0107e wng mormonism&abortion

8/8/2019 0107e WNG Mormonism&Abortion

1/30

http://www.theamericanview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=950

8th August 2006

Cuchulain Cuauhtemoc

New Member Join Date: Jul 2006Location: Idaho

Posts: 20

Mormonism's Self-Serving Position on Abortion

First, a bit of personal background.

I'm an adopted child, one of six adopted children in my family. I was a young child when Roe was

handed down, and public discussion of abortion prompted me to ask my mother what it was. I was

stunned and horrified almost beyond expression.

"People couldn't really do that!" I exclaimed.

As a young adult I was very active in the pro-life movement, and on one occasion -- while working with

a national pro-life group -- had an audience with a Mormon Church PR official at Church Headquarters

in Salt Lake City. Exceptionally well-dressed and adorned with a very expensive coiffure, this

gentleman spent an hour or so dancing around the issue of whether abortion was "murder," displaying agrace and agility that Fred Astaire would have envied.

Not long afterward, Mormon Apostle Russell Nelson (a surgeon) gave a General Conference talk

dealing with abortion that condemned the practice while explicitly refusing to describe it as "murder" (asI recall, citing Doctrine and Covenants section 42, Nelson referred to it as "like unto" murder).

In more than a few discussions with active LDS, I found that Nelson's talk actually left the impression

that abortion was a relatively venial sin, since it was something for which forgiveness was possible(unlike murder, aka shedding "innocent blood," according to Mormon doctrine).

And that distinction played a significant role a few years later in debates over abortion laws in Idaho and

Utah: As long as The Brethren wouldn't describe it as "murder," and Bishops could prayerfully endorse

it in certain circumstances, most active Mormons were resolutely unwilling to support laws that

48726005.doc Page 1 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=481http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=481


2/30

recognized pre-born children as innocent human beings whose lives must be protected from lethalviolence.

All of this reflects a very important fact about the Mormon view of abortion:

In Mormonism, the question of whether or not abortion is murder is defined entirely by the needs of its

priesthood leadership. This is why Mormon leaders teach a Bishop or other ecclesiastical leader canreceive direction from "God" to permit an abortion. And during the first half-century or so of the

"restored" church, the question of abortion was inextricably bound up with the practice of polygamy.

There's reason to believe that Joseph Smith availed himself of the services of an abortionist to concealhis Nauvoo-era promiscuity. The key figure here is "Dr." John C. Bennett, a professional scoundrel who

arrived in Nauvoo in about 1840 and became an intimate associate of Smith -- even, at one point,

becoming "Co-President" of the Mormon Church (a position later filled by Hyrum Smith).

Bennett was a member of an irregular Masonic lodge distantly connected to the Grand Orient Lodge in

Europe. He was also an abortionist and a practitioner of Smith's doctrine of polygamy, according to anaffidavit filed by none other than Hyrum Smith after Joseph and Bennett had a falling-out:

Before polygamy was practiced openly by the Mormon priesthood leadership, Hyrum testified that Dr.

Bennett was propositioning women: "[Dr. Bennett] endeavored to seduce them, and accomplished hisdesigns by saying it was right; that it was one of the mysteries of God, which was to be revealed when

the people was strong enough in faith to bear such mysteriesthat it was perfectly right to have illicitintercourse with females, providing no one knew it but themselves, vehemently trying them from day to

day, to yield to his passions, bringing witnesses of his own clan to testify that there were suchrevelations and such commandments, and that they were of God; also stating that he would be

responsible for their sins, if there were any, and that he would give them medicine to produceabortions, provided they should become pregnant." (Emphasis added)

- Affidavit of Hyrum Smith. Official History of the Church, Vol. 5, p.71

From various scholarly studies -- particularly LDS Historian Todd Compton's book "In SacredLoneliness" -- we know that Joseph Smith was ardently practicing polygamy during the time frame

referred to by Hyrum. Yet there are very few confirmed instances of women becoming pregnant and

having issue by him. On at least one occasion he hurriedly arranged for a pregnant paramour to be

married to another man. But what happened to the other children who may have been conceived? Andwhy would Joseph treat Bennett with such deference, to the point of making him a full partner in his

scam? What leverage did the abortionist Bennett have with Joseph?

