man.)

I told you before: I'm not apologetic about ANY of my beliefs. I'm no Barack Obama. I haven't heard anything in church, or read anything from the leaders in my church that I don't believe or that I would try to sweep under the rug.

The half truths being told about my beliefs, on the other hand, I would like to get rid of.



>> ^MINK:
^actually, the mere presence of the guys in the white shirts freaks me out and i consider it a mild "force" in my face in the street. I can take the pain, i just think it's what some people call "offensive", for example if i wore a "fuck god" tshirt all day and asked people in the street if they would like to talk about Satan. It would be... rude.
one thing i am noticing is the need to tell us how persecuted you are. that's interesting. I would say you choose persecution if you follow an unconventional path, whatever that is. if it was purely your skin colour it would be unfair to persecute, but it's your chosen belief, you have to take the knocks.
As for the defences here of Mormonism, they seem to amount to "don't worry about that part". I am afraid I consider all the parts, and I wouldn't want to be part of an organisation with parts like that, even if it contains nice people in other parts.
all your life you were told mormonism is good, and you seem to find it hard to understand that some good people simply weren't born into that tradition, and that from the outside, it looks ridiculous (like most religions). some retards will throw retarded accusations, but other people will read a lot about your religion (from many sources) and simply decide it's not believable or coherent.

>> ^deedub81:
^Who tries to force? Our motive for missionary work is to bring our message to all who are willing to hear. If you're not willing to listen, we leave.

Just coming to my door and trying everything possible before finally giving up and leaving is just plain annoying. Although doing it to tribes and other 'non advanced' cultures is pretty terrible. It's done all over by most Christian religions and has wiped out so many native belief systems which are just as logical and based on just as much fact as any that Christians follow.

The forcing part comes with what GundamnX says above, whereby those in the church are seriously encouraged to get all their friends and family into it too so they can 'all be together in the afterlife'. Now this isn't just with the Mormons, I had a friend who was... erm... babtist I think, anyway, he tried for years to convert me... eventually I stopped seeing him due to his anti gay views.


Coffee and Wine both contain addictive substances. We've all heard about the benefits that go along with the risks, but there's nothing those drinks do for my body that is essential or that I can't get somewhere else. I know plenty of people who never drank a lick of coffee or wine and were very healthy all their lives. We just choose to steer clear of habit forming substances. I can't understand why what we choose to drink or not to drink would be listed as an "issue" that you have with the Mormon religion.

Because if you choose to not have them due to whatever health reasons you wish to abide by that's fine... it's when you're TOLD to not drink them, THAT'S a serious problem. Being TOLD to do something is not a way to do anything (at least not anything that isn't hurting others). And if the only thing you've got to go on is that they have 'addictive' substances... well... I notice that you left tea out of there, as do you know ANYONE who's addicted to tea? Does it extend to green tea? What else do you consider addictive? There are people who are addicted to all sorts of things, you can ban the use of everything just because some people use them to excess, that's removing free will. How about teaching restraint and the ability to control oneself instead?

In regards to giving up our money: A significant dollar amount gathered from tithes and offerings go toward humanitarian efforts around the world.

And a significant portion is used for trying to push the word on others, build large churches to your lord (the one near me has large grounds and is kept immaculately(tee hee) clean... so at least you're tidy) etc. Saying that some goes towards good doesn't get it off the hook. Being told that if you want to be considered a good follower you need to give up 1/10 of your income... man, that's emotional blackmail right there.

dude i was replying more to pinky than you

and wow, you guys have a weird way of debating. it's all indignation and skirting over the difficult points you can't answer. you come back with "i didn't say that! people are telling halftruths about my religion!" intead of answering the points about an army of identically dressed people walking around every city in the world with a book in their hand.

In my church, drinking wine was compulsory.

If you are following scripture, why aren't you stoning rape victims to death and sacrificing sheep etc.

over to you...

@ Spoco2: That's exactly what we teach. Restraint and self control. Nobody forces me not to drink wine. I choose not to. ...and yes, Green tea has caffeine in it. Therefore, it's addictive.

This is the way I see it: Nobody forces you or I to get up in the morning and go to work and do our best. It's just what we're all taught that we must do to lead a happy and productive life. This doesn't mean that we're forced to do anything or that our free will is taken away, does it? It's not blackmail if It's voluntary. That's just my opinion of my own faith and actions. Take from that what you will.

I did not serve a mission but I do know that almost all Mormon missionaries and their families pay 100% of their own way. In addition to those funds provided for one's own self, there is a missionary fund that members can contribute to, if they'd like to. This is not considered a commandment or rule of any kind. It's a 100% voluntary contribution.

...and yes, our Meeting houses, temples, and chapels are generally in good condition. In most parts of the world, the majority of the interior maintenance is provided by members who volunteer their time to clean, repair, etc. To the best of my knowledge, the funds for construction of new buildings and for grounds keeping (and many other expenses) is allocated from tithes and income earned on real estate holdings and investments.


@ Mink: If you're not talking to me, then don't point at me

And I think you're misinterpreting my tone. No indignation here (I blame my avatar for the misunderstanding. Makes it seem like I'm always ticked off. I should change it to a hot chick, or some dude smiling).

