Internet Anti-Mormonism

[Senator]

Use your dictionary. There is a difference between creed and church. There really is.

" I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all ^awrong;"

The "them" and "they" are in reference to Joseph's prior inquiry:

"No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join."

[KevinG]

For the contextually challenged...

JS History:

5: ...great multitudes united themselves to the different religious parties, which created no small stir and division amongst the people, some crying, ^a“Lo, here!” and others, “Lo, there!” Some were contending for the Methodist faith, some for the Presbyterian, and some for the Baptist.

6 For, notwithstanding the great ^alove which the converts to these different faiths expressed at the time of their conversion, and the great zeal manifested by the respective clergy, who were active in getting up and promoting this extraordinary scene of religious feeling, in order to have everybody converted, as they were pleased to call it, let them join what sect they pleased; yet when the converts began to file off, some to one party and some to another, it was seen that the seemingly good feelings of both the priests and the converts were more ^bpretended than real; for a scene of great confusion and bad feeling ensued—priest contending against priest, and convert against convert; so that all their good feelings one for another, if they ever had any, were entirely lost in a strife of words and a contest about opinions.

8: ...I felt some desire to be united with them; but so great were the confusion and ^astrife among the different denominations, that it was impossible for a person young as I was, and so unacquainted with men and things, to come to any certain conclusion who was ^bright and who was wrong.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all ^awrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those ^bprofessors were all ^ccorrupt; that: “they ^ddraw near to me with their lips, but their ^ehearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the ^fcommandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the ^gpower thereof.”

Wrong includes a footnote to the Topical Guide: Apostacy of the Early Church. Meaning that they were all (as a group) wrong. Wrong about what say the Mormons? Well the fullness of the Gospel for one, but in light of the preceeding paragraphs the confusion and strife are probably key. We never taught and don't teach that churches are "all wrong" as in completely wrong. We recognize the truth that they have and ask them if we can bring our latter-day revelation to the table.

Then we get to the word corrupt. Which was used for the professors who were drawing near to God with their lips but far from God with their hearts, etc. Hardly a condemnation of all other religion.

Get it right people!

[Grundelwalken]

I wonder if Joseph Smith considered this when he taught all churches were corrupt.

By the way, all religions can boast of positive FRUITS. This does not mean they

are of God.

Sorry, I don't believe Joseph had any quarrel with those who sincerely believed they were following Christ. Take the Catholic Father that he helped when the Saints were first moving to the Nauvoo area. To say that he taught all churches were corrupt was to 'corrupt' the teachings he gave. The teachings of many were corrupt and the character of many of the advocated were corrupt but the true teachings that were left in the churches were still true and were gladly accepted. Joseph (and the Church) have never preached against other churches. The teachings have always been to invite others to learn more of Christ through the Church.

And we recognize the 'fruits' of every other religion and gladly accept them for the good they bring.

We are not bashers or anti anyone. MW

Edited December 2, 2011 by Grundelwalken

[Sky]

I know the fact that the Church teaches that it is the only true Church of Jesus Christ really bothers some people. The audacity and the arrogance, they say. But in spite of this, we are actually very charitable towards other faiths (or at least we try). We don't attack people for their beliefs, and we even have some things in common.

[KevinG]

Shame on you Grundelwalken!

You won't leave real anti-mormons any justification for railing against us. After all its not so bad to firebomb, condemn to hell, poison, mob and defame if we insulted them first.

And yes that was:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggXmKPMaHMo

[Senator]

For the contextually challenged...

Wrong includes a footnote to the Topical Guide: Apostacy of the Early Church. Meaning that they were all (as a group) wrong.

Exactly! Wrong is wrong. In other words they were all (as a group or as individual sects) wrong in one degree or another. In other words, none of them were right, or at least right enough to be recognized by God and thus warranting his stamp of approval. If any one of them had been right, having God's true authority, he would have directed Joseph to join with them.......but such a sect didn't exits.

.... but in light of the preceeding paragraphs the confusion and strife are probably key.

Well its a symptom at least.

We never taught and don't teach that churches are "all wrong" as in completely wrong.

I didn't say you did.

I'm simply saying it is reasonable for someone to interpret Josephs words as saying, well "they were all wrong", as in collectively not comprehensively.

Then we get to the word corrupt.

I was not resonding to the word corrupt. That was someone else.

Get it right people!

Please do.

[california boy]

Indeed. It's also worthy to note that CB's faithful hobby-horse is seldom found as justification among the hateful epithets and sneers under discussion.

