What is an anti-Mormon?

[Guest]

We know, we have seen, the power of the priesthood.

President Kimball, DON'T do it! The man is a fraud and a liar! The document is fake! Don't use the Lord's money to buy his lies!

President Romney! President Tanner! Don't do it! Listen to the voice of the Holy Spirit. Be guided by the Holy Ghost and use your power of discernment!

Elder Hinckly! Don't let the prophet do it!

Boyd!! Your little factory needs a tug.

[_Lemmie]

The strategy of attacking when you are proved wrong is not really the way to go here.

We've been down this road SO MANY times, haven't we, Lemmie?

oh my YES.

[_Dr. Shades]

If I am guilty of the things you claim, then you are doubly so, because you have not condemned the burning of the Jackson county press in equally scathing terms, nor have you condemned anything done TO the Mormons.

I hereby condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the destruction of the Jackson County press and utterly condemn everything extra-legal ever done TO the Mormons.

But the attitude I'm getting in here is that even though the men who burned up the Jackson County press, tortured people . . .

"Tortured people?" Where are you getting this, who was tortured, and of what did the torture consist??

and made a family homeless and penniless got away clean..and were even lauded for THEIR act, . . .

Who on earth ever lauded them for THEIR act? Certainly nobody here.

. . . that Joseph Smith absolutely deserved to be charged with treason and shot by a mob for his.

Charged with treason, yes. Shot by a mob, no.

Remember, nobody ever sang "Praise to Missourians, who de-stroyed the print press," nor did anybody ever assume they had been visited by God the Father and Jesus Christ. Nor does anyone think they were chosen by the Great Jehovah, the Prince of Peace, to restore his true gospel. Quite simply, they were frontier ruffians from whom nobody expects any better.

But Joseph Smith, however? Call me crazy, but it's natural to assume that the man who communed with Jehovah ought to be held to a somewhat higher standard of moral conduct. Quite simply, a true prophet would've known better.

[_Fence Sitter]

When others are calling the destruction of the Nauvoo press, and those who accomplished that, do not, with equal fervor, denounce those who ....first and far more nastily....committed the same act AGAINST us, they are ignoring the context of the act.

No they are not ignoring anything, what they are doing is addressing the subject at hand. Your argument might have some validity if you were to ask those you have accused of hypocrisy how they felt about the destruction of the other press, but you didn't, you just jumped right to calling them hypocrites without having any actual knowledge of their opinions on that subject.

In this case, the context of the destruction of the Nauvoo Press includes the FACT that it does not stand alone; that destroying the press of the opposing faction seems to have been pretty standard behavior and nobody at the time called such things 'treason' or any of the other charges leveled at Joseph Smith and the Nauvoo council. Certainly there was no arrest and mob murder of any of the other perpetrators of such deeds.

That is the CONTEXT of the time.

No argument from me that these events might be related, but again, and I am not sure how you are missing this, you have no evidence of how people feel about the destruction of the other press, none. What you are making is an argument from silence. "Hey, so and so has not said anything about this issue so he/she must not care about it" is not a valid conclusion. Why not ask first what they think about it then come to a conclusion?

Not seeing this within that context is...to put it academically, 'historian's bias,' if not outright presentism. I brought up the Jackson county press to show the context...and the hypocrisy of those who called Joseph Smith 'traitor' and all the other things both then AND now.

Nobody was bothered by the destruction of a printing press until a Mormon did it.

And THAT is entirely appropriate to bring up.

The subject is appropriate to bring up, deciding what people think about it without any direct information from them is not.

For example, I have not seen you make any comments about the depredations by Mormons against the Daviess county settlers. What can I conclude from your silence? That you approve of them? No. That it means you only bring up persecution back then when the Mormons are the victims? No. What I can conclude is you haven't mentioned it.

[_Shulem]

No they are not ignoring anything, what they are doing is addressing the subject at hand. Your argument might have some validity if you were to ask those you have accused of hypocrisy how they felt about the destruction of the other press, but you didn't, you just jumped right to calling them hypocrites without having any actual knowledge of their opinions on that subject.

Quite right, you are, Fence Sitter. The matter at hand is what we are discussing. And as a matter of humility on my part, rather embarrassing I might add, I confess that I know nothing about the Jackson County press incident. This is the first I've heard about it or it's not committed to memory.

[_Res Ipsa]

Nadnia, I’d like you to revisit your classification of critic vis a vis anti Mormon in the context of your accusations of hypocrisy and making claims not supported by evidence, such as your claim that Smith concluded that the destruction of the printing press in Missouri was legal and relied on it as precedent in the Expositor case. Do you hold yourself to the same standard as you do critics?

[_Niadna]

Who said I was attempting to exonerate anybody from anything?

I did. It's quite obvious you are trying to do so by calling what Smith did with the Expositor press LEGAL.

I wrote that it was found to be legal.

personally, I think it was one of the dumber moves made, but it was certainly SOP for the time. Everybody was doing it.

I mean, really... you quoted me saying it, so why would you ask the question? Are you really that dumb? Yeah, it appears so.

I quoted you as saying WHAT, precisely?

[Guest]

But the attitude I'm getting in here is that even though the men who burned up the Jackson County press, tortured people and made a family homeless and penniless got away clean..and were even lauded for THEIR act, that Joseph Smith absolutely deserved to be charged with treason and shot by a mob for his.

I find that to be...

typical, actually.

I've said nothing about the Jackson County press.

I know. I did. You know, providing a little context?

That is something you are mulling about in your own mind. Is this how you are excuse Joe for his dastardly act of defying freedom of speech as afforded by the Constitution? Is that how you justify his crime by clamoring on how others did it too?

Pathetic.

Shulem, are you like this with everybody, or just newbies who you can, possibly, scare off the forum? Well, doesn't matter. I've never put anybody on ignore quite this quickly, and it looks at least that it WORKS on this forum.

[_moksha]

Having a church lose its tax exemption just isn't that scary a threat.

Excellent point. There is no theoretical reason why the Church could not have held out with their apartheid policy even longer than the Union of South Africa. Sure, many nations would have eventually banned Mormon Missionaries and perhaps closed Churchs and Temples, but that was no real reason to stop a peculiar people. I would like to think that the LDS Church was finally worthy enough to receive the "further light and knowledge" that had been available to others for quite some time.

[_Maksutov]

Having a church lose its tax exemption just isn't that scary a threat.

Excellent point. There is no theoretical reason why the Church could not have held out with their apartheid policy even longer than the Union of South Africa. Sure, many nations would have eventually banned Mormon Missionaries and perhaps closed Churchs and Temples, but that was no real reason to stop a peculiar people. I would like to think that the LDS Church was finally worthy enough to receive the "further light and knowledge" that had been available to others for quite some time.

I'm sure that the shrewd moneychangers in the COB could make up any decreases brought on by taxation. Or they could go on buying, er, sponsoring, the politicians who would protect them from that necessity.