I don't see where anyone, including thepinky, talks a lot about "how persecuted [we] are." She did, however, mention that some Christians attack us for our beliefs about Christ. Is that the statement you are referring to?

You still haven't named anything specific that I won't answer or that I'm trying to sweep under the rug. Name one topic I'm "skirting over."


Stoning rape victims? Didn't they only talk about doing that if the woman didn't object to the rape? I admit, I personally spend more time studying the New Testament and the Book of Mormon than I do the Old Testament.

In regards to sacrificing sheep, etc: Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law of Moses by becoming the ultimate sacrifice. That's why he's referred to as The Lamb of God. We believe and strive to follow all of Christ's teachings and practice the methods of worship as laid out by Him and His apostles in the New Testament as well as in the Book of Mormon. This is not to say that we don't believe the Old Testament to be true. It is still scripture. We just don't live the old law (an eye for an eye, etc).

I can see that it's not productive to turn this into a debate about whether or not you think what I believe is good. I didn't mean to do that. Sometimes I get a little defensive when I feel like I'm being attacked.

I'm not trying to convert anyone here. I just kinda wanted to clear the air of some myths about what we believe. Many people either don't know, or claim to know and spread misinformation.

That's all

MINK, you're missing the point for any Christian with regards to the treatment of any extramarital sexual relationship (I don't think RAPE victims were EVER stoned. That would suck, "sorry you got raped now you gotta die?"). Even Christ himself did away with that practice. See St. John 8:2-11.

“Obviously those of the Mormon superstition have not been enlightened about the great, holy, and sacred Flying Spaghetti Monster. Be saved from DEATH! Be saved from being EVIL! Be a GOOD person and live FOREVER in Spaghetti HEAVEN!”


My studies at Boston College in Theology of the major religions convinced me that the primary reason religions can successfully exist is because they promise a way to escape death. This is utilization of the instinct to survive. Most religions deriving from the Middle East also heavily utilize a constant "judgment" by a "higher power" which can withdraw the possibility of escaping death, therefore conveying the death sentence, if the "rules" of the religion are violated. These "rules" almost always require submission to higher "spiritually" developed humans, thereby creating authority and power in the religion, which assures growth and solidity of the religion, and the imperative to convince non-believers to believe in the religion (and hence in its' rules) in order to escape death.

The aspect of religion that is, to me, so incredible, is that they are all based upon a history of occurrences in a far distant past, a history that has changed multiple times in its' travel to the present. Each change was primarily made to further empower the leaders of the religion at the time of the change.

Present day “proofs” of the existence of “higher power” are inane and “believers” present as proof intangible totally subjective experience. If there would be a “higher Power” which is omnipotent, that “higher power” must, considering the suffering of human beings of the world, be horrendously uncaring and evil.

My objection to religion is that the "rules" it imposes inhibits free will and instills shame, fear, and guilt. Freely experiencing such basic instincts as sexuality and enjoying the freedom to be ones’ unique self (without being constantly judged) are penalized with the death sentence. Religion assumes that humans are basically evil and MUST be controlled by religion or they will be thieving, murdering, animals, devoid of empathy and incapable of agape (which, in my mind, seems to describe the “omnipotent higher power” should one exist).

I believe writing LONG sentences is NOT evil!!

well it's not easy discussing in comments like this, but thanks everyone for staying on track as much as possible.

all i can add at this point is: Watch Monty Python's Life Of Brian. It's the best explanation I know as to why some people opt out of dedicating themselves to just one interpretation of one ancient religion.

I could ask the classic question: what if you hadn't been born into a Mormon family?

It seems to me we need to separate "cultural heritage" from philosophy and theology.

Oh and Orgazmo is really funny too.

There are plenty of people in my religion that are converts.

So, ask a more specific hypothetical question and I'll answer it hypothetically. There's no answer to a "what if" question without an end to the question.

What if you hadn't been born into a Mormon family, would you...?
What if you hadn't been born into a Mormon family, could you...?

Does the fact that I didn't believe any religion, including the one I was raised in, until I was 23 mean anything to you? I stopped going to church when I turned 17 because I no longer felt obligated to go and my parents didn't force me. I figured out that my friends and family loved me regardless of what church I attended. After that, I had to come to my own decision about the whole thing. I agree that cultural heritage has a large influence on us as human beings, but it's not the end all be all to how we see the world.

Don Juan, Exactly... everything you said I think too... although I didn't study theology to come to the same conclusions. Most people at some stage are afraid of death, and the fear of just 'stopping' scares the living shite out of them, so anything that lets them believe that they won't really just stop when they die gives them enormous comfort. This is all well and good until you start treating people poorly because of the set of rules you believe are set around entrance to the amazing afterlife. (Sorry, you had sex before marriage, sorry you're gay, sorry you didn't come and praise his almighty every weekend.... which begs the question, just how insecure is God if he/she needs so much reaffirmation?)

My wife and I both wish there were things like churches where people could come together and discuss things, feel part of a community, think and act on how to help others etc. BUT without any 'ordained' people, without any promise of some almighty afterlife, without ANY care of what you believe in when it comes to higher powers. Just humanitarian principles that everyone should be treated equally, everyone should be helped in times of need, everyone deserves to be given the chance to 'make it' in our society.

There may be such places, we just don't know of them.

