At least two Mormons I know have already laughed at this thread.
Well, if you don’t know much about the Qur’an–obviously implying that you really don’t know all that much about Islam itself, let alone extremist versions of same–then perhaps you shouldn’t’ve brought Islam into the “discussion” in your OP.
Oh I don’t know- doesn’t Mormon history have a lot in common with ISIS?
Feel free to fight my ignorance here. I’m not an expert on Mormonism/Mormon history. My understanding is that the Mormon belief that Jesus visited the New World rendered the natives guilty of rejecting Jesus (if they hadn’t, they’d have been Christians when the white man met them), and therefore it was okay to kill them as… what? Heretics? Unbelievers? I am not exactly sure about the reasoning, but the unbelievers were killed or otherwise driven off to make room for the founding of a Mormon State. Sound familiar?
Do you think there is any way the Mormons of that time could have been convinced to give up all this nonsense to live in harmony with the unbelievers? I doubt it- the concept of disfellowshipping came up in this very thread. Unbelievers aren’t welcome, then as now. I like to think that Mormons are less barbaric than ISIS, that they wouldn’t kill unbelievers if they ran their own state, that disfellowshipping is the ‘legal limit’ since they are not the authors of the law. OTOH, both groups have resorted to genocide.
What would it take to get Mormons to give up their beliefs? As has been pointed out, the faith is one-sided and not really open to objective review. That is what you are up against in convincing ISIS to quit killing in the name of Allah. The solution is probably the same, too. Prevent the continuance of their state, wait 100 years or so for them to begin to admit that, say, other races are equal. Eventually some kind of peace may be hammered out, though the Middle East is, IMHO, messier and more complicated than the American West, partly because the American genocide project was successful while the competing groups in the ME never seem to manage to wipe each other out. (OTOH, even with the success of genocide in America, the culture still splits into polarized, competing groups, though they don’t seem to have quite the differences groups in the ME have).
Not really. The Mormons were forced to seek places to live in the West due to persecution: their homes, businesses and lives were being threatened and destroyed by their fellow countrymen.
Sounds like someone has been reading anti-Mormon literature.
I thank my lucky stars that Monty is not my bishop. 
Please give specific citations proving that the LDS members as a group “resorted to genocide.”
Mormon apologetics provides “objective reviews” aplenty (see FAIR Website).
Again, you’ve been reading anti-LDS literature.
Tell me more about this “American genocide project.” :smack:
[QUOTE=Snark Hunter]
Please give specific citations proving that the LDS members as a group “resorted to genocide.”
[/quote]
And please remember that the citations must come from lds.org or from an LDS apologetics team. Anything else would be anti-LDS, and the Apostle forbids Snark Hunter from reading it.
I’m number three!
ETA: never mind. Read that as “Morons”.
Forbids? Not really. I would genuinely like to know, from any source, what mainstream LDS group practiced genocide and who did they practice it against. Also, what LDS leader(s) condoned it?
The “American genocide project” was simply the destruction of the natives in general. The Mormons founded an independent nation, one that only lasted a couple of years until the US threatened to declare war. I have always thought that this was accomplished partly by driving out/killing the natives, the similarity I see between the early Mormons and ISIS. I don’t think the Mormons were ever as bloodthirsty as ISIS, but isn’t that what happened?
I am not reading “anti-Mormon literature”. I have these ideas, I wonder how true they are. The train of thought isn’t leading to, “therefore you are evil!” if that is your concern.
As far as I know, Mormon pioneers were kind to the native Americans and traded with them regularly. Calling their relationship the “American genocide project” is a gross misrepresentation, as if Brigham Young sat down with other LDS leaders and plotted the entire destruction of the NA. But I suspect you know that.
Tired old joke, not funny even the first time it was floated.
While I do not make the claim that Brigham committed genocide, he was certainly willing to do so:
From CONTENTdm page 105. See also J. Willard Marriott Digital Library
The apostles and stake presidents were also willing to enlist the Southern Paiutes to slaughter men, women, and children in a non-Mormon wagon train in 1857. Brigham’s culpability in the massacre is still hotly debated. What is certain is that the Southern Paiutes failed to carry out the massacre so the LDS stakes had to finish the deed, and that Brigham tried to blame the whole affair on the Native Americans. What a pity that these LDS terrorists couldn’t discern your Body Signals to realize that Elohim didn’t approve of the massacre.
Driven from their homes back East. Said homes burned to the ground by lawless mobs. Raped, pillaged, killed, starving, frozen, disease rampant, forsaken by the government that was supposed to protect them. You better believe they were willing to fight for their new homes in Utah. Calling them “LDS terrorists” sets the foundation for your own judgment.
Better watch that left ear.
(And no, I’m not excusing the Mountain Meadows Massacre.)
They were abused by Missourians, so they butchered Arkansasians. The only conceivable motive was to send a message to the US government that its civilians would not be safe on the route to California until the Mormons were allowed to pick their own federal judges. And the Native Americans were collateral damage. Yes, that meets the modern definition of terrorism. No, their left-side itches and aches did not help them to make moral choices. (And yes, you just gave excuses for the Mountain Meadows Massacre.)
*Arkansans.
Nope. Reasons, maybe, but excuses, no.
Mountain Meadows Massacre Summary (FAIR)
“On September 11, 1857, some 50 to 60 local militiamen in southern Utah, aided by some American indian[s], massacred about 120 emigrants who were traveling by wagon to California. The horrific crime, which spared only 17 children age six and under, occurred in a highland valley called the Mountain Meadows, roughly 35 miles southwest of Cedar City. The victims, most of them from Arkansas, were on their way to California with dreams of a bright future“ (Richard E. Turley Jr., ”The Mountain Meadows Massacre,“ Ensign, Sept. 2007).
“What was done here long ago by members of our Church represents a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teaching and conduct. We cannot change what happened, but we can remember and honor those who were killed here.
“We express profound regret for the massacre carried out in this valley 150 years ago today and for the undue and untold suffering experienced by the victims then and by their relatives to the present time.
“A separate expression of regret is owed to the Paiute people who have unjustly borne for too long the principal blame for what occurred during the massacre. Although the extent of their involvement is disputed, it is believed they would not have participated without the direction and stimulus provided by local Church leaders and members” (Henry B. Eyring, in “Expressing Regrets for 1857 Massacre,” Church News, Sept. 15, 2007).
It was a “terrible and inexcusable” tragedy and the LDS Church acknowledges this. See the full article for more details.
He didn’t say the church excused the tragedy; he said you did.
Whooooooooooooooooooooooosh!
Let’s get back to your so-called theory. It’s nothing that fits in with LDS theology. It’s certainly not what the LDS teaching about prayer is. As you describe the “theory”, it’s basically no more and no less than reading entrails.
I suspect that the itchy underwear is designed so as to drown out God’s signals.
Point of order - Mormons do run their own state - Utah - and there are plenty of non-Mormons in said state. Presumably, you meant a theocratic state not governed by the U.S. Constitution, but Utah is pretty close. And as you said, the worst thing they do to dissidents in their church is disfellowship them. The worst thing they do to unbelievers is annoy them with pamphlets. (As far as I know, I’m sure someone will be along to correct me if this is a misapprehension.)
I’ve got no love for the LDS, but comparing them to ISIS is … a bit of a stretch.