I think this is a case of res ipsa loquitir (the thing speaks for itself).

Here's a link to a very detailed research site on the question of Joseph Smith and polygamy:

Now, this is where it gets interesting:

AFTER Mormon leaders admitted to the practice of polygamy, they insisted that sexual promiscuity was

the inevitable outcome of the "unnatural" practice of monogamy led to illegitimacy, which was coveredup through abortion.

In that self-serving context, 19th-century Mormon leaders, unlike their contemporary successors, had

48726005.doc Page 2 of 30
http://www.i4m.com/think/joseph-smith-polygamy.htmhttp://www.i4m.com/think/joseph-smith-polygamy.htm


3/30

NO difficulty referring to abortion as murder.

Here are some relevant citations (in each case, the emphasis is mine):

From Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2 pg. 77; Mormon Apostle Orson Hyde, October 6, 1854:

"A man, for instance, who has the most riches, the man who can command the most wealth, I do not saythis is the case with all, but it is the case with the majority-they not only have their wives and families

with whom they publicly live and associate, but they also have in secret places their mistresses, whomthey maintain not honorably, but under a cloak as it were. When by their illegitimate connections they

are likely to increase their race, what means do they resort to, to save their credit, to keep their honorunsullied in the eyes of the multitude, to cover up their iniquity, hide their crimes, and smother their

shame ? A skillful practitioner is employed to destroy the embryo offspring. This is murder."

From Journal of Discourses, Vol. 5 pg. 91; President Heber C. Kimball, July 26, 1857:

"The priests of the day in the whole world keep women, just the same as the gentlemen of theLegislatures do. The great men of the earth keep from two to three, and perhaps half-a-dozen private

women. They are not acknowledged openly, but are kept merely to gratify their lusts; and if they get in

the family way, they call for the doctors, and also upon females who practice under the garb of

midwives, to kill the children, and thus they are depopulating their own species. [Voice: "And theirnames shall come to an end."] Yes, because theyshed innocent blood."

Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20 pg. 355; Mormon Prophet John Taylor. Nov. 30th. 1879:

"I feel to proclaim against the vices of the age, whether in this nation or others; for we as a nation are

fast descending as low as the most degenerate and corrupt nations of Europe, and are PRACTICING

INFAMIES which have been the overthrow and ruin of many mighty cities, nations and empires, and

which are now the loathsome, UNNATURAL, DISGUSTING, DAMNING SINS OF

CHRISTENDOM,. The standing law of God is BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY; but these reformersare `SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD.' EVEN THE BLOOD OF INNOCENCE, AND WITH THEIR PRE-NATAL MURDERS and other crimes, are slaying their thousands and tens of thousands with impunity,

to say nothing of that other loathsome, disgusting, filthy institutions of modern Christendom "the social

evil," as well as other infamous practices. WE MUST PROTEST AGAINST FETICIDE,

INFANTICIDE, AND OTHER ABOMINABLE PRACTICES OF CHRISTENDOM BEING FORCEDUPON US, either in the shape of legislative enactment, judicial decision or any other adjunct of so-

called civilization. WE ARE AMERICAN CITIZENS AND ARE NOT YET DEPRIVED OF THEINALIENABLE RIGHTS OF LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS."

It strikes me that those who truly believe that Mormonism in its pure, unalloyed state is the only true

Christian way, they must also believe that monogamy is a leading cause of abortion, and that only

through the universal acceptance of "Celestial and Plural Marriage" -- that is, polygamy -- can thepractice be ended.

This was the thrust of the "inspired" address of Mormon Elder H.W. Naisbitt, delivered in MormonConference on March 8, 1885:

"And if a tree is to be judged by its fruits, what of the whoredoms, the adultery, the fornication, the

prostitution of women in monogamic nations? What of sexual diseases, of blighted lives, of martyred

48726005.doc Page 3 of 30


4/30

women, of little graves dotting every hillside and the resting places of the dead? What offoeticide,

infanticide and abortion? What of the decimated power and numbers of the best society, what of their

liasons [liaisons] and their divorce courts, and other damning features which cling closely to the skirts ofmodern Sodoms, the paragons and promoters of monogamic marriage?"

