Justification For The Mountain Meadows Massacre?

[Mariner]

Oh yes it was.

I remind you of what you wrote:

Brigham had a whole lot more in common with Nephi than a pair of mass murderers did. That kind of smarmy pseudo-compliment, wherein you pretend to be saying something nice about Brigham but were really sticking the knife into Nephi (and by extension, the Book of Mormon) might fool some people, but it doesn't fool anyone who knows what an anti-Mormon is and does.

Just so you know.

Regards,

Pahoran

Pahoran,

Why this comment? That Nephi killed Laban while Laban was defenseless, as was commanded of him by God, is a matter of scriptural record.

How does simply alluding to this fact constitute "sticking a knife into the Book of Mormon"?

A 2007 article written by Val Larsen and published by the Maxwell Institute states that the killing of Laban was of great importance as "The first symbolically sovereign act that marks Lehi's family as a separate people--."

Why does the mere indirect reference to this story from LDS scripture make one an anti-Mormon?

Are you perhaps going a bit too far here?

[Calm]

No one can really understand the feelings felt by those early Mormons. They had been chased from their homes, losing everything, in New York, Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois. They had lost friends, family, and possessions. There had to be a "circle-the-wagons" mentality.

Could be likely some post traumatic stress disorder going on as well.

[Calm]

Somehow I doubt the reasons that drove Nephi to very reluctantly take the life of Laban, the man who had stolen his family's property and tried to have them killed are even close to the same reasons that Haight and Lee led the massacre of not only men who might by a long shot be imagined to be deserving of death for alleged past crimes, but of women and children.

Similar action does not make similar men.

Edited October 26, 2011 by calmoriah

[Pahoran]

Pahoran,

Why this comment? That Nephi killed Laban while Laban was defenseless, as was commanded of him by God, is a matter of scriptural record.

How does simply alluding to this fact constitute "sticking a knife into the Book of Mormon"?

But C70 wasn't "simply alluding to this fact." I remind you that he said:

[brigham] Young was not, for example, a Nephi. Isaac Haight and John D. Lee [mass murderers], on the other hand, were.

Nephi was led to kill a man who had twice threatened and once tried to kill members of his family. The comparison to Haight and Lee was offensive at best, and deliberately misleading at worst.

A 2007 article written by Val Larsen and published by the Maxwell Institute states that the killing of Laban was of great importance as "The first symbolically sovereign act that marks Lehi's family as a separate people--."

Why does the mere indirect reference to this story from LDS scripture make one an anti-Mormon?

Are you perhaps going a bit too far here?

No.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Thinking]

Do you have any evidence that might support such a notion, or is it, like much of this thread, merely rank speculation?

I'm speculating, although I'm not sure that it's rank. BTW, using the the phrase "I think it's possible" should be a clear indication that I'm speculating.

[Thinking]

Lol wishful thinking "Thinking".

Try again.

I'm not sure what your objection is. Do you disagree that Lee acted before receiving BY's message? Do you disagree that Mountain Meadows is about 50 miles west & south of Cedar City? Do you disagree that Lee may have thought that BY would order aggressive action? Otherwise, why would Lee ask for direction? Do you think that Lee didn't panic? Please tell me what is so wishful about my thinking?

[ERayR]

I'm speculating, although I'm not sure that it's rank. BTW, using the the phrase "I think it's possible" should be a clear indication that I'm speculating.

I think it is possible that it was all done by aliens and blamed on Lee, Haight and company. Possible but not liklely but maybe just as likely as your scenarios.

[Thinking]

I think it is possible that it was all done by aliens and blamed on Lee, Haight and company. Possible but not liklely but maybe just as likely as your scenarios.

Please be specific about what is unlikely.

• Lee acted before receiving BY's message.
  
• Mountain Meadows is about 50 miles west & south of Cedar City.
  
• Lee may have thought that BY would order aggressive action.
  
• Lee panicked.
  

[Cobalt-70]

Somehow I doubt the reasons that drove Nephi to very reluctantly take the life of Laban, the man who had stolen his family's property and tried to have them killed are even close to the same reasons that Haight and Lee led the massacre of not only men who might by a long shot be imagined to be deserving of death for alleged past crimes, but of women and children.

