More LDS Racism on MAD

[_Coggins7]

Note to Scratch: the overwhelming majority of racism, properly understood, exists today primarily on the cultural Left, among an unfortunately substantial segment of indigenous American blacks, and a tiny, isolated sub-culture of whites associated with the white identity movement.

There is no such thing as "LDS" racism as a identifiable cultural phenomenon. There is, however, such a thing as Scratchist demagoguery, a particularly virulent form of populist, yellow journalistic anti-intellectualism that corrupts everything that comes into contact with it.

[_Coggins7]

This was almost certainly a mistake. It will probably energize you for several hours, if not for several days. You'll be in bliss, slandering and maligning and distorting and misrepresenting. Doing what you love to do.

Ok. So essentially some normal Jews were offended at the notion of Mormons baptizing their dead ancestors. Mr. Peterson considers them extremists. What a buffoon. . . . So, if the Jews don't sit down and take it, they risk losing Mormon support. Wow. What a veiled little threat.

Yes, precisely. DCP is correct about there being a good deal of anti-Jewish feeling around the world. My question is: Why add to it by threatening to take away support if Jews don't capitulate to proxy baptisms?

Yeah, I see your point very clearly. Any Jew who doesn't agree with you is an extremist, and if they don't shut up you're going to ensure they lose Mormon support. You, Sir, are an anti-Semite. Bastard.

QED.

I rest my case.

As Charlie Brown used to say, "Frightening, isn't it?"

[_Trevor]

Note to Scratch: the overwhelming majority of racism, properly understood, exists today primarily on the cultural Left, among an unfortunately substantial segment of indigenous American blacks, and a tiny, isolated sub-culture of whites associated with the white identity movement.

There is no such thing as "LDS" racism as a identifiable cultural phenomenon. There is, however, such a thing as Scratchist demagoguery, a particularly virulent form of populist, yellow journalistic anti-intellectualism that corrupts everything that comes into contact with it.

What a load of crap. Unbelievable.

[_RockHeaded]

FEW WACKO THINGS? LOL those FEW things are HUGE!

Wow! So easy to see how someone else is wacky, so hard to see yourself there.

Really? hhhhmmmmmmmm please tell me how my wacky beliefs compare to the government creating aids to kill 'people of color' or any of the other wonderful sound bites by Wright.

[_Pokatator]

This was almost certainly a mistake. It will probably energize you for several hours, if not for several days. You'll be in bliss, slandering and maligning and distorting and misrepresenting. Doing what you love to do.

Ok. So essentially some normal Jews were offended at the notion of Mormons baptizing their dead ancestors. Mr. Peterson considers them extremists. What a buffoon. . . . So, if the Jews don't sit down and take it, they risk losing Mormon support. Wow. What a veiled little threat.

Yes, precisely. DCP is correct about there being a good deal of anti-Jewish feeling around the world. My question is: Why add to it by threatening to take away support if Jews don't capitulate to proxy baptisms?

Yeah, I see your point very clearly. Any Jew who doesn't agree with you is an extremist, and if they don't shut up you're going to ensure they lose Mormon support. You, Sir, are an anti-Semite. Bastard.

QED.

I rest my case.

I don't mind you posting a response but...... you posted this

I will not respond to anything else you post on this thread.

Are you having trouble living up to your own words?

[_Coggins7]

You, Sir, are an anti-Semite. Bastard.

You'd better get home now antishock, its after curfew...

[_Trevor]

Really? hhhhmmmmmmmm please tell me how my wacky beliefs compare to the government creating aids to kill 'people of color' or any of the other wonderful sound bites by Wright.

Well, let's see:

Do you believe that Jesus rose from the dead?

Do you believe the Bible to be the word of God?

Do you believe that the LDS Church is the only true church?

Do you believe that Hebrews colonized America, established Christianity here before the life of Jesus, and left a record of their civilization on gold plates that was translated by an ignorant farm boy?

Do you think that the LDS temple ceremony is the continuation of a chain of saving ordinances that date back to Adam?

Do you believe in the existence of Kolob?