See here

The Same point was made by Mormon Apostle Franklin D. Richards:

"Wherein consists the crime of bigamy? It is this. When a man takes one wife he covenants to adhere toher until death do them part. He violates that covenant when he takes another woman, unknown to his

wife; he thus practices fraud upon her. This is where the crime comes in. Fraud is perpetrated upon hisown family.... With the Latter-day Saints there is no fraud practiced, the second wife being accepted

with the mutual consent of the first, and in accordance with the revelations of God.... [The] eternity and

plurality of the marriage covenant do not violate the law of God, because He has commanded His people

to accept and obey it. Neither is it and infringement upon the rights of others, neither men nor women,but gives all women an opportunity to become honorable wives and mothers, and thus to shut out what

is politely called the social evil, with all its horrid concomitants of seduction,foeticide [that is,abortion], infanticide and all the train of sexual monogamic evils which haunt and infest Christendom."

See here

Mormon prophet John Taylor took a similar tack in upbraiding the "Gentiles" for condemning Mormonpolygamy:

"They are in a good deal of trouble about it [polygamy], and the religious people are very much

exercised over it. Their pure souls are very much agonized about things of that sort, and about impuritieswhich exist among the Mormons. They cannot see or say anything about the licentiousness, the

corruption, thefoeticide, the infanticide, the rottenness, hypocrisy, lying, fraud and deception that exists

among themselves; but they think we are a very bad people, and in order to purge the nation of so foul a

blot, they must all unite to put us down."

See here.

So -- is the unborn child killed by abortion the victim of murder, or not?

According to Mormon prophets and apostles, that depends on the existing needs of the Mormon Church.

A related question: Is monogamous marriage ordained by God, or a foul apostate practice thatpropagates corrupt and hypocritical vice, including abortion?

That, too, depends on the needs of the Mormon Church.

In Mormonism, there is only one consistent moral principle: Follow the Brethren. Sustain the

Melchezidek Priesthood leadership uber alles. Even if this means slaughtering scores of innocent

48726005.doc Page 4 of 30
http://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_26/JD26-114.htmlhttp://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_26/JD26-336.htmlhttp://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_25/JD25-084.htmlhttp://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_26/JD26-114.htmlhttp://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_26/JD26-336.htmlhttp://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_25/JD25-084.html


5/30

children at Mountain Meadows, or countenancing the slaughter of innocent unborn whose lives aredeemed expendable because of suspected deformities, or the circumstances of their conception.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#2

9th August 2006

angelawittmanActive Member + Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: SW IllinoisPosts: 325

Re: Mormonism's Self-Serving Position on Abortion

When I read the account of the Massacre at Mountain Meadows, I thought my eyes were open to the

depravity of the Mormon religion, but after reading this post, I realize I have yet to fully comprehend theevil of the LDS religion.

Thank you so much for exposing this wickedness. I pray the LORD will keep you safe as you continue

to shine light on these dark secrets of hell, and may He set the captives free who are in bondage to this

hellish religion.

__________________For Christ's Crown and Covenant,

Angela Wittmanhttp://www.angelawittman.net/

Member, American Heritage Partyhttp://www.americanheritageparty.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#5

10th August 2006


New Member

Join Date: Jul 2006

48726005.doc Page 5 of 30
http://www.angelawittman.net/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9440&postcount=5http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9440&postcount=5http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=481http://www.angelawittman.net/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9440&postcount=5http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=481


6/30

Location: IdahoPosts: 20


"My young Padawan"? Apparently the Mormon priesthood now includes the office of Jedi Master,

n'cest pas?

I wonder what the "sign" and accompanying "penalty" would be for the relevant priesthood token.

I eagerly agree that the Mountain Meadows Massacre was of a piece with the atom bombing of Japan bya socialist US government, or the massacre of Indians by the depraved statist US Grant, or the horriblethings done to -- and the even more horrible things done by -- the Aztecs (a subject with which I'm very

familiar) and Mayans.