>> ^thepinky:
>>That's awesome. Treat 'em all the same. Thanks for playing.

Ah sarcasm, how refreshing.

I would treat them all the same, except the different religions don't treat the rest of us the same. The basic principles of all religion (though I must be careful saying "all", because someone somewhere will make up a new religion that works differently) is that there is a supernatural being, who in some religions are a creator-god. This is evidently false. That there exists an intervening supernatural being is equally false, with even more evidence against it.

This is the basis for all monotheistic religions and I hold it against all of them.

That being said, there are monotheistic religions that propagate animosity towards other people of different religion (or no religion) and some who don't. Some, or even most, religions are actively recruiting, such as Mormonism, and this I also dislike. They may claim that they are simply "spreading the good message", but really they are "selling" their religion at the doorsteps. I dislike this.

Atheism is a practical scientific look at the evidence presented and making the correct conclusion. Now, you may say, "that's just as bad as what religion does", but that would be a false claim. Religion makes it's conclusion before the evidence is created and morphs the evidence to fit the preceding conclusion. This is bad.

I dislike religion.

I don't dislike any given person for their beliefs, even if I dislike their beliefs. I have plenty of friends, who are active Christians and I don't dislike them. I think they are willfully deluded, for lack of a better word, because they do not want to scrutinize their beliefs. If these people kept their religious views to themselves, I would have no problem with it, whatsoever.*

Many religious people are heavily influenced by their religion, such that their actions are a direct result of religious values. This I can tolerate, otherwise I would be a fascist. But if a person is in a position of power, such as the presidency, he or she, should not be religious, for the simple fact that they are partly deluded - and if their actions are influenced by a falsity (religion) they could make amoral, willfully ignorant decisions, which are harmful to us all.

If religion gives YOU (directed at any reader) comfort that's perfectly fine. Some people are comforted by placing crystals on their bodies, some eat sugarpills, and some see therapists. If that is something you need in your daily life, I can, well not respect, but honor that. Just don't expect anyone else to want part in it.


*This would change, however, if a religion worked to secretly undermine secular society, or a similar situation.

I think the original post was to testify that Mormons are actually good, familiar people. Is it a coincidence? But I hear the proverbial brain sucking aliens are in need of a similar image makeover.

Why, how belittling of you to say so. I actually don't have a heck of a lot of time on my hands and sacrificed sleep in an effort to make you all see that you are intolerant, but I'm never going to win against such blatant and blind egocentrism, so it was a waste of my time.

I don't see how your arguments against the Bible relate to the topic at hand, so I'm not going to give a rebuttal. We aren't trying to legitimize religion here. We'er trying to make people realize that they don't know all that they think they do about Mormons and that they need to be more tolerant.

I agree that creationists who deny the scientific facts are blinding themselves to truth. Not all Christians believe that Creationism and Darwinism are mutually exclusive. There are many books on the subject of justifying the two ideologies. Pick one up if you care.

I don't have the energy (or the TIME!) to go too far into this point right now. But, YES, many, many, many Christians are hypocrites. I completely and utterly agree. We should all be tolerant of each other.

Many people believe that there are safeguards against following and believing implicitly in the words of others. Some but not all of which are:
1. Personal revelation
2. Agreement with already existing doctrines and morals
3. Intellect
4. Rationality

Why not get the same health benefits from non-addictive substances? Caffeine in addictive and in tea. And who said that rationality has to justify the interworkings of religion? Pah-lease! Have you ever heard of faith? What's the difference between doing what the Bible says and doing what Joseph Smith says? I don't know why you're even bothering to bring this up. Like SDGundamX said, he was taught WHY he did things. I think that most Mormons know why they do the things they do.

What's wrong with tithes? They aren't forced out of anybody. They go to good causes. Members of the church do not get paid for their service, and church members can easily find out where their money is going. I don't see the problem, honestly, or why it seems important to you.

GAH! If anyone uses anything akin to the term "forcing beliefs" one more time, I THINK AM GOING TO VOMIT.

