Under the Banner of Heaven Trailer

[Rivers]

Looks interesting.  Haven’t read the book.  I’m not super familiar with the Lafferty murders either.  But this has me intrigued.

 

Edited April 26, 2022 by Rivers

[LoudmouthMormon]

Gaaah.  Scenes from inside the temple, folks going through the ordinances, wearing the clothing.

Dang it.  Why take a perfectly good anti-mormon show, and turn it into something the mormons won't watch?

 

[The Nehor]

I think I will watch Halo instead.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

2 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Gaaah.  Scenes from inside the temple, folks going through the ordinances, wearing the clothing.

Dang it.  Why take a perfectly good anti-mormon show, and turn it into something the mormons won't watch?

 

I wish it did not have Temple content, I don’t think it adds too, or needs to be included in this movie. My guess, is no member in good standing would write this into the movie. Which leaves only someone who no longer holds these things to be sacred. So whomever wrote this into the script or screenplay has an axe to grind, or a need to openly rebel, or trample upon what they once considered sacred. Again, in short, a need to trample the pearls that were once laid down before them, in the past. I am sure this comment will upset some, but I hope, not too many. Even if I left the Church, and no longer believed, I would never seek to harm, or belittle what others hold sacred, as in NEVER! 

[Tacenda]

Deleted

Edited April 27, 2022 by Tacenda

[Vanguard]

4 hours ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

I wish it did not have Temple content, I don’t think it adds too, or needs to be included in this movie. My guess, is no member in good standing would write this into the movie. Which leaves only someone who no longer holds these things to be sacred. So whomever wrote this into the script or screenplay has an axe to grind, or a need to openly rebel, or trample upon what they once considered sacred. Again, in short, a need to trample the pearls that were once laid down before them, in the past. I am sure this comment will upset some, but I hope, not too many. Even if I left the Church, and no longer believed, I would never seek to harm, or belittle what others hold sacred, as in NEVER! 

You have struck a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with. It amazes me also that others no longer care. : )

[ttribe]

4 hours ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

I wish it did not have Temple content, I don’t think it adds too, or needs to be included in this movie. My guess, is no member in good standing would write this into the movie. Which leaves only someone who no longer holds these things to be sacred. So whomever wrote this into the script or screenplay has an axe to grind, or a need to openly rebel, or trample upon what they once considered sacred. Again, in short, a need to trample the pearls that were once laid down before them, in the past. I am sure this comment will upset some, but I hope, not too many. Even if I left the Church, and no longer believed, I would never seek to harm, or belittle what others hold sacred, as in NEVER! 

 

5 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

You have struck a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with. It amazes me also that others no longer care. : )

Lafferty mimicked the penalties from the pre-1991 Endowment in the murders. I'm not sure how you tell that part of the story without showing at least that portion of the Endowment.

[Hamba Tuhan]

4 hours ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

I don’t think it adds too, or needs to be included in this movie.

It does if Mr Black's objective is to once again camouflage his unslakeable antipathy towards faithful Church members behind his mediocre attempts at storytelling. It's the cinematic equivalent of suspending a crucifix in a jar of urine and then insisting one had no idea that Catholics and other Christians might find such 'art' offensive.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[Rivers]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

 

Lafferty mimicked the penalties from the pre-1991 Endowment in the murders. I'm not sure how you tell that part of the story without showing at least that portion of the Endowment.

The penalties go all the way back to the Old Testament times as part of covenant-making ceremonies.  We’ve all done something similar when we used the phrase, “cross my heart, hope to die, stick a needle in my eye.”  The Lafferty brothers took things too literally.

[ttribe]

52 minutes ago, Rivers said:

The penalties go all the way back to the Old Testament times as part of covenant-making ceremonies.  We’ve all done something similar when we used the phrase, “cross my heart, hope to die, stick a needle in my eye.”  The Lafferty brothers took things too literally.

Wait, are you claiming the the penalties specifically in the pre-1991 LDS Endowment, namely the slitting of ones throat from ear to ear and the disemboweling, go back to the Old Testament? Do you have evidence for that claim?

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, ttribe said:

I'm not sure how you tell that part of the story without showing at least that portion of the Endowment.

I think you just did ...

[ttribe]

39 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I think you just did ...

Aside from the obvious fact that most of the readers of this board already know what they were, but don't let that stop you.

Edited April 27, 2022 by ttribe

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, ttribe said:

Aside from the obvious fact that most if the readers of this board already know what they were, but don't let that stop you.

It's called 'storytelling' for a reason, but don't let that stop you.

The research ethics guidelines at the university where I obtained my PhD forbid the portrayal of spiritual domains or the description or re-enactment of sacred rituals without the assent of the community.

Neither Mr Black nor his defenders are concerned with being ethical.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[ttribe]

Just now, Hamba Tuhan said:

It's called 'storytelling' for a reason, but don't let that stop you.

The research ethics guidelines at the university where I obtained my PhD forbid the portrayal of spiritual domains or the description or re-enactment of sacred rituals without the assent of the community.

Neither Mr Black nor his defenders is concerned with being ethical.

You're really trying to hold an entertainment enterprise to the same ethical standards as academic researchers?

[sunstoned]

7 hours ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

I wish it did not have Temple content, I don’t think it adds too, or needs to be included in this movie. My guess, is no member in good standing would write this into the movie. Which leaves only someone who no longer holds these things to be sacred. So whomever wrote this into the script or screenplay has an axe to grind, or a need to openly rebel, or trample upon what they once considered sacred. Again, in short, a need to trample the pearls that were once laid down before them, in the past. I am sure this comment will upset some, but I hope, not too many. Even if I left the Church, and no longer believed, I would never seek to harm, or belittle what others hold sacred, as in NEVER! 

