Mormon massacre?
- Thread starter DasBoot
- Start date
- Status
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Handy-
Unless it becomes a debate around religion, I honestly don't see a problem. If my colleagues disagree, they're welcome to close it.
Rich
Unless it becomes a debate around religion, I honestly don't see a problem. If my colleagues disagree, they're welcome to close it.
Rich
steelheart
Moderator
Another example of why you never give up your guns!
Handy
Why do you care?
steelheart
+1
But, for accuracy's sake. please be advised that Joseph Smith had been dead for some years before the incident.
Rich
It was not ONLY for the shortage of men and not ONLY to keep the women from destitution... They also believed it was ordained of God...
AND you don't stop anything as easily as you start it...
My little grandchildren have learned that lesson already...
Why do you care?
steelheart
+1
But, for accuracy's sake. please be advised that Joseph Smith had been dead for some years before the incident.
Rich
It was years... and it also happened in Nauvoo and other locales...
It was not ONLY for the shortage of men and not ONLY to keep the women from destitution... They also believed it was ordained of God...
AND you don't stop anything as easily as you start it...
My little grandchildren have learned that lesson already...
Rich,
It just doesn't seem like it is consistant with this forum's posting guidelines, as it is not about current law or politics, let alone guns. I've seen more than a couple current events topics with pending legislation closed as being not relevent enough for TFL, and L&P in specific. Yet this thread is a historical discussion.
Just seems strange that sometimes things are so flexible and other times it's like trying to get an article published in Nature. Your forum, of course.
It just doesn't seem like it is consistant with this forum's posting guidelines, as it is not about current law or politics, let alone guns. I've seen more than a couple current events topics with pending legislation closed as being not relevent enough for TFL, and L&P in specific. Yet this thread is a historical discussion.
Just seems strange that sometimes things are so flexible and other times it's like trying to get an article published in Nature. Your forum, of course.
Jericho9mm
New member
Motion is seconded!
I would suggest that the involved parties read the following book.
http://contemporarylit.about.com/cs/currentreviews/fr/bannerOfHeaven.htm
http://contemporarylit.about.com/cs/currentreviews/fr/bannerOfHeaven.htm
The colonies were to a large extent, settled for reasons of religious freedom. Various protestant sects fled the persecution they received in England (COE) and a few other European (Catholic or Lutheran dominated) countries. Even Catholics fled from England (Mary's Land, anyone?).
From that perspective, it is a lesson for all of us how the LDS were treated by the then, mainstream religions.
It is also a lesson on how government, entwined with religion (Separation Clause, anyone?), becomes the same persecutor that many fled from, a mere two hundred years previously.
One does not need to defend the LDS or even agree with their precepts. One only needs to recognize the absolute violation of our Constitution and our espoused Freedoms and Liberties.
One other item should be recognized. Much is said against the practice of polygamy. Rightly or wrongly, it is the way western culture has come to accept. But it is not the only way that exists. Nor is it even, in view of the entire world's cultures, past and present, a majority practice.
This religious practice was before the Supreme Court in REYNOLDS v. U.S., 98 U.S. 145 (1878). Here the Court argued that because plural marriages were condemned in English Common Law, more specifically, English Religious Canons, the practice would be forbidden under US Law. The Court decided that the Government could reach not into opinions, doctrine or theology, but into actual practices: "Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured. Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order."
N.B.: The "acknowledged leader" was Jefferson. This was the first time the Court had used Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists... That "Wall of Separation" clause stems from this case and not from Everson v Board of Education; 330 U.S. 1, 18 [1947]), as many think.
The history of this period is fascinating. For instance, compare the above ruling to current rulings on the gay marriage issues. It is obvious to me, that Reynolds must be revisited. What the result will be, is likely to turn this nation on its head. So I agree that this thread is extremely relevant, and even timely, to issues that confront us today.
Keeping always in mind: Those that do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.
From that perspective, it is a lesson for all of us how the LDS were treated by the then, mainstream religions.