Do you believe that Joseph Smith's translation of the Book of Abraham represents a faithful translation of an ancient Egyptian text?

You see, while you mighty not find those things wacky, I assure you that there are people who surely would. These people are no less reasonable than you think you are.

[_Jason Bourne]

This was almost certainly a mistake. It will probably energize you for several hours, if not for several days. You'll be in bliss, slandering and maligning and distorting and misrepresenting. Doing what you love to do.

Ok. So essentially some normal Jews were offended at the notion of Mormons baptizing their dead ancestors. Mr. Peterson considers them extremists. What a buffoon. . . . So, if the Jews don't sit down and take it, they risk losing Mormon support. Wow. What a veiled little threat.

Yes, precisely. DCP is correct about there being a good deal of anti-Jewish feeling around the world. My question is: Why add to it by threatening to take away support if Jews don't capitulate to proxy baptisms?

Yeah, I see your point very clearly. Any Jew who doesn't agree with you is an extremist, and if they don't shut up you're going to ensure they lose Mormon support. You, Sir, are an anti-Semite. Bastard.

QED.

I rest my case.

I must say I agree

Scratch you are the king of spin and distortion. Carry on. But please don't ever accuse others of spin. The conclusion you reach through your snippets from other board are often simply astounding.

Shock, you are simply,at least on this thread, an idiot.

[_Coggins7]

What a load of s***. Unbelievable.

The happy circumstance here is that it that what I said above is true, and can be shown to be true documentarily and empirically.

The only thing unbelievable about this is your illimitable ignorance of the cultural, social, and political history over the last 40 or so years, of your own country, years which, I assume you were alive and conscious (but, you probably have traditionally received most of your knowledge about the world from CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC etc., so even the most abyssal ignorance of easily acquired facts and knowledge is understood to be di rigueur).


http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder102600.asp

http://www.city-journal.org/2008/bc0326jm.html

http://www.city-journal.org/html/11_1_w ... lacks.html

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5086

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial ... =110006608


The overwhelming problem holding many American blacks back today, is not the bogeyman of white racism, but their own culture (Ghetto street culture, popularly packaged and marketed today as "Hip Hop" culture).

[_Mister Scratch]

More stereotypical TBM hypocrisy. Should Romney have "repudiated" BY, and ETB, and all the other questionable leaders within the LDS Church? Should the "leftist media" have been more rigorous in their questioning of Romney's feelings on MMM, or polygamy, or blood atonement, or the Danites, or Kolob?

1. BY and ETB (??) were not questionable leaders unless one makes other assumptions that may very well be questionable from another frame of reference.

That is beside the point. The point is whether or not Romney should have been forced to answer for their frequently whacked-out views.

2. The Church had nothing to do with MMM. This is closed as a historical matter involving Church authorities. Unless of course, you have some serious, documentary historical (verifiable and falsifiable, of course) evidence otherwise. Why should Romney be questioned on that actions of a small band of fanatics who committed an isolated crime, thoroughly out of harmony with Church teachings and attitudes?

Why should Obama be questioned on the views of one nutty clergyman?

3. Blood Atonement was the Church's teaching on capital punishment. The fevered slanders of the Church's most ethically vacuous nineteenth century critics notwithstanding. Nothing to see here...

Up until 1990, Blood Atonement figured into the temple ceremony (at least metaphorically).

4. Danites ditto. They existed to a limited extent, but were not a part of the Church or supported by its leadership (and could not possibly be reconciled with Church teachings).

The Danites were absolutely a function of Church leadership.

5. Polygamy ended in the late nineteenth century. Why should Romney have been questioned upon that subject?

Kolob is a doctrinal subject. Why should Romney be questioned on that as a Presidential candidate? Was Huckabee questioned on the doctrine of the Trinity?

Calm down Scratch, and a few extra momma's little helpers before bedtime. Your overextending yourself here.

The point is that Romney can be tied to these "questionable" facets of Mormonism in exactly the same way that Obama can be tied to the "questionable" views of Wright. It is deeply hypocritical to insist that Romney be given a free pass on this stuff while Obama's feet get held to the flames.