How much time and money did Mitt Romney save?

[_bcspace]

I'm pleasantly surprised--I thought the Jews were much more hated than this indicates.

As for LDS, I guess we're at least ahead of atheist.

Notice a trend was claimed but these aren't the kind of statistics that show a trend. On top of that, it's general and says nothing about the effect of the FLDS issue on feelings towards the LDS.

The lazy research is palpable....and intentional.

[Guest]

I am sure there will be a Faith-Promoting Rumor spin to it. It takes away the sting of defeat.

I was just beside myself with unconteolled glee when mitt lost and the current FLDS fiasco is just extra icing on my cake.

The preemtive move by the FLDS to rename themselves was pure genius.

[_guy sajer]

It's definitely a ploy right now with laws being bent and broken to get at them. However, I wouldn't be suprised if Romney's campaign got the ball rolling in someone's mind in the first place.

Sounds like someone is unfamiliar with both the law and child abuse case history.

Funny thing about that is the ACLU seems to agree with me about the legality of the situation. Of course as you know, the ACLU is only as good as it's agreement with your own opinions......

I humbly disagree. I think it will accomplish the precise opposite. By and large, people associate Mormonism (to the extent they even think of Mormonism) with polygamy. The FLDS fiasco will do nothing but cement this association in deeper.

It is true that in the back of many minds is the association of Mormons with plural marriage. However, the media, by and large is separating out the FLDS from the LDS and most people listen when the difference is explained. I'd be more worried if there weren't any incidences like this from time to time.

Joseph Smith's brilliant plan to get into the bloomers of his comely acolytes is the gift that keeps on giving for Mormon Inc. no matter how desperately Mormon Inc. tries to run away from it.

It's your inaccurate portrayals that adds to our membership daily. There are about 30-40 convert baptisms a year in our Stake and most seem to be connected to antiMormonism in some way.

How precisely was I inaccurate.

You actually believe that "anti-mormonism" and Mormonism's association with polygamy creates a net addition to the rolls of Mormonism?

Wow, denial is not a pretty thing.

[_guy sajer]

I'm pleasantly surprised--I thought the Jews were much more hated than this indicates.

As for LDS, I guess we're at least ahead of atheist.

Notice a trend was claimed but these aren't the kind of statistics that show a trend. On top of that, it's general and says nothing about the effect of the FLDS issue on feelings towards the LDS.

The lazy research is palpable....and intentional.

Oh, god, here's the lazy research gambit again, and this by a guy who just a few posts again declared that baptisms in his stake "appeared" to be associated with anti-mormonism. Drawing conclusions on limited number of biased anecdotes is the laziest research one can do. You're no more a solid researcher than Joseph Smith was an honest man.

[_bcspace]

I am sure there will be a Faith-Promoting Rumor spin to it. It takes away the sting of defeat.

I was just beside myself with unconteolled glee when mitt lost and the current FLDS fiasco is just extra icing on my cake.

The preemtive move by the FLDS to rename themselves was pure genius.

One good spin deserves another. Are you sure you're not just trying to make sweet lemons?

[_bcspace]

Oh, god, here's the lazy research gambit again, and this by a guy who just a few posts again declared that baptisms in his stake "appeared" to be associated with anti-mormonism. Drawing conclusions on limited number of biased anecdotes is the laziest research one can do. You're no more a solid researcher than Joseph Smith was an honest man.

Having served long time as a Stake missionary and in the same presidency, I feel quite qualified to speak about such matters in my Stake. Did I make any claims about other Stakes? No. Are the counter claims against us anything more than anecdote? No. Do you have any figures other than the ones presented which don't address the issue? No. Can you look at those figures and point out a trend? No.

In other words, you're argument is no better than what you claim mine to be.

[_bcspace]

You actually believe that "anti-mormonism" and Mormonism's association with polygamy creates a net addition to the rolls of Mormonism?

I've seen conversions first hand comming out of that specific type of antiMormonism. As for overall net on that issue, I don't know and neither do you.

[_guy sajer]

Oh, god, here's the lazy research gambit again, and this by a guy who just a few posts again declared that baptisms in his stake "appeared" to be associated with anti-mormonism. Drawing conclusions on limited number of biased anecdotes is the laziest research one can do. You're no more a solid researcher than Joseph Smith was an honest man.

Having served long time as a Stake missionary and in the same presidency, I feel quite qualified to speak about such matters in my Stake. Did I make any claims about other Stakes? No. Are the counter claims against us anything more than anecdote? No. Do you have any figures other than the ones presented which don't address the issue? No. Can you look at those figures and point out a trend? No.

In other words, you're argument is no better than what you claim mine to be.

You statement, in its context, implied effects beyond your stake.

My argument may be no better than yours (but it is, see below), but then I'm not going around chastising other people for "lazy research." I made reference to this only to point out your hypocrisy. You appear to hold others to higher standards of evidence than to which you hold yourself. (Big surprise there.)

Also, research is about theory construction. What, ex ante, is the most plausible hypothesis--that anti Mormon literature tends more to drive people into the Mormon Church, or that it tends drive them out of/away from the Mormon Church.

From where I sit, the latter is a much more plausible hypothesis.

[Guest]

You statement, in its context, implied effects beyond your stake.

Yes, I do believe in the universal principle of the parable of the sower having experienced it myself. But again, I did not claim any statitics for other stakes.

My argument may be no better than yours (but it is, see below), but then I'm not going around chastising other people for "lazy research." I made reference to this only to point out your hypocrisy. You appear to hold others to higher standards of evidence than to which you hold yourself. (Big surprise there.)

Hate to disappoint you, but it is a compliment to say that most antiMormonism is an exercise in lazy research. A compliment because reasearch is usually not even done. See the statistics given above as a reference to which my comments are directed and which you have not addressed.

Also, research is about theory construction. What, ex ante, is the most plausible hypothesis--that anti Mormon literature tends more to drive people into the Mormon Church, or that it tends drive them out of/away from the Mormon Church.

That was not my argument. I suggest you read it again.

[_Sethbag]

It is true that in the back of many minds is the association of Mormons with plural marriage. However, the media, by and large is separating out the FLDS from the LDS and most people listen when the difference is explained. I'd be more worried if there weren't any incidences like this from time to time.

I've seen quite a few articles where they claim something like "the mainstream LDS church abandoned polygamy in 1890 and now excommunicates polygamists" when differentiating the FLDS from the LDS. The problem for you and the rest of the LDS is that what this means to a lot of readers, I think, is "the Mormon church used to do this too but stopped in 1890". The "this" being thus referred to is abhorrent to a lot of people, and so there is still an association between the Mormons and this abhorrent practice. I don't think this really helps. It's sort of like a guy who moves into the neighborhood and everyone learns that 40 years ago he raped some children and did time in the big house for it. Come on, it was 40 years ago, and he paid his debt to society, didn't he? Um, well, yeah, but... People still won't want to live next door to him.