Haight, Lee, and the gang were also reluctant. But they believed that the Fancher party included people who had murdered the "prophets." For years, these Southern Utahns had been taught that God would smite the United States, and they even were entering covenants as part of the Endowment ceremony never to cease to pray that God would take vengeance upon the third and fourth generation of those responsible for spilling the blood of the prophets. They thought the U.S. Army was entering Utah to instigate Armageddon. It was to be the final battle between good and evil. The Fanchers were on the side of the evil. From their perspective, their situation was more dire than that of Nephi. Nephi only stood to lose a brass book that wasn't even his to begin with. He could have left the gates of Jerusalem and got of scott free. The Southern Utah Mormons, on the other hand, stood to lose the battle of Armageddon.

[KevinG]

Haight, Lee, and the gang were also reluctant. But they believed that the Fancher party included people who had murdered the "prophets." For years, these Southern Utahns had been taught that God would smite the United States, and they even were entering covenants as part of the Endowment ceremony never to cease to pray that God would take vengeance upon the third and fourth generation of those responsible for spilling the blood of the prophets. They thought the U.S. Army was entering Utah to instigate Armageddon. It was to be the final battle between good and evil. The Fanchers were on the side of the evil. From their perspective, their situation was more dire than that of Nephi. Nephi only stood to lose a brass book that wasn't even his to begin with. He could have left the gates of Jerusalem and got of scott free. The Southern Utah Mormons, on the other hand, stood to lose the battle of Armageddon.

Saints all over the intermountain West were under the same pressures and experiences. There was no widespread violence or conspiracy against travellers from the East. That takes some oomph out of that theory.

[why me]

No one can really understand the feelings felt by those early Mormons. They had been chased from their homes, losing everything, in New York, Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois. They had lost friends, family, and possessions. There had to be a "circle-the-wagons" mentality.

I said as such on the previous page:

There can be no justification for MMM. However, we also need to look at the context. Between the antimormonism in california and the threats coming from antimormon mobs in that state plus, the problems with the federal government, I do believe that certain mormons were shell shocked. What the mormons wanted was to live in peace and practice their religion. But it seems that it was impossible for them to do because of outside interference.

Being shell shocked and psychologically damaged was probably the condidtion of many mormons who experienced Missiouri and Nauvoo. and in MMM a certain amount of them acted out their fear and murdered innocent people.

But if it weren't for the federal government and antimormons threatening the lds at that time, the party would have been allowed to move forward to where they wanted to go.

[why me]

Why would Mormons kill innocent emigrants?

Since the founding of their church in 1830, Mormons had been heavily persecuted and attacked. They had been chased from New York to Ohio to Missouri to Illinois and then finally to Utah. In Missouri, at Haun's Mill, 18 Mormons had been massacred and 13 injured. The governor of Missouri had even issued an extermination order against the Mormons, forcing them to leave Missouri or be killed.

The church's founder, the prophet Joseph Smith, had been tarred and weathered, falsely accused and imprisoned several times, and ultimately killed alongside his brother.

In 1857 the federal government sent 1,500 United States troops to Utah to deal with what it thought was a rogue sect. Tensions were high in Utah in 1857.

Because of all the past persecution and fear of being attacked or imprisoned by federal troops, it's likely that local Mormons who participated in the Mountain Meadows Massacre acted out of a deep fear and paranoia.

Did persecution against the Mormons justify the Mountain Meadows Massacre?

While the Mormons were heavily persecuted, driven from their homes, and killed en masse several times, their persecution did not justify the killings at Mountain Meadows.

http://mountainmeadowsmassacre.com/

Edited October 26, 2011 by why me

[why me]

I think that we all need to understand the context of this event. But of course, there is no excuse for what happened. But it is not as simple as some critics contend it was. Antimormons were just as responsible for this event as the mormons involved, including the army.

[Thinking]

Antimormons were just as responsible for this event as the mormons involved, including the army.

Did you just write that out loud?

[why me]

Did you just write that out loud?

To my understanding the antimormons in california were threatening the mormons with more persecutions. Plus the federal army was threatening the mormons also. To put oneself among the saints again, we would probably see mormons who were experiencing a deja vu experience. If all would have just let the mormons be mormons and allow the mormons to worship freely, I do believe much pain and suffering would have been avoided in general, including MMM.

[Thinking]

If all would have just let the mormons be mormons and allow the mormons to worship freely, I do believe much pain and suffering would have been avoided in general, including MMM.

You just can't stop.