Every time prop 8 comes up, the church is mentioned in the comments under the article in any paper across this country and not in a good way Prop 8 is brought up even when the article has noting to do with gay marriage. Is all you have to do is mention Mormon in the article and people bring up prop 8 in the comments. It is not like this is a hard point to prove. If you asked me to provide you with 100 comments labeling the church as bigoted towards gays I could. If you asked for 1000 i could.

Why even ask the question "Why the church is so maligned in the press" if you don't want the answers to the question. You and others on this thread are too busy trying to defend the church rather than just look at the answers people are giving you. The question was not about whether those comments are justified. They are not about what YOU think of the church. The answers are about why do some people have to be down-right mean and nasty on the internet when it comes to the LDS faith? You are too busy smearing my answer. picking apart all of the responses and justifying your position to even hear the answer.

You don't think that the church members are labeled bigots because of prop 8 fine. What do I care.

You don't think Joseph Smith's teaching that Heavenly Father was once a man who became a God makes people attack the church? Fine

You don't believe that some people think that Joseph Smith call all the other churches corrupt? Fine

Or you don't believe what anyone responds. Fine who cares. The people that are writing against the church in the newspapers and blogs think that. And they must have a reason for thinking that.

You don't think some people are down-right mean and nasty on the internet when it comes to the LDS faith because they have their own reasons? fine. But don't attach those that are answering the op question.

[altersteve]

If some people are considered ant-Mormon because they don't agree with Mr.

Smith's teaching that Heavenly Father was once a man who became a God,

then are Mormons considered anti-Christian because they don't agree with

the teaching that Heavenly Father was always God?

How can Mormons be "anti-Christian" if we are Christians? And we do agree with the teaching that Heavenly Father was always God. Yes, I know, you'll go and quote the King Follett discourse or whatever else. Go right ahead.

[selek1]

Every time prop 8 comes up, the church is mentioned in the comments under the article in any paper across this country and not in a good way.

And yet the reverse is not true. Mentioning the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not automagically trigger a Pavlovian mention of Prop 8- except in a specially-conditioned minority.

Prop 8 is brought up even when the article has noting to do with gay marriage. Is all you have to do is mention Mormon in the article and people bring up prop 8 in the comments. It is not like this is a hard point to prove.

Especially if one resorts to a specially-conditioned, self-selecting sample.

And yet normal people can discuss the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints without reflexively screaming "Prop 8". They do so every day, even on this board.

And on the Recovery From Morminism board.

And on The Shady Rest.

And on the CARM boards.

And on the Catholic boards.

And etc., etc. etc.

Some of our most virulent critics can be found on those boards- and they couldn't care less about your personal greivance.

If you asked me to provide you with 100 comments labeling the church as bigoted towards gays I could. If you asked for 1000 i could.

I'm quite certain you could- and I'm equally certain that you've authored at least a third that many, personally.

That's the joy of a self-selecting sample. You generate your own evidence.

It remains beyond dispute, however, that we are loathed and despised for reasons beyond your personal political agenda.

Why even ask the question "Why the church is so maligned in the press" if you don't want the answers to the question.

Because despite your obssesive and narcissitic assumptions, your agenda is not the end-all and be-all of anti-Mormon motivations.

You are the one who introduced that particular hobby horse. Had you not mentioned it, it's not likely to have come up within the first three pages. We were doing just fine without it.

Homosexualty and Prop 8 are your obsession, not ours. In fact, I suspect that we'd be hard pressed to find a dozen posts during your entire tenure here that were NOT related to the homosexual lobby.

You are too busy smearing my answer. picking apart all of the responses and justifying your position to even hear the answer.

And yet it is you who turned this discussion to your agenda, not I.

You protested that you didn't want a Prop 8 thread by starting (or at least derailing) one.

You don't think that the church members are labeled bigots because of prop 8 fine. What do I care.

Apparently, you care enough to hoist your tattered petard over the issue once again.

Apparently you care enough to willfully distort my words and bear false witness (yet again).

Apparently you care enough to unmercifully flog that poor dead horse just one more time.

And apparently, you care enough to try and contradict the patently obvious.

The people that are writing against the church in the newspapers and blogs think that. And they must have a reason for thinking that.

This argument- attempting to justify hateful and untrue attacks on the Church by appealing to the ignorance and bigotry of the mob- could just as easily be used to justify all the hateful (and untrue) things said about homosexuals.

After all, they must have a reason for thinking those things, right?

That kind of demagogic "logic" is playing with fire- you will get burned eventually. The same flames of mob-justice you try and use to destroy us will just as quickly turn and consume you.