>> ^spoco2:
Holy crap pinky, you've got an AWFUL lot of time on your hands! That's a lot of comments! (Still, that's the way of uni students... At least it was for me)
Ignoring whether you believe in a supernatural being or not, my issues with pretty much all religions, but especially the Christian ones:
The belief that the bible is the word of god... even though it is:
a) A bunch of things written by a group of different people, all with their own points to get across and axes to grind.
b) Proven to have been altered and changed over time by whoever happened to be in power at the time (the Romans changed it, it's been changed during translations etc.)
c) That it's full of things written by the people of the day which reflects the beliefs of the time and includes things like slavery being ok, and so Christians pick and choose what they wish to believe from the book while still trying to say that it's all god's word.
The attempted forcing of what they believe onto the rest of us:
This forceful pushing of Creationism and refuting of the proven facts of Evolution is damaging the countries where this is becoming mainstream (the US in particular). Creationism was a way for people who DID NOT UNDERSTAND how things worked to explain them, now that we do, it should be relegated to the history books as where we've come from.
The heinous hypocrites that most of the organized Christian churches are:
Do unto others as you would have done unto you... except if you're gay, or of another faith, or believe in something we don't believe in, then we're going to treat you like dirt and try and pass laws to stop you being YOU.
Believing that there are those that have 'authority from God':
Under what proof? That the existing ones who have authority from god give them that authority? Who gave them it? Those before... and so on until you get to someone who just said 'Yeah, you know, God spoke to me and kinda told me I speak for him...' It's an utter cop out in general life to hand over your entire moral code to someone who just says that they speak for some being that you believe in, and so anything they say goes. 'I don't like gays, they're unnatural'. 'Why is that then?' 'Well, because my pastor says so'... 'Riiiight'.
Issues with Mormon's in particular from this video:
The excluding or including things in your life just because someone said so
With nothing to back it up other than that Joseph Smith said so, you're going to give up all alcohol, coffee and tea? Why? Tea has antioxidants, as does coffee. Red wine has been shown time and time again to have many positive health benefits. Sure you can overdo any of these, but that's MODERATION, not outright shunning of something with no rational reason behind it.
Handing over of 1/10th of your income for the 'work of God'
So, really, you're handing over a HUGE amount of what you earn to those that have self proclaimed themselves to be in communication with god to do with as they please... wonderful
But most of all demonstrating their amazing gullibility in believing the charlatan that was Joseph Smith. Even from a LDS website itself, which is obviously PRO him, the story comes off as just plain ridiculous.
And it mentions the hat and if you read that, then watch South Park THEY TELL IT LIKE IT IS. That is truly the insanity of the beliefs.
But hey, if people want to believe that, good on them, just DON'T COME TO MY DOOR TRYING TO MAKE ME BELIEVE IT.
But the good thing about Mormons... because so many more people can see their beliefs as being pretty ridiculous, it allows us to say, "Really, so a guy who puts a hat over his head and rambles off things from 'sacred stones' is a pretty insane thing to follow? OK, what about people who believe that there really was a Garden of idyllic majesty with no sin, and a talking snake with a magic apple? What about believing that you can fit two of every single species of animal onto a wooden boat built by ONE GUY and then live on it without them all dying for 40 DAYS? That doesn't sound a bit loopy to you? Good luck with that."
Surely religion should be about passing on a GOOD moral code, to teach a 'right and wrong' way to treat people. As SDGundamX said he received from his Mormon church, teaching WHY things are not good to do to people from a humanistic point of view, not just because some book says so.
I think one should invest more time in organisations that aim to help their community with NO bias as to beliefs at all, but just aim to treat everyone fairly and equitably.
If you believe something that I don't, and if it doesn't mean that you treat myself or anyone else in a poor manner, then go for it. But when you try and force you beliefs on others, try to tell others that they are wrong, try to force people to change who they are (no, you've only CHOSEN to be Gay, repent now), THAT IS WRONG.

I agree with Deedub's rebuttal to this, but I want to add a few things.

I'm sorry you're offended. It's a weak argument, though. Just because something about another person's religion offends you, they ought not to have to discontinue. Honestly, how often have you been approached by missionaries? It has NEVER happened to me, but by the way people around here talk, it seems like it happens just about every day to you guys.

Here's a hypothetical situation for you: I may be offended by a Sikh because his turban is blocking my view at a play. I may not see the need to wear a turban. I may even say that the "mere presence of the guy in the turban freaks me out", but it is important to him so I deal with it. Missionary work is important to Mormons. Deal with it.

So you're saying that any group that is persecuted ought to expect and accept persecution? I don't think you mean that. One could say: "Interracial couples CHOOSE to get married, so I don't know why they have a problem with being harrassed!" "Gays CHOOSE to be openly gay, so I don't see why they have a problem with people defacing their property! They ought to expect that kind of thing!" "Muslims CHOOSE to be Muslim, so I don't see why they have a problem with being called terrorists!" Gimme a break! Mormons DO NOT have to take the knocks and have every right to expect and seek after religious tolerance. They also have the right to fight against the damaging effects of anti-Mormon propaganda and, as deedub said, half-truths.

You might be referring to my comment that a summary need not discuss all Mormon doctrine or controversy. I stand by that. No one is asking you to ignore anything. You've just made that part up. By pointing out that Mormons are nice, I'm emphasizing the fact that as far as the outside world is concerned, this is all that is important for YOU to worry about. If you've decided that Mormonism is not for you, great! Fine! More power to you! I'm just saying, why stress about the Mormons? Why are the users of videosift so determined to put them in a bad light? Why do you care about the so-called "magic hat?" To emphasize insignificant and unflattering parts of a religion FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE of being cruel and promoting hatred and misunderstanding is wrong and intolerant.

Mormons don't believe that they have the corner on good people, if that's what you were implying. Some people may look into it fairly, but ask yourself if you are truly one of those people, or are you the type that likes to take cheap shots at Mormons because, let's face it, it is so...very...easy?