The justification as I understand it is that Brenda Lafferty was killed in the manner similar to the temple pre-1990 blood oaths. Dustin Lance Black, the producer (raised Mormon) wanted to show a connection with ritualistic violence.  Don't hate me.  I'm just reporting what I heard from a PR blip a few weeks ago.

Edited April 27, 2022 by sunstoned

[sunstoned]

1 hour ago, Rivers said:

The penalties go all the way back to the Old Testament times as part of covenant-making ceremonies.  We’ve all done something similar when we used the phrase, “cross my heart, hope to die, stick a needle in my eye.”  The Lafferty brothers took things too literally.

I would be interested in references on this. CFR on the temple penalties going back to the Old Testament.

[webbles]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

Wait, are you claiming the the penalties specifically in the pre-1991 LDS Endowment, namely the slitting of ones throat from ear to ear and the disemboweling, go back to the Old Testament? Do you have evidence for that claim?

I'm having a hard time finding if disembowling happened in her murder.  Everything seems to only reference the throat slitting.  Do you happen to know a reference for her disemboweling or am I just at a loss because I wasn't in Utah when it happened and so didn't read any of the newspapers?

[ttribe]

3 minutes ago, webbles said:

I'm having a hard time finding if disembowling happened in her murder.  Everything seems to only reference the throat slitting.  Do you happen to know a reference for her disemboweling or am I just at a loss because I wasn't in Utah when it happened and so didn't read any of the newspapers?

I think you are correct about the murders. The post you quoted me on was about the penalties more generally. 

[Calm]

Strangled, beaten, and then throat cut.  No disemboweling.  Erica’s throat cut so deeply only spine was intact.

I was going to quote, but pretty graphic.

https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2380&context=byu_sc1

Quote

 On the 23rd, they held a Bible study session (R. 1720, 2286). Defendant and Dan read from the Bible and another book and talked of slashing the throats of Brenda and Erica (R. 2289).
The next morning, Carnes helped Dan saw off the barrel of a 12-gauge shotgun (R. 1722, 2290). Defendant said this would be "good for shooting cops" (R. 1725, 2293). Defendant asked defendant, if their throats have to be cut couldnft we just shoot them?" (R. 2289). Defendant assured him that the Lord wanted their throats cut 

Apparently no discussion about disemboweling.  No reference shared in “facts of the case” to the temple, but this could be the choice of “the State”.  Want to know what “other book” was.  Trial transcript would be useful to see if any references to temple.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Calm

[webbles]

4 minutes ago, ttribe said:

I think you are correct about the murders. The post you quoted me on was about the penalties more generally. 

 

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Strangled, beaten, and then throat cut.  No disemboweling.  Erica’s throat cut so deeply only spine was intact.

I was going to quote, but pretty graphic.

https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2380&context=byu_sc1

Thanks.  I was searching online and only kept coming back to discussions about the new show.

[Calm]

Lawyers…do you know of a way to find the 1985 trial transcripts online?  Finding lots of info on appeals, but no documents for original trial.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

45 minutes ago, ttribe said:

You're really trying to hold an entertainment enterprise to the same ethical standards as academic researchers?

Absolutely not. That would be a foolish enterprise in light of what we already know about a) the general lack of ethics in the entertainment industry and b) Mr Black's previously demonstrated determination to openly and repeatedly tread on the sense of the sacred held by a community that he despises and would like to punish.

43 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

The justification as I understand it is that Brenda Lafferty was killed in the manner similar to the temple pre-1990 blood oaths. Dustin Lance Black, the producer (raised Mormon) wanted to show a connection with ritualistic violence.  Don't hate me.  I'm just reporting what I heard from a PR blip a few weeks ago.

Yeah, I'm sure this is the justification that has been concocted and shared. Mr Black had a similar one for doing the same thing on television some years ago. He knows how well that was received then by the community he hates so much. Clearly, he is eager to find an opportunity to repeat the offence. I don't expect this to be his last attempt either.

He is essentially Mike Norton with a much bigger budget and an Academy Award.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[sunstoned]

34 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Absolutely not. That would be a foolish enterprise in light of what we already know about a) the general lack of ethics in the entertainment industry and b) Mr Black's previously demonstrated determination to openly and repeatedly tread on the sense of the sacred held by a community that he despises and would like to punish.

Yeah, I'm sure this is the justification that has been concocted and shared. Mr Black had a similar one for doing the same thing on television some years ago. He knows how well that was received then by the community he hates so much. Clearly, he is eager to find an opportunity to repeat the offence. I don't expect this to be his last attempt either.

He is essentially Mike Norton with a much bigger budget and an Academy Award.

It might not be very palatable, but the reasoning has validity. The link to the murder and temple penalties is not concocted. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

The link to the murder and temple penalties is not concocted. 

This may well be; I don't know the case at all and so can't judge. But there is literally an infinite number of ways to include such a link that doesn't involve intentionally and blatantly transgressing a community's right to sacred spaces and practices.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[webbles]

25 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

It might not be very palatable, but the reasoning has validity. The link to the murder and temple penalties is not concocted. 

Was the link between the murder and the temple part of the original case?  I can't find any thing on whether the Laffertys connected the two and reading on the method of murder, I'm not really seeing a strong resemblance between the temple penalties.  Throat cutting is a fairly common form of murder.