DiscussMormonism.com

WOW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcWVU5-pd7Y

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX_uB8CLAW4

Looks like an interesting presentation. I'd like more information. Who put it on? Use of washrooms: Would Moslems have been permitted to use them? Who blocked entry to them? Was the presentation on public/private property? Too little information. Fill us in.

More like Evanglical Christian critics of the LDS Church not allowed to use the bathroom.

Though this surprises me. I have been at Church pageants and helped as volunteer security in the past. We were always told to let the EV critic to use the facilities. They even had passed from the pageant leadership allowing them in.

Roger Morrison wrote:Looks like an interesting presentation. I'd like more information. Who put it on? Use of washrooms: Would Moslems have been permitted to use them? Who blocked entry to them? Was the presentation on public/private property? Too little information. Fill us in.

THe Manti pageeant is held on the grounds of the Manti Temple. Private property.

Boaz & Lidia wrote:WOW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcWVU5-pd7Y

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX_uB8CLAW4

Do you see anything wrong with LDS members behavior?
I certainly don't.
Those idiots, posing themselves Bible thumping Christians are nothing but idiots, to waste their time
here in Manti. They make a big spectacle, disturb local people.
Serves them right.
Let them defend their ridiculous Bible their own turf.
And leave the Mormons alone.

I too, have little patient with morons.

The cop in the first video even tells them they're on private property... Much ado about nothing.

Real Christians never have to do such a sinful thing.

Angus McAwesome wrote:The cop in the first video even tells them they're on private property... Much ado about nothing.

Yet the others who were not dressed in 1840 era dress were allowed to use the facilities, regardless whether they were members of the church which owns the "private property".

Boaz & Lidia wrote:

Angus McAwesome wrote:The cop in the first video even tells them they're on private property... Much ado about nothing.

Yet the others who were not dressed in 1840 era dress were allowed to use the facilities, regardless whether they were members of the church which owns the "private property".

Doesn't matter. If the owner of employees of the property say you can't use the restroom and tell you to leave the premises then you must comply. Now if these twinkies can prove in a court of law that this was based on religious discrimination good for them, but when the security staff says "No" and then says "Leave" you can't use the restroom and you must go away.

Angus McAwesome wrote:

Boaz & Lidia wrote:

Angus McAwesome wrote:The cop in the first video even tells them they're on private property... Much ado about nothing.

Yet the others who were not dressed in 1840 era dress were allowed to use the facilities, regardless whether they were members of the church which owns the "private property".

Doesn't matter. If the owner of employees of the property say you can't use the restroom and tell you to leave the premises then you must comply. Now if these twinkies can prove in a court of law that this was based on religious discrimination good for them, but when the security staff says "No" and then says "Leave" you can't use the restroom and you must go away.

Give me a break. Had Mormon missionaries been treated this way you know LDS Inc would run it up the PR flag pole.