>> ^MINK:
^actually, the mere presence of the guys in the white shirts freaks me out and i consider it a mild "force" in my face in the street. I can take the pain, i just think it's what some people call "offensive", for example if i wore a "fuck god" tshirt all day and asked people in the street if they would like to talk about Satan. It would be... rude.
one thing i am noticing is the need to tell us how persecuted you are. that's interesting. I would say you choose persecution if you follow an unconventional path, whatever that is. if it was purely your skin colour it would be unfair to persecute, but it's your chosen belief, you have to take the knocks.
As for the defences here of Mormonism, they seem to amount to "don't worry about that part". I am afraid I consider all the parts, and I wouldn't want to be part of an organisation with parts like that, even if it contains nice people in other parts.
all your life you were told mormonism is good, and you seem to find it hard to understand that some good people simply weren't born into that tradition, and that from the outside, it looks ridiculous (like most religions). some retards will throw retarded accusations, but other people will read a lot about your religion (from many sources) and simply decide it's not believable or coherent.

we have an angry mormon here people! look out!

seriously pinky, i can understand it's a problem if most of society think your particular origins or way of life are wrong. you are not alone, nobody likes this feeling. we all have something different about us that gets insulted occasionally. I even get people looking down on me because I am English, assuming i must be very rich and sneering at my insanely priveleged life if I complain about the price of anything at all. (it's true, i've been lucky, but i am not rich and I don't like being judged as a generic stereoptype of a nationality I have basically disowned, it fucking hurts).

There are atheists who are bullied by christians, muslims bullied by hindis, nerds bullied by jocks, this is how humans behave to each other (unfortunately).

So first of all, accept that this is never going to stop. Second of all, accept that a lot of people here are familiar with mormonism already and we STILL think it sucks, and we reserve the right to tell you so in a discussion thread about mormonism.

However we (non mormons) will NEVER come to your doorstep to tell you about atheism or agnosticism or any other ism unless you ask us. That is a big difference, and if you really want to stop people's prejudice and hate, maybe you should cut down on that side of your marketing campaign. It's just unwelcome. It doesn't matter if you are polite. When you knock on a door or approach someone in the street you are invading their space uninvited.

@deedub: you said (in answer to my question "what if you weren't born mormon"):
"There are plenty of people in my religion that are converts.
So, ask a more specific hypothetical question and I'll answer it hypothetically. There's no answer to a "what if" question without an end to the question."

That's just dodging the point. You know what I mean. If you were born in India you'd more likely be Hindu. You'd probably tell me how great Hinduism is. So if you go down the road of saying there is "only one true religion" then you are kinda being an asshole to everyone who wasn't born near enough to a source of information about that religion. And all the babies who died before they could understand language.

So... isn't the "all-city doorstep marketing campaign" just an excuse so you can all go to heaven and say "well, we TRIED to convert other people, but they wouldn't listen..."

>> ^spoco2:


Because if you choose to not have them due to whatever health reasons you wish to abide by that's fine... it's when you're TOLD to not drink them, THAT'S a serious problem. Being TOLD to do something is not a way to do anything (at least not anything that isn't hurting others). And if the only thing you've got to go on is that they have 'addictive' substances... well... I notice that you left tea out of there, as do you know ANYONE who's addicted to tea? Does it extend to green tea? What else do you consider addictive? There are people who are addicted to all sorts of things, you can ban the use of everything just because some people use them to excess, that's removing free will. How about teaching restraint and the ability to control oneself instead?

And a significant portion is used for trying to push the word on others, build large churches to your lord (the one near me has large grounds and is kept immaculately(tee hee) clean... so at least you're tidy) etc. Saying that some goes towards good doesn't get it off the hook. Being told that if you want to be considered a good follower you need to give up 1/10 of your income... man, that's emotional blackmail right there.


People do choose not to drink tea and coffee and alcohol. Mormons do teach restraint and learning to control oneself. But why take the unnecessary risk of surrendering free will? Addictive substances are just not worth it. (Pornography is also considered addictive and highly frowned upon.) The church advises against such substances, but they aren't about to kick anybody out for drinking tea.

Much of the money given to tithing also supports members of the congregation in which a Mormon resides. This money is given under the condition that the beneficiaries do all they can to become economically independent. People make a great sacrifice for what they believe to be a greater cause, and they know exactly why they do it. They give money to those who need it, and Mormons do a lot of good. As to the other places that the moeny goes: They believe in missionary work. They want everyone in the world to have access to temples. Tithing is also seen as preparation for a time when Jesus Christ comes again, when there will be no personal property. Tithing is a self-fulfilling, generous, and wonderful thing that Mormons choose to do with their money. Of all things to have a problem with, I am amazed that you choose tithing. Emotional blackmail my foot. Taxes are forced donations to often unknown and unreasonable causes. Tithing is a voluntary donation that goes exactly where Mormons want it to go.

Please refrain from making disparaging comments, belittling me, and otherwise making personal attacks. I have been very deliberately using the third person to refer to Mormons and almost everyone but you has done the same.

I accept that intolerance will never stop as long as people like you accept it as a convention of society and degrade those who attempt to eradicate it. Maybe being "sneered at" makes you feel like you have the right to tell people to accept their abuse, but come back to me and tell me to deal with intolerance when neighborhood children throw rocks at your little brother and call him a devil worshipper. I'm sorry if I seem like I feel sorry for myself. I don't know what to tell you. I'm sick of it all and no one even wants to acknowledge that it is a problem. They would rather just ignore it or tell Mormons that they deserve it. I just don't accept that this has to go on. I'm really sorry that you don't feel the same way.

And, please, do not have the gall to say that Mormons deserve it because they proselytize. Can't you see how asinine that is? Let's compare the two:

You lose some sleep or ten minutes or are annoyed because of some missionaries with a sincere desire to share a message with you that they believe to be true and that makes them happy and who leave after you slam the door in their faces.