You don't think some people are down-right mean and nasty on the internet when it comes to the LDS faith because they have their own reasons? fine. But don't attach those that are answering the op question.

Your statement does not in any way reflect my earlier comments or opinions.

You tried to turn this thread into yet another soap box for your personal grievance.

In turn, I and others pointed out that your personal vendetta against the Church is simply far, far below most people's radar.

We understand why that's a burr under your saddle.

But it's not OUR problem....

Edited December 2, 2011 by selek1

[Storm Rider]

If some people are considered ant-Mormon because they don't agree with Mr.

Smith's teaching that Heavenly Father was once a man who became a God,

then are Mormons considered anti-Christian because they don't agree with

the teaching that Heavenly Father was always God?

This is such a preposterously stupid line that is brought out time and again. Be clear on this, an anti-Mormon is not a critic of the Church or Mormonism. An anti-Mormon goes beyond honest criticism; it will do anything to demean the LDS Church. It will distort facts, it will create falsehoods in order to debase, ignore all evidence that is contrary to their position; it has a single commitment and that is to destroy Mormonism. You have been told this before and you continue to ignore it. Now tell me, what do we have to do to stop acting a victim and/or calling foul, when what is at stake is just telling the truth?

If you are an anti-Mormon, then admit it, be proud of it, but do not act like a wolf in sheep's clothing. When you are proved wrong, admit it and move on. There is plenty of accusations that cannot be proved wrong; stick with those, but never, ever bring up the same old slap-stick stupidity that anti-Mormons hold most strongly. If you do so, it is a dead give-away and you are wearing a sign about your true self, purpose and objective.

[Storm Rider]

Every time prop 8 comes up, the church is mentioned in the comments under the article in any paper across this country and not in a good way Prop 8 is brought up even when the article has noting to do with gay marriage. Is all you have to do is mention Mormon in the article and people bring up prop 8 in the comments. It is not like this is a hard point to prove. If you asked me to provide you with 100 comments labeling the church as bigoted towards gays I could. If you asked for 1000 i could.

Why even ask the question "Why the church is so maligned in the press" if you don't want the answers to the question. You and others on this thread are too busy trying to defend the church rather than just look at the answers people are giving you. The question was not about whether those comments are justified. They are not about what YOU think of the church. The answers are about why do some people have to be down-right mean and nasty on the internet when it comes to the LDS faith? You are too busy smearing my answer. picking apart all of the responses and justifying your position to even hear the answer.

You don't think that the church members are labeled bigots because of prop 8 fine. What do I care.

You don't think Joseph Smith's teaching that Heavenly Father was once a man who became a God makes people attack the church? Fine

You don't believe that some people think that Joseph Smith call all the other churches corrupt? Fine

Or you don't believe what anyone responds. Fine who cares. The people that are writing against the church in the newspapers and blogs think that. And they must have a reason for thinking that.

You don't think some people are down-right mean and nasty on the internet when it comes to the LDS faith because they have their own reasons? fine. But don't attach those that are answering the op question.

Yawn, this is a one note song and it bores me. It is similar to a diamond that has only one facet and makes about as much sense. No problem is so simple.

[thesometimesaint]

Sky:

Don't mud wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Minos
You are one post away from permanent ban

[lachrymolotov]

The Mormons are largely ignored until their organization finds itself involved in politics, at which point their more far-fetched beliefs become an easy target. The culture of the people in the church is far different compared to most people in America and most people in the world. It is only natural that the Mormon culture draws criticism and negative attention.

Just be glad you aren't a Muslim and some of your innocent people aren't being held without due process and tortured while even the Mormons stand by and do nothing. Some Mormons even support it.

All in all, the Mormons are not treated any worse than any other group. What is a shame is that many of them choose not to take the higher ground and practice what they preach. It is clear that many are willing to roll around in the proverbial mud.

[CV75]

Joseph taught all churches were corrupt? Really. I learn something new every day.

I agree. The charge of corruption seems to be levied against those clergy who were contending (3 Nephi 11:29), “the commandments of men” being the hypocrisy in using “management” and “genius” (and not the testimony of Jesus) in winning and keeping converts through confusion, contention, bad feeling, strife, contest, etc. (Alma 30:17).

The charge of being wrong was levied at the churches, and the charge of abomination at the creeds.