It is also a lesson on how government, entwined with religion (Separation Clause, anyone?), becomes the same persecutor that many fled from, a mere two hundred years previously.
One does not need to defend the LDS or even agree with their precepts. One only needs to recognize the absolute violation of our Constitution and our espoused Freedoms and Liberties.
One other item should be recognized. Much is said against the practice of polygamy. Rightly or wrongly, it is the way western culture has come to accept. But it is not the only way that exists. Nor is it even, in view of the entire world's cultures, past and present, a majority practice.
This religious practice was before the Supreme Court in REYNOLDS v. U.S., 98 U.S. 145 (1878). Here the Court argued that because plural marriages were condemned in English Common Law, more specifically, English Religious Canons, the practice would be forbidden under US Law. The Court decided that the Government could reach not into opinions, doctrine or theology, but into actual practices: "Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured. Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order."
N.B.: The "acknowledged leader" was Jefferson. This was the first time the Court had used Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists... That "Wall of Separation" clause stems from this case and not from Everson v Board of Education; 330 U.S. 1, 18 [1947]), as many think.
The history of this period is fascinating. For instance, compare the above ruling to current rulings on the gay marriage issues. It is obvious to me, that Reynolds must be revisited. What the result will be, is likely to turn this nation on its head. So I agree that this thread is extremely relevant, and even timely, to issues that confront us today.
Keeping always in mind: Those that do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Handy-
Lighten up or provide examples, please.
The thread is about political repression and murder, so long as it does not move to Religion. Had it been posted in Tactics and Training under the title, "What could they do?", no one would argue.
Where's the foul? TFL Members are handling it without acrimony or "My God Says" responses. If you're looking for a Moderator position, apply within: rich@swatmag.com
Rich
Lighten up or provide examples, please.
The thread is about political repression and murder, so long as it does not move to Religion. Had it been posted in Tactics and Training under the title, "What could they do?", no one would argue.
Where's the foul? TFL Members are handling it without acrimony or "My God Says" responses. If you're looking for a Moderator position, apply within: rich@swatmag.com
Rich
The PBS site on Mr. Lee is pretty good, but this is more interesting.
www.xmission.com/~country/reason/lee_mm.htm
MOMONISM UNVEILED;
OR
THE LIFE AND CONFESSIONS
OF THE LATE MORMON BISHOP,
JOHN D. LEE;
(Written by Himself)
"I was now satisfied that it was the wish of all of the Mormon priesthood to have the thing done. One reason for thinking so was that it was in keeping with the teachings of the leaders, and as Utah was then at war with the United States we believed all the Gentiles were to be killed as a war measure, and that the Mormons, as God's chosen people, were to hold and inhabit the earth and rule and govern the globe."
www.xmission.com/~country/reason/lee_mm.htm
MOMONISM UNVEILED;
OR
THE LIFE AND CONFESSIONS
OF THE LATE MORMON BISHOP,
JOHN D. LEE;
(Written by Himself)
"I was now satisfied that it was the wish of all of the Mormon priesthood to have the thing done. One reason for thinking so was that it was in keeping with the teachings of the leaders, and as Utah was then at war with the United States we believed all the Gentiles were to be killed as a war measure, and that the Mormons, as God's chosen people, were to hold and inhabit the earth and rule and govern the globe."
Last night I watched....
Waco,"Rules of Engagement!" On comcast-cable access three!
The news got completly in bed with the Clinton imperial power
structure.
There wasn't a nickles worth of of help for the Davidian Church at Mt.Carmel unless they were sighted in or dumped with fire and military C.S. gas. The last news conference, Helen Thomas asked McCleland whether Iraq was going to turn into another Waco?
Waco,"Rules of Engagement!" On comcast-cable access three!
The news got completly in bed with the Clinton imperial power
structure.