VS.

Children brought up in ignorance who deface the cars of Mormon high school students as a result of ignorant defamation of Mormon beliefs and the resulting prejudice.

Which is worse? I dunno, it's pretty close.

>> ^MINK:
we have an angry mormon here people! look out!
seriously pinky, i can understand it's a problem if most of society think your particular origins or way of life are wrong. you are not alone, nobody likes this feeling. we all have something different about us that gets insulted occasionally. I even get people looking down on me because I am English, assuming i must be very rich and sneering at my insanely priveleged life if I complain about the price of anything at all. (it's true, i've been lucky, but i am not rich and I don't like being judged as a generic stereoptype of a nationality I have basically disowned, it fucking hurts).
There are atheists who are bullied by christians, muslims bullied by hindis, nerds bullied by jocks, this is how humans behave to each other (unfortunately).
So first of all, accept that this is never going to stop. Second of all, accept that a lot of people here are familiar with mormonism already and we STILL think it sucks, and we reserve the right to tell you so in a discussion thread about mormonism.
However we (non mormons) will NEVER come to your doorstep to tell you about atheism or agnosticism or any other ism unless you ask us. That is a big difference, and if you really want to stop people's prejudice and hate, maybe you should cut down on that side of your marketing campaign. It's just unwelcome. It doesn't matter if you are polite. When you knock on a door or approach someone in the street you are invading their space uninvited.
@deedub: you said (in answer to my question "what if you weren't born mormon"):
"There are plenty of people in my religion that are converts.
So, ask a more specific hypothetical question and I'll answer it hypothetically. There's no answer to a "what if" question without an end to the question."
That's just dodging the point. You know what I mean. If you were born in India you'd more likely be Hindu. You'd probably tell me how great Hinduism is. So if you go down the road of saying there is "only one true religion" then you are kinda being an asshole to everyone who wasn't born near enough to a source of information about that religion. And all the babies who died before they could understand language.
So... isn't the "all-city doorstep marketing campaign" just an excuse so you can all go to heaven and say "well, we TRIED to convert other people, but they wouldn't listen..."

you just really don't get it. people are annoyed by mormons approaching them uninvited to talk about god. that is a fact. mormons choose to do this, even though everyone tells them it is annoying. so, mormons, it's your fault if people are annoyed. you are the religious equivalent of spam.

nobody here is advocating for mindless abuse of mormons anyway. i tried to tell you i understand that but it seems you were looking for disagreement. you have only responded to some points and ignored the others.

it's honeslty weird debating with mormons. i think it's fascinating how in my experience you guys have a uniform and completely different understanding of almost everything people say to you, and very little grasp of logic. Your comparison of "getting up to answer the door" and "defacing cars" was just... whoaahh...

you keep going on about how mormons have to deal with shit. well tough. life's like that. you can't go round telling other people how to behave, they won't listen.

i want to say something about a splinter in a brother's eye, a plank in your own... how does it go again?

http://www.videosift.com/video/How-to-deal-with-Mormon-doorsteppers-from-Orgazmo

asinine lol
what's worse? mormons getting some verbal abuse from retards, or 2 million refugees running away from Iraq?
we can all play that game.

Wow, this whole debate has gotten retarded. Let me explain the current situation as I see it, being as objective as I can.

Maranara: Keeps making comments that don't make sense given the context. lolwut?

spoco2: makes posts that are against all religions and not specific to the topic at hand.

gwiz665: Equal opportunity hater. Willing to give extra hate if he thinks you deserve it.

MINK: seems genuinely offended by the presence of Mormon proselytizing practices. Also, seems to believe that this causes all Mormons to deserve a certain amount of grief from everyone else, regardless of their participation in said practices. Believes that Mormons (pinky) does not follow the logic being presented.

thepinky: Also seems genuinely offended by everyone else's objections. Seems to be making a plea for tolerance, which is met by the objections of many people to Mormon practices and beliefs.

Come on, guys, think about this all. Take a step back and evaluate everything that's going on. Pinky, respect others right to disagree. You probably won't change anyone's mind, but feel free to keep trying as long as you aren't getting pissed when it doesn't work. MINK, just because someone else thinks your logic is wrong doesn't mean they don't follow it. Just remember that pinky is just trying to create some tolerance for religious beliefs the same way so many others defend topics like gay marriage, democrats, etc. It's OK if the sift sees both sides of the coin, right? I think if you both take this less personally you can have a quite constructive discussion.

Can't we all just get along?

Marry me?

And thank you for pointing out where I am going wrong here. You're totally right. I got frustrated and I think it is because we are debating issues that are totally irrelevant to the whole reason that I posted the video, anyway. Myself, included.

All I'm trying to say is:

1. This video is good and accurate, though not all-inclusive.
2. Mormonism is misunderstood, although admittedly it can be seen as annoying and crazy to most people EVEN AFTER they get all the facts. Yet, still, it is misunderstood. You have every right to hate the religion if you want, but please get the facts first.
3. I think the abundance of half-truths and defamation ought to be balanced out by videos like this.
4. A one-sided view of Mormonism is intolerant and promotes prejudice.

That's what I'm sayin'. Take it or leave it.

