The Handcarts Again..

[_Moniker]

When children face hardships at any point, in any culture, at any time period I am upset by it. When children die I feel intense grief from the thought of little ones perishing. So what when it was? Who did it? Where it occurred? Or what time period?

No one is going to make me lose a sense of sympathy and despair that children lose their lives -- no matter what the circumstances or when they occurred.

So, I suppose I'm just a wacko when I read about suffering of any sort and my heart bleeds? Probably. But it's a good thing that some people recognize that when actions occur there are consequences and from those lessons we try to change the world to be a safer place for all persons. There are lessons here. That some want to deny that it is appropriate to look at the lessons, and show the very human nature of feeling empathy and concern for those that had difficulty, really speaks to their inability to empathize with their fellow man.

Or is it just when it deals with the LDS Church that it's not appropriate? That's the sense I'm getting here!

OH, and about the liquor thing. I'm a never-Mo and I've never had liquor in my house since becoming a parent. No liquor cabinet here! Should we stereotype some LDS now? I'd be happy to since you went first!

Moniker, you obviously have a soft heart. Children suffering bothers me, too. But this is off subject.

Are parents subjecting their teenagers to threat of crippling and injry by sending them on a handcart trek for 2 or 3 days? Oh, good grief! What a crock! In that Maryland experience, yes there ended up being some risk. No one was hurt or killed. But it was something way out of the ordinary. The kids were statistically more likley to be hurt or killed driving Old Testament the stake center to meet up with their group.

About the liquor thing. Not every non member has liquor in their homes. Nor does every famly buy a 16 year old a car. I am just saying, if the shoe fits, then wear it.

Oops! I got a bit frenzied there and my reading comp dropped significantly!!

I thought you were joining in with Nehor and Jason with the idea that we shouldn't discuss the original treks and feel sympathy for those that endured hardships. Sorry!

I agree with you about the rest. I don't see it as a problem and don't view it as necessarily dangerous. I think if parents don't want their children to participate with the Church's focus on this bit of history they can opt out.

[_wenglund]

Ok, so the handcart pioneers had it rough. The church still isn't true. It isn't now, and it wasn't when they experienced their rough hardcart travel.

I appreciate you sharing your personal opinion about the truth of the Church. I happen to have an opposing point of view. However, I do agree that the difficult experienced by the pioneers is not an indication of the truth of the Church, though I think it does clearly suggest that the pioneers believed it was true, and were thus willing to make the kinds of sacrifices they they did in light of their belief.

Anyway, will you be directly answering my previous questions?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_truth dancer]

Hi Seth,

ps: for what it's worth, that now well-used story of the guy who stood up in Cedar City during a meeting where someone criticized the handcart company ordeal, and told about how he'd been there, and when he thought he couldn't go on anymore and the handcart would start pushing him instead, that was my great great grandfather, Francis Webster.

OMG... I LOVED that story!

I thought it was angels that attended him and helped him with the handcart. :-)

I go back to my earlier statement... what kind of God requires children be sacrificed to bring forth the one true church?

~dancer~

[_Jason Bourne]

All or nothing isn't it, Jason?

No. We can learn from the trainwreck called Mormonism.

I do not think I am the all or nothing guy here. I criticize where I think it is needed and don't where it is not and praise where it is deserved. You on the other hand criticize constantly and it seem to be on the rise.

[_Jason Bourne]

Hi Jason,

All I'm saying is that I think parents should take care of their children.

Who is not doing this?

I think parents should not knowingly put them in harms way.

Who is doing this?

I do not think a healthy message to send to children is that it doesn't matter if you risk the lives of children because you will be together in the next life.

Who is sending this message?

I do not think a good message is that it is better to obey and have your children possibly die than it is to keep your children safe.

Who is teaching this message?

Again, I do understand the dynamics of early settlers, (I recently read stories of those who first came to America for example). I still think risking the lives of children is not a good idea.

Well that is fine. I guess you would have stayed wherever you lived.

I have a difficult time when I hear of children freezing to death as they traveled across the plains knowing that some leaders knew of the challenges and most likely outcomes that would occur.

I am not sure what you are talking about? Which leaders intentionally sent the saints late on their trek? What leaders advised them to not be cautious and plan well for their trek? Do you honestly think the LDS leaders were just willy nilly asking people to be put in peril? Sure any trip then was risky but I don't see any reason to conclude that the LDS leaders were encouraging folly in the westward migration.

And, yes I can feel sorrow for the pain and suffering of children. I'm not OK with it.

I am saddened at the loss of life as well. But given the times, the frontier and so on people were going to run risks if they immigrated.

Further, I think any God that requires the suffering and death of children to establish "his" church is not a God worth worshipping.

Who is saying GOd requires this?

[_Jason Bourne]

Uh, no! Even during that time period people were HORRIFIED by what they witnessed! See my above quote. It is NO less appropriate to be horrified THEN as it is NOW! Children and their suffering is always seen as horrific! What lala land do you live in where you think people 100 years ago didn't care that kids were freezing to death?

Holy crap! Is anyone reading what I said? Does not look like it. Did I say people were not horrified when children suffered? Nope. I give up.

Uh, yes. Can you try to recall what you WROTE?

This from the 21st century of your chair in front of a PC. Look, life wast really hard back then. Many children died at young ages. Many US immigrants left Europe, not just LDS ones, in hopes of a better life. From your present day 160 years later who the heck are you to question what was good and not good for their children? Keep in minds more did this then so called religious fanatics, which in and of itself is once again a rather nasty slam when you really don't know that was up. I am sure glad our ancestors weren't afraid an cowardly to tackle the unkown like many of you seem to be.