[thesometimesaint]

"The God Makers" was produced, Rhonda M. Abrams, Central Pacific (San Francisco) Regional Director for the ADL wrote a critical review, including the following statement:

Had a similar movie been made with either Judaism or Catholicism as its target, it would be immediately denounced for the scurrilous piece that it is. I sincerely hope that people of all faiths will similarly repudiate "The Godmakers" as defamatory and untrue, and recognize it for what it truly represents—a challenge to the religious liberty of all.

[HeatherAnn]

Why do some people have to be down-right mean and nasty on the internet when it comes to the LDS faith?

Sky,

I've experienced some of the most "mean & nastiness" from Mormons online. It's not just those "evil ones over there."

Still, to answer your question, I think that many people mix up the 3 aspects of Mormonism (& pull the most disturbing aspects from each) & combine them to one...

1. Church leadership... who makes the big decisions for the church

2. Doctrine... even that doctrine which is no longer applicable....some can't get over Joseph Smith having 30+ wives, blacks being denied priesthood, etc.

3. Members (who IMO, are mostly good-intending people striving to do better... yet...) are considered brainwashed cult-members... who maybe sometimes have this "us verses them" approach... & make outsiders feel like "outsiders."

Edited December 2, 2011 by HeatherAnn

[Kenngo1969]

If some people are considered ant-Mormon because they don't agree with Mr.

Smith's teaching that Heavenly Father was once a man who became a God,

then are Mormons considered anti-Christian because they don't agree with

the teaching that Heavenly Father was always God?

I think it'll be way kewel once we get all them ants baptized Mormon! That way, we'll have more members than even the Roman Catholic Church!

[california boy]

And yet the reverse is not true. Mentioning the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not automagically trigger a Pavlovian mention of Prop 8- except in a specially-conditioned minority. Especially if one resorts to a specially-conditioned, self-selecting sample. And yet normal people can discuss the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints without reflexively screaming "Prop 8". They do so every day, even on this board. And on the Recovery From Morminism board. And on The Shady Rest. And on the CARM boards. And on the Catholic boards. And etc., etc. etc. Some of our most virulent critics can be found on those boards- and they couldn't care less about your personal greivance. I'm quite certain you could- and I'm equally certain that you've authored at least a third that many, personally. That's the joy of a self-selecting sample. You generate your own evidence. It remains beyond dispute, however, that we are loathed and despised for reasons beyond your personal political agenda. Because despite your obssesive and narcissitic assumptions, your agenda is not the end-all and be-all of anti-Mormon motivations. You are the one who introduced that particular hobby horse. Had you not mentioned it, it's not likely to have come up within the first three pages. We were doing just fine without it. Homosexualty and Prop 8 are your obsession, not ours. In fact, I suspect that we'd be hard pressed to find a dozen posts during your entire tenure here that were NOT related to the homosexual lobby. And yet it is you who turned this discussion to your agenda, not I. You protested that you didn't want a Prop 8 thread by starting (or at least derailing) one. Apparently, you care enough to hoist your tattered petard over the issue once again. Apparently you care enough to willfully distort my words and bear false witness (yet again). Apparently you care enough to unmercifully flog that poor dead horse just one more time. And apparently, you care enough to try and contradict the patently obvious. This argument- attempting to justify hateful and untrue attacks on the Church by appealing to the ignorance and bigotry of the mob- could just as easily be used to justify all the hateful (and untrue) things said about homosexuals. After all, they must have a reason for thinking those things, right? That kind of demagogic "logic" is playing with fire- you will get burned eventually. The same flames of mob-justice you try and use to destroy us will just as quickly turn and consume you. Your statement does not in any way reflect my earlier comments or opinions. You tried to turn this thread into yet another soap box for your personal grievance. In turn, I and others pointed out that your personal vendetta against the Church is simply far, far below most people's radar. We understand why that's a burr under your saddle. But it's not OUR problem....

Whatever.

I would like to point out that the small majority that you talk about is now over half the population that think gay marraige should be allowed.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Anonymity on the internet allows those predisposed to do so to remove their veneer of civil discourse and tolerance without any fear of being identified or held accountable. It kind reminds me of the old fantasy 'if you were invisible, what would you do?'. The internet allows invisibility, so if you want to allow your most base and coarse thoughts, feelings, and so forth to be expressed without any fear of those around you knowing you feel that way, then you can. I also think that if you are the type to feed emotionally off the reactions your comments foster then it can be kind of addictive as well. You get emotional energy from enjoying the reaction of those you target, as well as from those who are cheeering you on. It's win-win for the type of personality that enjoys that type of thing.

I agree.

[Jaybear]

Why do some people have to be down-right mean and nasty on the internet when it comes to the LDS faith? Why is our faith the target of so much satire? Why is this generally accepted?

