John Voight, September Dawn, on the View

[_Polygamy Porter]

I saw this thread on MAAD about John Voight and his movie on the View:

http://www.abc4.com/mediacenter/local.a ... eoid=72570


While I loathe the spew, errr I mean the View, I am glad to see it get this kind of publicity.

What shocked me was the reply by "freakin a man"

Link to "the board that must not be named"

Even if Brigham Young did order the killing, it would be no worse than the killing that is ordered in the Old Testament by Moses.

Goddammit, god damn it, GOD DAMN IT!!!

The story of Moses has never been verified!!!

The event that occurred on 9/11/1857 ACTUALLY HAPPENED YOU F'ing FOOL!!!

I just cannot believe that a Mormon would post that... un-friggin-believable....

If this mindless member would half engage his brain he would realize what grotesque dishonor he brings to the REAL victims of MMM.

He is basically justifying what happened to the people, IN THE NAME OF GOD.

After showing his religious terrorist self, he not only further mars the victims, he also insults the intelligence of many familiar with the story:

Just from things I have read about this movie, pretty much all the Mormons are portrayed as evil and while those in the Francer party are pretty much painted as angels. One will find bad apples in every bunch and just because a few LDS where bad does not mean the bulk where.

So, is he saying they deserved what they got? and their children deserved to be beheaded after watching their parents being slaughtered?

Mormons like that anger me to no end.

[_The Nehor]

For someone who doesn't believe in God you sure ask him to send a lot of things/people to hell in your post.

[_Mercury]

For someone who doesn't believe in God you sure ask him to send a lot of things/people to hell in your post.

Its the only language you understand. telling you and others that they deserve hell is our way of talking to "children", kind of like when parents tell the kids that the cat "ran away from home" instead of dad backing the car over it accidentally.

So, heres your pat on the head. Run along now.

[_The Nehor]

Its the only language you understand. telling you and others that they deserve hell is our way of talking to "children", kind of like when parents tell the kids that the cat "ran away from home" instead of dad backing the car over it accidentally.

So, heres your pat on the head. Run along now.

I deserve hell now? Wow, that's quite the leap.

[_Gillebre]

No, he isn't saying "they deserved what they got".

He IS saying, however, that you can't paint one group as all good, and one group as all bad, in ANY situation, because there are "bad apples", so to speak, everywhere.

Unless you can cite some group that doesn't have bad apples, and can thus be exempt from my previous statement?


I know Mormons most certainly are not exempt from my statement. Is anyone? I don't think so, but then again, people do think some odd things - I do not presume you disagree with my statement, I'm just stating that someone, somewhere, will. ;)



Oh, and hey Nehor. I'm here. :P

Let's fight the good fight, as it were, bro. :D

[_The Nehor]

Welcome Gillebre

[_Sethbag]

The problem is, Gillebre, and you're a bit too young to really understand this yet, it's not the good fight. You're fighting to defend an organization which is not what it claims to be (ie: true church of God), and which has blinded you with mental blinders that prevent you from seeing this clearly. Joseph Smith was not a virtuous and good man. He was a manipulator, an abuser, an aggressor, and he fooled a lot of people, possibly including himself. I'm sorry you can't see that, but there's a chance that someday you will. Don't fear this. I know what it's like to fear that the church might not be true, but other than some social ramifications with those who are still under the spell, it's actually not a bad thing to learn and comprehend the truth about the LDS church (and, IMHO, about all of religion together). It's actually a good thing.

[_Gillebre]

I appreciate your advice, Seth. :)

the "good fight" is relative. it could be a good fight for your family's honor, or a good fight for your spouse's love, or it could be the good fight to defend what you believe in.

Regardless - the good fight, from my perspective, is defending a truth that I love with all my heart. I know what "arguments" are used against the character of Joseph Smith. Con-man, gold digger, adulterer, et al. I've already heard those jabs. ;) Certainly there's more that I haven't heard, but nothing thus far has moved me from my path back home. :D


Your concern, Seth, is much appreciated.

[_Sethbag]

The thing is, and this is important, the "jabs" and "arguments" aren't the reasons why Joseph Smith was not what the LDS portray him as, and as he claimed to be. They are merely pointing out symptoms of his not being what he said he was.

Take, for instance, the Book of Abraham. The LDS church isn't not true, and Joseph Smith wasn't not a true prophet, merely because he made up the Book of Abraham. Rather, the fact that Joseph Smith apparently made up the Book of Abraham is just a symptom of his not having been a true prophet. He was already not a true prophet before the Book of Abraham thing came about.

Similarly, Joseph Smith was not a false prophet because he manipulated women into agreeing to what amounts to sham weddings, in secret, so that he could then consummate them (ie: get the women in the sack). He was already a false prophet before he did any of this, and his having done these things is really only a symptom of his not being a true prophet.

What is important to understand is that people who have a desire, or a need, for the LDS church to be true, and who are unwilling to accept even the possibility that Joseph Smith wasn't really a true prophet of God, and so forth, will willfully look for and find ways of trying to explain away these symptoms, trying to defend Joseph Smith's prophethood.

You believe the LDS church is true, so you will naturally assume in your mind that I'm wrong, and you will look around, in your mind, for the ways of explaining things that allows, in your mind, the LDS church to still be true. But keep thinking about these things, and find a way within yourself to honestly consider that you may be just as wrong as you think the Jehovah's Witnesses are, and you just don't know it, just like the JWs don't know it. Consider that maybe Joseph Smith really wasn't a true prophet, and then you will see how easily all of the negative things in his history are explained.

It was the case with me, and from some others I've talked to in a similar situation, it was the same case with them too, that the hardest thing, mentally, to overcome is the assumption, the mental requirement, for Joseph Smith to have been a true prophet, no matter what. Once I was able to consider that it was possible that I was wrong, and face that seriously, it was all over. Once I entertained seriously the notion that he might not have been a true prophet after all, and decided to just face the facts as they are and go with whatever conclusion they required, that was all she wrote. It's now clear as day that in fact the LDS true believers are in just as naïve and misguided state, with respect to their faith, that diehard Jehovah's Witnesses are about theirs, or any other diehard members of whatever church. Just like you cannot pound into the head of any diehard JW how and why his or her church isn't really true, because they know it is, you can lead a Mormon to the explanation of the true nature of their church, but you cannot make him accept or acknowledge it. That can only happen when they decide that knowing the truth, the reality, is more important than defending their cherished faith.

[_Gillebre]

Yes, but to Mormons, they already have all the truth they could ever want. :)


Do I "want truth"? Of course. But I already have a portion of it, I believe.



I know. No doubts will put off the unmistakable witness that is the Holy Ghost. ;)

Again, your advice is appreciated, Seth.