You are not only insinuating, you are flat out stating that I am using modern notions to be horrified by children suffering. That is what the above quote of yours states. That I'm looking through a lens of my 21st century comfy laptop pecking life. My point was to say that even then people were horrified by the circumstances. Can you try to keep up with your own arguments? Please?

Nope.

Still did not say that.

[_Moniker]

Uh, no! Even during that time period people were HORRIFIED by what they witnessed! See my above quote. It is NO less appropriate to be horrified THEN as it is NOW! Children and their suffering is always seen as horrific! What lala land do you live in where you think people 100 years ago didn't care that kids were freezing to death?

Holy crap! Is anyone reading what I said? Does not look like it. Did I say people were not horrified when children suffered? Nope. I give up.

Uh, yes. Can you try to recall what you WROTE?

This from the 21st century of your chair in front of a PC. Look, life wast really hard back then. Many children died at young ages. Many US immigrants left Europe, not just LDS ones, in hopes of a better life. From your present day 160 years later who the heck are you to question what was good and not good for their children? Keep in minds more did this then so called religious fanatics, which in and of itself is once again a rather nasty slam when you really don't know that was up. I am sure glad our ancestors weren't afraid an cowardly to tackle the unkown like many of you seem to be.

You are not only insinuating, you are flat out stating that I am using modern notions to be horrified by children suffering. That is what the above quote of yours states. That I'm looking through a lens of my 21st century comfy laptop pecking life. My point was to say that even then people were horrified by the circumstances. Can you try to keep up with your own arguments? Please?

Nope.

Still did not say that.

Then please do tell me what you were saying to me Jason. I mentioned being horrified that children died and had a terrible journey. You said I was judging the journey by present day standards. Perhaps you should have responded to me being horrified (since that was the point of my post!) and not responded to whatever the hell you thought I was talking about. WHAT precisely was I judging by today's standards?

Replying to something you said to TD:

by the way, yes there were elders that told the last two parties to go out and that divine intervention would assure their safe arrival.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_han ... _companies

Prior to the Willie Company departing Florence, the company met to debate the wisdom of such a late departure. Because the emigrants were unfamiliar with the trail and the climate, they deferred to the returning missionaries and Church agents. One of the returning missionaries, Levi Savage, urged them to spend the winter in Nebraska. He argued that such a late departure with a company consisting of the elderly, women and young children would lead to suffering, sickness and even death. All of the other Church elders argued that the trip should go forward, expressing optimism that the company would be protected by divine intervention. Some members of the company, perhaps as many as 100, decided to spend the winter in Florence or in Iowa, but the majority, about 404 in number (including Savage) continued the journey west.

[_Jason Bourne]

When children face hardships at any point, in any culture, at any time period I am upset by it. When children die I feel intense grief from the thought of little ones perishing. So what when it was? Who did it? Where it occurred? Or what time period?

No one is going to make me lose a sense of sympathy and despair that children lose their lives -- no matter what the circumstances or when they occurred.

So, I suppose I'm just a wacko when I read about suffering of any sort and my heart bleeds? Probably. But it's a good thing that some people recognize that when actions occur there are consequences and from those lessons we try to change the world to be a safer place for all persons. There are lessons here. That some want to deny that it is appropriate to look at the lessons, and show the very human nature of feeling empathy and concern for those that had difficulty, really speaks to their inability to empathize with their fellow man.

I understand and I agree. I do not like seeing children suffer either and actually I don't like seeing adults suffer. But living is risky business and at times ther is going to be suffering. This past year where I live there was an inordinant number of deaths in auto accidents. One such event involved the death of five girls that were on their way to a graduation party. They think the driver may have been texting on her cell phone, she swerved into the lane of an on coming semi and they were all killed, possibly in the ensuing fire.

I felt horrible about this, and even wept more then once about it when it was in the news. I rode my bike past the school where they attended and say the memorial and wept.

So I agree.


Yet we still drive and let our kids die.

I do no think the LDS leaders, Mormon pioneers or any other pioneers were blatantly uncaring about their lives or the lives of their kids. No more then the parents that let these young ladies drive to a party that tragic night.

[_Moniker]

Jason, and other LDS as appropriate, I am often startled when I write on subjects that come up on this board and I feel as though I have to defend myself from the label of an anti-LDS. I am not attacking the Church when I talk about these emigrants or their children. People do foolish things all the time. I place no blame on the Church, or on LDS -- except for those that were foolish. If this was a board about Japan (and I LOVE Japan) I'd be upset about Nanking. So, when I type something and then have to justify it (because if it was ANY other topic outside of LDS it'd be a-okay) as not being an attack on the Church it gets a little old.

I am NOT attacking the Church. I do however question parents and their ability to care for their children. These were individuals and I make comments on their actions. This is not attacking your faith, or your God, or your Church -- it is attacking their actions and if certain beliefs played into their faulty actions then I can comment on those as well.

I get so tired of people responding to me as if I'm attacking them. I don't think I am?

[_Jason Bourne]

l.

ps: for what it's worth, that now well-used story of the guy who stood up in Cedar City during a meeting where someone criticized the handcart company ordeal, and told about how he'd been there, and when he thought he couldn't go on anymore and the handcart would start pushing him instead, that was my great great grandfather, Francis Webster.

Cool

You are famous!! what do you think of what he said?