DiscussMormonism.com

Read the tripe here

Follow me truth mongers! Lets go catch us a lying weasel!

Although Brigham Young and other Church leaders in Salt Lake City learned of the massacre soon after it happened, their understanding of the extent of the settlers’ involvement and the terrible details of the crime came incrementally over time. In 1859 they released from their callings stake president Isaac Haight and other prominent Church leaders in Cedar City who had a role in the massacre. In 1870 they excommunicated Isaac Haight and John D. Lee from the Church.

So the LEADER of these wacko Mormons did not run down there and kick some ass? HELLO? Your members did this and you waited for the details to come INCREMENTALLY?

Funny that they omitted John Taylor's journal entry about when Young passed by the make shift memorial BUILT by the US SOLIDERS NOT the Mormons. Funny they OMITTED the PROPHET's loving actions. Its odd they omitted what he said...

The warm innocent blood which flowed from the necks and heads of the women, children, and unarmed men is now upon the cold scaly calloused hands of the current leadership of the Mormon Church.

GOOD JOB YOU BASTARDS.

Although Brigham Young and other Church leaders in Salt Lake City learned of the massacre soon after it happened, their understanding of the extent of the settlers’ involvement and the terrible details of the crime came incrementally over time. In 1859 they released from their callings stake president Isaac Haight and other prominent Church leaders in Cedar City who had a role in the massacre. In 1870 they excommunicated Isaac Haight and John D. Lee from the Church.

LOL. So the only punishment the church could dish out was releasing some from their callings, and excommunicating a few others? Wow, did they record the minutes from any of these disciplinary councils? "Brother Haight, we understand you took part in the massacre of over one-hundred innocent men, women, and children, the looting of their goods, and the kidnapping of the surviving children. We also learned from our interviews with you, that you masturbated on two occasions last month. As punishment, we the high-council have determined that you will be released from your calling as Stake President. Brother Haight, we want you to know we are doing this because we love you, and for your own good. We want you to work with your bishop and get back in good standing within a few months."

Didn't they have blood atonement back then? Why wasn't this crime eligible for blood atonement?

I thought it was a pretty good article. At least they're trying to tackle this subject.

I found it odd that the section that actually covered the massacre was so short. Also I thought it was in dispute that the Indians actually killed all of the women and children. The author says the Indians attacked the women and children and later says that a witness says the LDS killed almost all of the emigrants. The author isn't very clear about this portion of it.

This sentence stood out to me, "A century and a half later, the massacre remains a deeply painful subject for their descendants and other relatives."

I think that is worth repeating.

There are many things "fudged" in that article.

Does the Guinness Book of World Records have any category for the longest cover-up?

moksha wrote:Does the Guinness Book of World Records have any category for the longest cover-up?

Wait... you an active defending member are saying they are lying?

I really hope my step-son's mother gets that issue. I'll have to ask. I will feel so vindicated when he realizes that it is not his family here that lied to him but someone closer to him. Very sad.

Polygamy Porter wrote:

moksha wrote:Does the Guinness Book of World Records have any category for the longest cover-up?

Wait... you an active defending member are saying they are lying?

Lying is such a harsh term. Let us just say that for whatever reason, they chose to omit details which would cast them in a negative light. It is no doubt caused by a urging to have all information be faith-promoting. As an active and defending member, I would say that complete honesty is the best way to deal with blotches in history - so it is merely a difference in opinion.

moksha wrote:

Polygamy Porter wrote:

moksha wrote:Does the Guinness Book of World Records have any category for the longest cover-up?

Wait... you an active defending member are saying they are lying?

Lying is such a harsh term. Let us just say that for whatever reason, they chose to omit details which would cast them in a negative light. It is no doubt caused by a urging to have all information be faith-promoting. As an active and defending member, I would say that complete honesty is the best way to deal with blotches in history - so it is merely a difference in opinion.

Seems like an approach that leads to greater consistency, plus it is easier on your conscience.

moksha wrote:

moksha wrote:

Polygamy Porter wrote:

moksha wrote:Does the Guinness Book of World Records have any category for the longest cover-up?

Wait... you an active defending member are saying they are lying?

Lying is such a harsh term. Let us just say that for whatever reason, they chose to omit details which would cast them in a negative light. It is no doubt caused by a urging to have all information be faith-promoting. As an active and defending member, I would say that complete honesty is the best way to deal with blotches in history - so it is merely a difference in opinion.

Seems like an approach that leads to greater consistency, plus it is easier on your conscience.

Paging Paul, paging Paul.... we need some of your pills.... Moksha is responding to himself...