Blergh. Go eat your sour grapes somewhere else.
If gay person wants to get married they can do it legally without having to get married in a church or by a clergyman. Or do you think that church marriages are the only legitimate form of marriage?
No thanks to your bigoted church. Or does the LDS church think that legal marriages are the only legitimate sacrament? Why else would they be so invested in the secular side of the issue?
Civil rights=sour grapes. How civilized.
A priest can’t blab about those sins revealed to him in the privacy of the confessional, no.
But these sins are public sins; everybody and his brother knows about them. I can’t see how it would be a breach of privacy to say, “being involved in a political campaign at any level doesn’t excuse the routine and flagrant bearing of false witness that has characterized the Romney campaign. This sort of behavior is antithetical to Mormon belief and practice, and we hope nobody reaches any conclusions from Mr. Romney’s problematic relationship with the truth about what sort of behavior is acceptable in our faith.”
No thanks to the LDS, which campaigned actively against the legalization of gay marriage.
Yeah, because the church is really going to rebuke their most prominent member who tithes a greater percentage*** of his income than is taxed.
*** Probably.
No, Troppus always making comments when I post in threads about my religion just to try and upset me is sour grapes. It has happened before, but this isn’t a pit thread and I don’t care enough to start one in order to elaborate.
This thread is pretty much dead anyway and not at all about any one thing in particular, so I am done with it. Y’all can continue if you like, but don’t ask me any more questions.
P.S. I am going to say this one more time so maybe someone will understand,
The Church did not actively campaign against anything, members of the Church did. Individual members, who organized themselves. The Church was not asking anyone to do anything. They did it as individuals. Just like abortion clinic bombers are not acting under the directions or their church. Some members felt strongly enough about this issue to donate time and money to it, but it was not donated by the Church, but Church members.
If you can’t separate that then nothing I say or anyone says or does is going to help you.
And this does have something to do with the original post, because I think the Church felt compelled to issue such a statement because a lot of people in the general public have a hard time separating an individual who practices a religion from that religion as a whole. The Church itself did not support or donate to campaign for Romney any more than it did for prop 8. What individual members choose to do with their money and time in regards to the political process and candidates is their business.
**I don’t assume an individual feminist is like all feminists, or a black person is like all black people, or a gay person is like all gay people, or a child is like all children. I don’t assume any organizations they belong to represent or direct their every thought and move. I don’t assume anything of someone until they show and share with me how they think and feel. Maybe I am naive to expect the same from others. **
Nope, sorry. If you choose to associate yourself with a group, especially one with extreme and rigid (and nonsensical) teachings, then it’s fair to paint you and the rest of the members with the same brush.
Bullshit. As cited on page 1 of this thread, the LDS church donated more than $180,000 and encouraged its members to donate more.
This is so curious: are you calling on the Church to engage in more public condemnation? That you never had any objection to the (caricature* of) the bad old Church’s methods, you just thought the targets should have been different?
- I am not Mormon, but I imagine they, like the many Catholic churches of the world, conceive of their mission not to be “a museum of saints, but a hospital for sinners.” Like any imperfect institution, they (we) do not always live up to these aspirations.
That’s true of just about all churches.
Anyway, would you mind answering the question I asked earlier.
You seem to be appalled at many Mormon practices and appear to hold Mormons in contempt due to them.
Do you also hold Jews and Muslims in contempt for not letting men and women pray together or allowing women to be Imams, Cantors, Rabbis, or clerics?
So does that mean you have extreme contempt for Jews and Muslims as well?
If not, why?
You said extreme contempt, not me.
First of all, point me to the liberal Mormon congregations. The CoJCoLDS is, as far as I can tell, pretty homogenous in terms of teachings and leadership. There are less-extreme groups of Muslims. There are Jews who identify as Jews because of heritage, but who are non-practicing.
Back to the contempt. Of course I still have contempt for Jews and Muslims, as I have for any religion. Mormonism takes the cake, though.
And if you don’t mind that I jump in to answer this as well: yes.
Must one comment on all related topics before focusing in on the OP?
This again? Ibn Warraq, I’ve already told you to stop with these attempted gotcha posts. This should not be your response to any negative comment about any religious group regardless of the particulars of the comment or the reasons it was made. These comparisons can be useful if they’re done right, but in other situations they are just lazy and they hijack the thread. Don’t do this again in this thread, and if you it again here, and in other threads, make sure it’s related to the topic first. That also means other posters are encouraged to drop this latest hijack.
I’m not trying to hijack the discussion, nor am I asking “gotcha” questions.
I’m merely pointing out that the criticisms they’re leveling at Mormons apply just as well to virtually all religious groups and asking for logical consistency.
For example virtually none treat male and female members equally.
The best examples being Orthodox Jews and Muslims.
Similarly, while there are certainly parts of the Book of Mormon and other parts of Mormon theology that people would object to, the same is true of the Holy Scriptures of the other Abrahamic faiths.
I’ve yet to see anyone produce a shred of evidence that the Mormons are somehow “more barbaric” or more deserving of contempt then the other groups and Mormons have certainly committed far, far less atrocities in the name of their tribe/religion/community than the Jews, Protestants, Catholics, or Muslims.
As I said, I’m just asking for logical consistency.
If you object to Mitt Romney or Harry Reid becoming President due to their beliefs then be consistent and argue that it would have also been wrong to vote for Gore/Lieberman in 2000 because Lieberman belongs to a group which doesn’t allow men and women to pray together, doesn’t allow women to become Rabbis, and doesn’t allow women to become Cantors because they think a woman’s voice box is a sexual organ and requires their sons receive Bar Mitzvahs, but forbids their daughters from receiving Bat Mitzvahs.
I am attempting to tell you what you are doing regardless of your intent. This is a demand that people argue about a bunch of related subjects before they are allowed to discuss the actual topic at hand. You used this tactic on stpauler, who said he did feel that way about other religious groups, and undeterred by the fact that that made your question basically pointless and the fact that I’d told you to stop it, you did the same exact thing to another poster who gave you an identical answer. This is contributing nothing to the discussion and you’re ignoring mod instructions. Rather than explaining your intent, please stop doing it.
The difference is that the Abrahamic tradition is thousands of years old. That does give some points in its favor, barely. Also, events such as the Great Flood and a literal 7 day creation are now passed of by most mainstream religions as allegory in order to prevent any cognitive dissonance.
Mormonism is less than 200, and in that short time many of their more off-the-wall claims are easily refutable. Hence my statement earlier that I find it hard to take anybody seriously who believes that Jesus is going to come back to Independence, Missouri.
Why?
I have not seen anyone produce a shred of evidence that their beliefs are somehow more odious or illogical than the beliefs of the other Abrahamic beliefs and they certainly haven’t committed nearly the atrocities done by Jews, non-Mormon Christians, or Muslims.
I am not familiar with any Muslim group, other than the Sufis, who are not recognized as Muslims by most Muslims(something I disagree with) and have historically been persecuted for their beliefs far worse than Christians or Jews in the Islamic world, that allows men and women to pray together or allows women to be clerics(I think they do but I’m not 100% sure).
Only a tiny percentage of Muslims identify themselves as Sufis and they are no more representative of Islam than Mormonism is of Christianity.