>> ^Aemaeth:
Wow, this whole debate has gotten retarded. Let me explain the current situation as I see it, being as objective as I can.
Maranara: Keeps making comments that don't make sense given the context. lolwut?
spoco2: makes posts that are against all religions and not specific to the topic at hand.
gwiz665: Equal opportunity hater. Willing to give extra hate if he thinks you deserve it.
MINK: seems genuinely offended by the presence of Mormon proselytizing practices. Also, seems to believe that this causes all Mormons to deserve a certain amount of grief from everyone else, regardless of their participation in said practices. Believes that Mormons (pinky) does not follow the logic being presented.
thepinky: Also seems genuinely offended by everyone else's objections. Seems to be making a plea for tolerance, which is met by the objections of many people to Mormon practices and beliefs.
Come on, guys, think about this all. Take a step back and evaluate everything that's going on. Pinky, respect others right to disagree. You probably won't change anyone's mind, but feel free to keep trying as long as you aren't getting pissed when it doesn't work. MINK, just because someone else thinks your logic is wrong doesn't mean they don't follow it. Just remember that pinky is just trying to create some tolerance for religious beliefs the same way so many others defend topics like gay marriage, democrats, etc. It's OK if the sift see both sides of the coin, right? I think if you both take this less personally you can have a quite constructive discussion.
Can't we all just get along?

I understand that you aren't advocating mindless abuse of Mormons, and I thank you. I believe that I'm not making my logic clear to you. I'm saying that this mindless abuse is the result of hatred that begins on this level:

http://www.videosift.com/search?q=mormons

I do get that people are annoyed by proselytizing, but you seem to be using it as a legitimate reason for people to hate and slander Mormons. I'm simply comparing the result of anti-Mormon propaganda, mindless abuse, to the justification that you gave me for its existence, proselytizing. Now do you see where I was going with that, or am I being illogical like most Mormons are?

I have to say, you're being insulting. I am a very logical person. I just don't happen to agree with you.

>> ^MINK:
you just really don't get it. people are annoyed by mormons approaching them uninvited to talk about god. that is a fact. mormons choose to do this, even though everyone tells them it is annoying. so, mormons, it's your fault if people are annoyed. you are the religious equivalent of spam.
nobody here is advocating for mindless abuse of mormons anyway. i tried to tell you i understand that but it seems you were looking for disagreement. you have only responded to some points and ignored the others.
it's honeslty weird debating with mormons. i think it's fascinating how in my experience you guys have a uniform and completely different understanding of almost everything people say to you, and very little grasp of logic. Your comparison of "getting up to answer the door" and "defacing cars" was just... whoaahh...
you keep going on about how mormons have to deal with shit. well tough. life's like that. you can't go round telling other people how to behave, they won't listen.
i want to say something about a splinter in a brother's eye, a plank in your own... how does it go again?

Aemaeth:
"gwiz665: Equal opportunity hater. Willing to give extra hate if he thinks you deserve it."
Dislike does not equal hate!
I would like to think that I am more "forgiving" to the more peaceful religions, instead of more "hateful" to more violent religions. That simply doesn't change that they are wrong and misguided. I can tolerate most any religion as long as they don't impose on me: what any person does in his or her home is none of my business as long as it doesn't go further than their homes and/or churches. Furthermore I think you are making an misdirected simplification of my argument.

thepinky:
I really don't hate the mormons, and I do believe they are getting and unfair treatment. They are being singled out as being "more stupid" than for instance Islam or "Vanilla" Christianity and they are not. They are exactly at the same level of stupidity as all other religions; for me that means they are all false. Most people believe that one particular religion is right and all the others are wrong, and I just can't understand their reasoning. The stories are not more "real" or trustworthy than most other religions.

I applaud that you are trying to give Mormonism a fair shake, but if you look around Videosift you'll see that just about every religion is persecuted here, so you shouldn't feel so singled out here.

Yes, I understand that hate is a stronger word than you used. I used it for convenience sake and also for it's slang use, not because I thought you actually *hated* anyone in particular. If I'm over simplifying then I apologize. That's what I've gotten from it so far.

>> ^gwiz665:
Aemaeth:
"gwiz665: Equal opportunity hater. Willing to give extra hate if he thinks you deserve it."
Dislike does not equal hate!
I would like to think that I am more "forgiving" to the more peaceful religions, instead of more "hateful" to more violent religions. That simply doesn't change that they are wrong and misguided. I can tolerate most any religion as long as they don't impose on me: what any person does in his or her home is none of my business as long as it doesn't go further than their homes and/or churches. Furthermore I think you are making an misdirected simplification of my argument.

Wow, thanks for this comment, Gwiz. That's really all that I was trying to say. And you're right, everybody gets a piece of the unfair pie, I shouldn't feel that Mormons are so singled out. It seems like you can understand the other perspective, and that's rare around here. Good on ya, mate.