[Cobalt-70]

Saints all over the intermountain West were under the same pressures and experiences. There was no widespread violence or conspiracy against travellers from the East. That takes some oomph out of that theory.

This was different, though, because the Fanchers were the last wagon train going through the south passage before the impending war, and it was understood (incorrectly, it turns out) that the group contained some of the people from Missouri who were responsible for killing Joseph and Hyrum, and for the Haun's Mill massacre. Also, the main group was from Arkansas, where Parley P. Pratt had just been murdered. Plus, there were the rumors the Fanchers had poisoned a spring and killed innocent children. Further, the southern Utahns were isolated from the protection of Salt Lake and felt particularly isolated. They did not want the Fanchers seeking military assistance from California.

[Cobalt-70]

I think that we all need to understand the context of this event. But of course, there is no excuse for what happened. But it is not as simple as some critics contend it was. Antimormons were just as responsible for this event as the mormons involved, including the army.

Well, the Fanchers were not anti-Mormon. They were an innocent wagon train that just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, when Southern Utah Mormons had been whipped up by their leaders, including Brigham Young and George A. Smtih, into a violent frenzy over what they thought was an approaching Armageddon war with the "Gentiles."

[thesometimesaint]

cobalt-70:

Interesting that it was BY that told those Saints to leave to Francher party alone.

[Calm]

Antimormons were just as responsible for this event as the mormons involved, including the army.

When you say "the Mormons involved" do you mean just the killers or a larger group? If a larger group, would you specify who you mean, please.

If you mean just the killers, I strongly disagree. Even with all the factors playing on their fears, they still had a choice to step back and not kill and instead place themselves in God's hands or even choose to take their families north where there would be larger numbers for safety. Nothing the antis did forced their hand into killing, even if others' actions did encourage the paranoia.

[Scott Lloyd]

You just can't stop.

Why the pious indignation?

I think the truth of Why Me's comment is obvious. Absent the 40-year prelude of oppression against the Mormon people, absent the lying rumors spread by incompetent and disgruntled federal appointees, absent a U.S. president's foolish order to send one-third of the U.S. Army to accomplish an administrative task, absent a general climate of bigotry and ignorance in the nation at the time toward Mormons and Mormonism, there would have been no Mountain Meadows Massacre.

And don't start with me about justifying the actions of the perpetrators. I have said many times that their actions were wrong regardless of the provocation. I think it a shame that Lee was the only one brought to justice, a fact attributable to the incompetence of federal prosecutors more intent on heaping infamy on Brigham Young and Mormonism than in seeing that justice was carried out.

Edited October 26, 2011 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, the Fanchers were not anti-Mormon. They were an innocent wagon train that just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, when Southern Utah Mormons had been whipped up by their leaders, including Brigham Young and George A. Smtih, into a violent frenzy over what they thought was an approaching Armageddon war with the "Gentiles."

While they were definitely undeserving of their fate, the wagon train members were not entirely innocent. There was that incident in Cedar City, related in the book by Turley et al, in which members of the party (don't know if they were Fanchers or hangers-on) were rowdy and disorderly, insulted some of the women of the town, evidently boasted about atrocities committed against Mormons in Missouri, evidently threatened to raise an army in California and return to hem in the settlers, and defied the authority of local law enforcement. This, perhaps, contributed to the flashpoint in which all the volatile elements were ignited.

Again, I hasten to say I am not justifying the actions of the perpetrators.

Edited October 26, 2011 by Scott Lloyd

[ERayR]

Please be specific about what is unlikely.

• Lee acted before receiving BY's message.
  
• Mountain Meadows is about 50 miles west & south of Cedar City.
  
• Lee may have thought that BY would order aggressive action.
  
• Lee panicked.
  

• Lee may have thought that BY would order aggressive action.
  
• 
  
• There I changed the emphasis to illustrate what I meant. You are all so full of convictions for BY on MAYBE's and MIGHT HAVE'S so I threw out a might have that had about as much evidence as yours and as ridiculous as it sounded was just as plausible.
  

[Scott Lloyd]

Like I said, I never accused him of authorizing the attacks. As Young was the authoritarian moral leader of the men who carried out the crime, its hardly unreasonable to ask the question I asked. I don't expect a clear answer either way.

Yet another instance of the fallacy of guilt by association.

[ERayR]

Yet another instance of the fallacy of guilt by association.

You know it really could have been the reptillian aliens.