Mormons - more persecutors than persecuted

[_Buffalo]

Are you saying that Mormon missionaries are being killed for being Mormon? Or is this hypothetical outrage your are expressing?

I am indeed saying that Mormon missionaries have been killed for being Mormon. Certainly you are aware that this happens from time to time. It's quite rare among LDS missionaries as compared to those of other faiths, but it happens.

Never heard of a case. I've heard of Mormon missionaries being killed in drive by shootings, things like that.

When a Mormon missionary is hit by a bus, is it safe to say the driver was attempting to persecute him for his beliefs?

[_Jaybear]

I am indeed saying that Mormon missionaries have been killed for being Mormon. Certainly you are aware that this happens from time to time. It's quite rare among LDS missionaries as compared to those of other faiths, but it happens.

Not familiar with that happening. I recall hearing about missionary Parley Pratt getting killed. But I believe he kidnapped someone's children. So I would call that revenge, rather than religious persecution,

Is that who you are thinking about?

[_stemelbow]

So if Mormons are persecuting a group through non-violent means it's still persecution, but if other groups are persecuting Mormons through non-violent means it's not persecution because that non-violent "persecution" doesn't compare to being murdered? Why does the putative persecution of women and gays not have to be weighed against murder and rape? It seems as if you mean to insist that the violence perpetrated against Mormons is absolutely meaningless until the simple majority shifts. Until that point, non-violent persecution perpetrated by Mormons is weightier than however many murders of Latter-day Saints have taken place since 1830. More brilliant analysis.

I don't even see the point of continuing here. As you demonstrate there is no consistency at all. The arguer, and his partners, are clearly being obtuse and seem to maintain that stance because of their own desire to ffight against Mormonism. I can't get them to go back to their drawing board after they express these types of silly complaints.

[_Sethbag]

I am indeed saying that Mormon missionaries have been killed for being Mormon. Certainly you are aware that this happens from time to time. It's quite rare among LDS missionaries as compared to those of other faiths, but it happens.

Not familiar with that happening. I recall hearing about missionary Parley Pratt getting killed. But I believe he kidnapped someone's children. So I would call that revenge, rather than religious persecution,

Is that who you are thinking about?

Parley P. Pratt was killed by a guy whose wife PPP had taken as a polygamous wife. It's been a while since I read the details, but it was his wife, not his kids.

I recall a church film when I was a kid about a pair of missionaries that got shot by some Mexicans a long time ago. I don't recall the year or anything, but it was "way back in the olden days". It did sort of feed into the persecution complex a little.

Granted, I think a lot of Mormons have a persecution complex, but actual persecution? I just don't see it.

Anyhow, this thread is pretty stupid. I think it's a contrived premise, and both sides are getting their dander up over something pretty stupid IMHO. It looks like an argument just to argue.

[_stemelbow]

It looks like an argument just to argue.

I don't know if you've looked around much but that pretty much defines why critics are posting threads here at all. Anything to argue against Mormonism seems to be the order of the day.

[_maklelan]

If you have more deaths to bring up, go ahead and do it. But I've listed the major events.

I've never sat down to number them, but off the top of my head I can mention Elders Berry and Gibbs along with Martin Condor and J. R. Hutson, Joseph Standing, Joseph and Hyrum Smith. An interesting note about the Standing murder. The sheriff didn't really want to track down the killer, stating that, "the man they murdered was only a 'Mormon.'" The deputy was the one who pursued the case, despite threats against him by others.

Violence against Mormons is a lot rarer, statistically, than violence committed BY Mormons.

You have the statistics? By all means, share them. You keep making assertions, but when I point out that you're just guessing all you can do is tell me to provide the information. The burden of proof lies with you.

Thomas Coleman

Right. I think the sign on his body reading "NOTICE TO ALL ******* - TAKE WARNING - LEAVE WHITE WOMEN ALONE" kinda complicates that notion. The fact that some of the wounds on his body align with temple oath punishments is hardly indicative of anything.

Anna Pulitzer

I didn't realize that Anna Pulitzer was a Latter-day Saint. Can you document that fact? I also don't believe that a murder committed by a vagrant and a drunk who was declared medically insane by a court really qualifies as a genuine case of the application of the principle of blood atonement, especially when that entirely conflicts with the murderer's own explanation of the murder.

20th century Mormons have been much more civilized. No argument here.

So when you say "historically been far more violent" what you mean is that in America's frontier during the latter half of the nineteenth century, Mormons killed more non-Mormons than the other way around? Or at least you assume so?