>> ^gwiz665:
Aemaeth:
"gwiz665: Equal opportunity hater. Willing to give extra hate if he thinks you deserve it."
Dislike does not equal hate!
I would like to think that I am more "forgiving" to the more peaceful religions, instead of more "hateful" to more violent religions. That simply doesn't change that they are wrong and misguided. I can tolerate most any religion as long as they don't impose on me: what any person does in his or her home is none of my business as long as it doesn't go further than their homes and/or churches. Furthermore I think you are making an misdirected simplification of my argument.
thepinky:
I really don't hate the mormons, and I do believe they are getting and unfair treatment. They are being singled out as being "more stupid" than for instance Islam or "Vanilla" Christianity and they are not. They are exactly at the same level of stupidity as all other religions; for me that means they are all false. Most people believe that one particular religion is right and all the others are wrong, and I just can't understand their reasoning. The stories are not more "real" or trustworthy than most other religions.
I applaud that you are trying to give Mormonism a fair shake, but if you look around Videosift you'll see that just about every religion is persecuted here, so you shouldn't feel so singled out here.

I think my issue with this video Pinky, is that you've posted it as if it shows the Mormons as actually being a top notch lot. When in fact it very nicely demonstrates so many issue with the Church of JCLDS and other branches of religion as a whole, which is why I did my big lists. If you believe that this video could swing favour back to the Mormons then I just don't think it works at all, it merely shows us even more points that those who disagree with religion can pick on.

It's never ever going to make people like Mormans more, or any other branch of Christianity more to just list out their beliefs like this because they all just seem so incredibly laughable. You're posting this from the point of view that we think 'mainstream' Christianity is ok, and so look how similar Mormonism is to it! All this has done is said 'Hey, look, we believe in all the same stuff that you ridicule in other religions and pile on another book of things you'll find even harder to believe on top of that'.

And if you're going to get upset about people using terms like 'forcing beliefs', then you'd better stop having evolution be pushed out of classrooms in favour of intelligent design, you'd better stop making it be a necessity for those who run for office have to demonstrate that they're good God fearing people, you'd better stop hardline christians trying to enforce 'rules' from the bible into the laws of nations... The beliefs ARE being forced on people, so don't get shitty if those who don't believe in them are getting a little angry about it these days. The supposed separation of church and state is becoming less and less real.

Ummmm...okay? But what does any of this have to do with me or with the video? All of the things that you demanded that I stop doing in the last paragraph...

I never started doing.

>> ^spoco2:
I think my issue with this video Pinky, is that you've posted it as if it shows the Mormons as actually being a top notch lot. When in fact it very nicely demonstrates so many issue with the Church of JCLDS and other branches of religion as a whole, which is why I did my big lists. If you believe that this video could swing favour back to the Mormons then I just don't think it works at all, it merely shows us even more points that those who disagree with religion can pick on.
It's never ever going to make people like Mormans more, or any other branch of Christianity more to just list out their beliefs like this because they all just seem so incredibly laughable. You're posting this from the point of view that we think 'mainstream' Christianity is ok, and so look how similar Mormonism is to it! All this has done is said 'Hey, look, we believe in all the same stuff that you ridicule in other religions and pile on another book of things you'll find even harder to believe on top of that'.
And if you're going to get upset about people using terms like 'forcing beliefs', then you'd better stop having evolution be pushed out of classrooms in favour of intelligent design, you'd better stop making it be a necessity for those who run for office have to demonstrate that they're good God fearing people, you'd better stop hardline christians trying to enforce 'rules' from the bible into the laws of nations... The beliefs ARE being forced on people, so don't get shitty if those who don't believe in them are getting a little angry about it these days. The supposed separation of church and state is becoming less and less real.

Whoops, been a while since I looked here.

Aemaeth: I accept.

Aw man, watching it again just angries up my blood. Hearing the words "Authority from God" makes me stamp my hooves and froth around the mouth. (Then again, I am a bit hung over, so I'll write it up to substance abuse use.)

>> ^Aemaeth:
MINK, you're missing the point for any Christian with regards to the treatment of any extramarital sexual relationship (I don't think RAPE victims were EVER stoned. That would suck, "sorry you got raped now you gotta die?"). Even Christ himself did away with that practice. See St. John 8:2-11.


Umm, I believe the last confirmed stoning of a woman who was raped occurred in this century. . . . Tough to look that one up though.

I have got to ask...

WTF type of foot ball are they paying at 3:44??? And why did it end in some sort of odd ball dog pile at the end with a single girl in the middle?

Pinky,

I agree that the Mountain Meadows Massacre movie was horribly made film and made of mockery of the horrific event.

As to your question about the translation method depicted in the Southpark episode, its interesting that the church always shows pictures and gives the impression that the translation was literal, with Joseph going through the plates, page by page. Eyewitness accounts, however, back up the Southpark depiction:

“Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.”

(David Whitmer-- one of the three witnesses, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12. as quoted in the July Ensign (Mormon magazine) by Apostle Russell Nelson)"

http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1993.htm/ensign%20july%201993.htm/a%20treasured%20testament.htm

There are other quotes to corroborate this, including from his wife Emma and Oliver Cowdrey, his principle scribe.

*nochannel *religion *humanitarian

This video has been removed from all channels (Religion, Humanitarian, Happy) due to invalid channel assignment - nochannel invoked by Issykitty. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

Adding video to channels (Humanitarian, Religion) - requested by Issykitty.

"There is a temptation... to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith-promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.... In an effort to be objective, impartial, and scholarly, a writer or a teacher may unwittingly be giving equal time to the adversary... . In the Church we are not neutral. We are one-sided. There is a war going on, and we are engaged in it."

- Apostle Boyd Packer