....

Thoughts?

Perception. You are hypersensitive to criticism directed towards mormons, because you are Mormon.

If you look deeper, you will find same sort of criticism directed towards the Catholic Church, Scientology, Evangelical Christians, JWs.

Beyond religion, people criticize, insult and mock Yankee fans, Trekies, birthers, tea partiers, OWS protestors.

It all perception. Do a google news search right now for "church fire" you will see what a typical news week looks like, but of which you were unaware. But if an LDS Church in scranton, PA burned down two weeks ago, you would know, and likely suspect it was the result of anti-mormon persecution.

[thesometimesaint]

Jaybear:

I'll agree and disagree here.

Yes it is perception. We ali pay more attention when we have skin the game. However it is not entirely perception. If these incidences didn't occur there'd be nothing to perceive. IE. Millions oc school children will successfully go to school today. It is the rare few that doesn't, and it is that rare few that make the news. That makes parents pay attention.

[selek1]

I owe Altersteve an apology- after chiding him not to feed the trolls, I find myself succumbing to that very temptation.

Whatever.

This is- quite possibly- the most cogent and profound rebuttal you've ever offered.

I stand amazed at your wit, brevity, and clarity.

Bravo Zulu, sir!

I would like to point out that the small majority that you talk about is now over half the population that think gay marraige should be allowed.

Actually, I spoke of a minority, rather than a majority.

But your statement once again illustrates the boundless joys of a self-selecting sample.

Unfortunately, that is the utter limit of its utility.

Or as Twain is alleged to have said, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

[selek1]

The Mormons are largely ignored until their organization finds itself involved in politics, at which point their more far-fetched beliefs become an easy target.

An assertion contradicted by history, fact, reason, logic, and all the other trappings of that inconvenient thing called "reality".

But a nice try, nonetheless. You've already been dinged once for politics, shall we make it two?

The culture of the people in the church is far different compared to most people in America and most people in the world.

Call For References, please.

When one takes the trouble to actually compare them, Mormon culture is little different than anywhere else in small town America- though certain aspects of our religious practice and beliefs are slightly different

It is only natural that the Mormon culture draws criticism and negative attention.

Agreed. It is the scale of that criticism and negative attention which is unusual/unprecedented.

All in all, the Mormons are not treated any worse than any other group.

We thank you for your opinion. Can you clothe those bare bones with fact?

In reality, how any group of people is treated varies significantly by region, location, and political/religious environment.

The topic at hand is the treatment of Mormons on the internet- which (as has been admitted by virtually all comers to the topic) is decidedly biased and negative.

What is a shame is that many of them choose not to take the higher ground and practice what they preach. It is clear that many are willing to roll around in the proverbial mud.

Is that an invitation or a proposition?

I can never tell with these things....

Edited December 2, 2011 by selek1

[Damien the Leper]

Just for the clarification and to stop misrepresentation from further happening concerning the context of JS-History...here are the definitions provided for corrupt and wrong.

CORRUPT:

1. guilty of dishonest practices, as bribery; lacking integrity; crooked: a corrupt judge.

2. debased in character; depraved; perverted; wicked; evil: a corrupt society.

3. made inferior by errors or alterations, as a text.

4. infected; tainted.

5. decayed; putrid.

WRONG:

1. not in accordance with what is morally right or good: a wrong deed.

2. deviating from truth or fact; erroneous: a wrong answer.

3. not correct in action, judgment, opinion, method, etc., as a person; in error: You are wrong to blame him.

4. not proper or usual; not in accordance with requirements or recommended practice: the wrong way to hold a golf club.

5. out of order; awry; amiss: Something is wrong with the machine.

[california boy]

I owe Altersteve an apology- after chiding him not to feed the trolls, I find myself succumbing to that very temptation.

This is- quite possibly- the most cogent and profound rebuttal you've ever offered.

I stand amazed at your wit, brevity, and clarity.

Bravo Zulu, sir!

Actually, I spoke of a minority, rather than a majority.

But your statement once again illustrates the boundless joys of a self-selecting sample.

Unfortunately, that is the utter limit of its utility.

Or as Twain is alleged to have said, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

You do enjoy attacking the messenger don't you. What do I care if you don't believe all the major surveys done in the past 6 months. There was actually another one released just two days ago indicating a majority supporting gay marriage. But hey if you don't want to believe something, the best thing to do is attack the messenger. It doesn't bother me. I learnd long ago on my mission to not take things personally by people who are afraid of the truth.