There wasn't a nickles worth of of help for the Davidian Church at Mt.Carmel unless they were sighted in or dumped with fire and military C.S. gas. The last news conference, Helen Thomas asked McCleland whether Iraq was going to turn into another Waco?Fascinating link. His whole defense seems to be based on the fact he was just following orders. That sounds familar. Most of those guys were hung, too.
This would also not be the first time a midlevel officer has been fed to the wolves to cover for higher ranking officals. The truth probably lies somewhere in between.
A tragic episode anyway you look at it.
Fanaticism, no matter the cause, usually leads to excess.
"Kill them all. God will know His own." Amalric Arnaud - Albigensian Crusade
This would also not be the first time a midlevel officer has been fed to the wolves to cover for higher ranking officals. The truth probably lies somewhere in between.
A tragic episode anyway you look at it.
Fanaticism, no matter the cause, usually leads to excess.
"Kill them all. God will know His own." Amalric Arnaud - Albigensian Crusade
Harley Quinn
Moderator
I have read much, about Joseph Smith
He was killed in Carthage Ill. By a mob of Vigilantes because his way of community was more resouceful then their's.
He and his brother were shot down, they were in custody but they still had firearms on themselves for protection. It was pretty much santioned murder by the officials of Ill.
Basically Communisim vs American Frontierism.
At the time of his death he was having a major revolt within his Mormon community and they were very much responsible for his demise.
The women were basically slaves and the men were hard workers and all, but it was/is really hard to believe people will go to the extremes like that, when following a cult leader (at that time that is what it was considered).
Very interesting story and now they are one of, or not the richest Religious community in the world.
They own most of Las Vegas, go figure.
HQ
He was killed in Carthage Ill. By a mob of Vigilantes because his way of community was more resouceful then their's.
He and his brother were shot down, they were in custody but they still had firearms on themselves for protection. It was pretty much santioned murder by the officials of Ill.
Basically Communisim vs American Frontierism.
At the time of his death he was having a major revolt within his Mormon community and they were very much responsible for his demise.
The women were basically slaves and the men were hard workers and all, but it was/is really hard to believe people will go to the extremes like that, when following a cult leader (at that time that is what it was considered).
Very interesting story and now they are one of, or not the richest Religious community in the world.
They own most of Las Vegas, go figure.
HQ
makarova30
Inactive
sorry for the lack of cites...but here goes
I had heard and cant remember the source that polygamy was both directly and indirectly the cause of strife between mormons and gentiles. As that story went...somebody correct me please.. polygamy had always been a major tenent of the faith. Abhorent as that was to the non saint community, what followed was far worse. Inevitably among the mormons there were always have and have nots just like every where else. A rich mormon could offer a mormon girl a far better life which is why they could attract so many wives. Naturally that left a good many mormon boys with no prospects. Imagine the consequences among that population, liquor, fighting, consorting with lewd women. You can imagine the horror in the community. So the story went, the church decided to allow marriage of non mormon girls to these men whether they wanted to or not.
In a word kidnapping! I suspect I've read one too many westerns or something, but could somebody more knowledgeable here opine on that part of the story. I even heard that was a primary cause of the near war with the states. So somebody turn on the lights for me please.
I had heard and cant remember the source that polygamy was both directly and indirectly the cause of strife between mormons and gentiles. As that story went...somebody correct me please.. polygamy had always been a major tenent of the faith. Abhorent as that was to the non saint community, what followed was far worse. Inevitably among the mormons there were always have and have nots just like every where else. A rich mormon could offer a mormon girl a far better life which is why they could attract so many wives. Naturally that left a good many mormon boys with no prospects. Imagine the consequences among that population, liquor, fighting, consorting with lewd women. You can imagine the horror in the community. So the story went, the church decided to allow marriage of non mormon girls to these men whether they wanted to or not.
In a word kidnapping! I suspect I've read one too many westerns or something, but could somebody more knowledgeable here opine on that part of the story. I even heard that was a primary cause of the near war with the states. So somebody turn on the lights for me please.
- Status