I can say for sure that the threshold has not been met

Then you know the number. Please end the suspense and tell us exactly how many murdered Mormons are lacking before we become the persecuted instead of the persecutors.

for the same reason I can say that two cups of water of the same size (one about 1/4 full, one almost completely full) do not contain equal amounts of water, even without knowing the exact mL).

That's a bad analogy. You can see that one is about 1/4 full and that the other is almost completely full. You can see the evidence. You have yet to claim that you are even aware of even a ballpark number of all the Mormons who have been murdered for their Mormonism since 1830. You are simply guessing. If you can't even see all the water in the cup you can hardly insist that your estimate is accurate.

You're quibbling over the brand name.

No, you're misusing the name of an institution. This isn't really an important point, but your obdurance makes it clear your argument is about winning and not about facts.

Ah, the straw man. A forum classic.

Perhaps the last sentence is a straw man, but that hardly invalidates the preceding sentences, does it? I think this illustrates even more of a classic on your part: evasion. You're aware of how ridiculous your little criterion is just like everyone else, but you're pot committed. You can hardly back down now, so you've got to turn up the rhetoric and bob and weave.

[_Jaybear]

I've never sat down to number them, but off the top of my head I can mention Elders Berry and Gibbs along with Martin Condor and J. R. Hutson, Joseph Standing, Joseph and Hyrum Smith. An interesting note about the Standing murder. The sheriff didn't really want to track down the killer, stating that, "the man they murdered was only a 'Mormon.'" The deputy was the one who pursued the case, despite threats against him by others.

You said they are killed "from time to time."
Any come to mind in this century, or even the last?

[_Gadianton]

Germans are more enthusiastic and zealous and most importantly successful killers of non-Germans than vice versa

Do "Germans" start up message boards and blogs complaining about their long history of persecution as "Germans" in order to demonize their debate opponents? If they do, then they might need to be reminded about certain things.

[_Buffalo]

Even now there's a persecution pity-party going on at MAD:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/559 ... -question/

[_Buffalo]

I've never sat down to number them, but off the top of my head I can mention Elders Berry and Gibbs along with Martin Condor and J. R. Hutson, Joseph Standing, Joseph and Hyrum Smith. An interesting note about the Standing murder. The sheriff didn't really want to track down the killer, stating that, "the man they murdered was only a 'Mormon.'" The deputy was the one who pursued the case, despite threats against him by others.

Great, doesn't sound anywhere close to 140, though.

You have the statistics? By all means, share them. You keep making assertions, but when I point out that you're just guessing all you can do is tell me to provide the information. The burden of proof lies with you.

So far the evidence points to a body count far south of 50. Statistically, is that a lower or greater number than 140?

Right. I think the sign on his body reading "NOTICE TO ALL ******* - TAKE WARNING - LEAVE WHITE WOMEN ALONE" kinda complicates that notion. The fact that some of the wounds on his body align with temple oath punishments is hardly indicative of anything.

I think just letting this response stand as is is the best counterargument I can give. :)

I didn't realize that Anna Pulitzer was a Latter-day Saint. Can you document that fact? I also don't believe that a murder committed by a vagrant and a drunk who was declared medically insane by a court really qualifies as a genuine case of the application of the principle of blood atonement, especially when that entirely conflicts with the murderer's own explanation of the murder.

She was killed by Brigham Young's son. She may have been one of his wives. Her membership is irrelevant, though. The murderer had writings on blood atonement in his room. You do the math.

So when you say "historically been far more violent" what you mean is that in America's frontier during the latter half of the nineteenth century, Mormons killed more non-Mormons than the other way around? Or at least you assume so?

Yes indeed.

Then you know the number. Please end the suspense and tell us exactly how many murdered Mormons are lacking before we become the persecuted instead of the persecutors.

That's a bad analogy. You can see that one is about 1/4 full and that the other is almost completely full. You can see the evidence. You have yet to claim that you are even aware of even a ballpark number of all the Mormons who have been murdered for their Mormonism since 1830. You are simply guessing. If you can't even see all the water in the cup you can hardly insist that your estimate is accurate.

You seem like a smart guy. I'm sure you've heard of the concept of estimation. You probably even make use of it in your every day life.

No, you're misusing the name of an institution. This isn't really an important point, but your obdurance makes it clear your argument is about winning and not about facts.

The Catholic church is as much the same institution as any of the first century Christian movements as the modern LDS church is the same institution as the Church of the Latter-day Saints.

Perhaps the last sentence is a straw man,

Appreciate that you can cop to that. Most people can't.