A mind so unmarked by learning and so inhospitable to reason that it cannot discern between OldTestament warfare and the slaughter, through ambush, of unarmed emigrant children at Mountain

Meadows represents a considerable human tragedy.

Rather than permitting you to divert this conversation off on a fruitless tangent, I'll simply say this

much:

One of Mormonism's most obnoxious doctrinal errors is its insistence on "restoring" things that havebeen transcended by the new covenant, such as the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood, the whole concept of a"prophet" akin to Moses, and the ethos under which the wars of the Exodus were fought.

Mormonism seeks to restore that which Christ transcended, and put us in bondage to men who presume

to make themselves prophets. This explains, in large measure, the overt authoritarianism and (currently)latent violence inherent in the religion.

But once again, as is your wont, you're changing the subject. One more small matter before we return to

the previous topic, already in progress:

I was not excommunicated. My wife and I and our five children resigned from the Mormon Church ofour own volition.

Admitting that one had fallen prey to a deception, and liberating one's self from it, are not symptoms of

weakness; persisting in error simply to avoid making such an admission is hardly a sign of strength.

You might find it profitable to reflect on that principle -- and act on it, should God give you the courage

to do so, as I pray He will.

48726005.doc Page 6 of 30


7/30

Your comments about the transmigration of the murdered baby's spirit are similar to remarks I heardmany other Mormons make when discussing abortion. They are, if you'll pardon the expression, quite a

revelation.

What you apparently fail to recognize is that 1) you're contradicting the "revealed" truth spoken by

Joseph Smith that the doctrine of transmigration of souls is of the devil (he got that one right, an

example of the "broken clock" principle in action); and, more importantly -- and pay attention! -- 2) thesame argument can be used to justify any abortion, for any reason, since the child wasn't really

"killed."

What you've outlined is a 100% pro-abortion argument.

What on earth were you doing in a party that, prior to its accomodation of your prejudices, was a 100%

pro-life organization?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#6

10th August 2006

J. Glenn Ferrell

Active Member + Join Date: Apr 2006Location: Idaho

Posts: 477


48726005.doc Page 7 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9459&postcount=6http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9459&postcount=6http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=383http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9459&postcount=6http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=383


8/30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sovereign

If I was a Calvinist I doubt I would care since nothing I would do makes a difference one way or theother. I could be an abortionist and a murderer or even a mass murderer and if I had been saved I

could not fall and if I was not saved I could not do anything to make a difference. I would be eithergoing to Heaven or Hell and nothing I did would matter. Since the Calvinists also believe that most

unborn babies are already damned to Hell what does it matter anyway under that belief system?

If I was an atheist I would be just like a Calvinist. What would it matter? There would be no reason notto just do whatever I wanted as long as I liked it. There is no reason in doing or not doing anything as

an atheist except whatever makes THIS life easier.

When I point out the false doctrines of Mormons, I quote from their official literature. I make everyeffort to represent what they actually believe and say. Still, I'm likely to be accused of being "anti-

Mormon," which means saying or writing anything critical, false or true, about the LDS.

Now, here, we have this distortion of Calvinists from one calling for fair representation. At least read,

quote and refer to what Calvinist actually believe and teach. Our doctrine is there in our Confessions.

Try the Westminster Standards or the Canons of Dordt; you may find them on the Internet. Until then,you exhibit your ignorance.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#7

10th August 2006

SWhiteman

Forum Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005Location: Maryland, My Maryland

Posts: 489

48726005.doc Page 8 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9476&postcount=7http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9476&postcount=7http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=26http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9476&postcount=7http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=26


9/30


Quote:


If your prophets did it then mine can too without criticism.

Your prophets hands are bloodier than my prophets hands so you prove nothing. If you anti-

Mormons ever placed the rules you try to place on us on your own prophets and leaders, in yourscriptures, they are worse than ours at every level of what you claim is a moral or righteous life.

Your scriptures fail, your prophets fail, your beliefs fail. That is why I am never shocked by anything

in LDS history (false or not) because Christian history always has the equivalent so-called evil.

I thought you guys were Christians? So why the distinction between your prophets and ours? Besides, if

your god and our God are the same, but we don't acknowledge the bloody prophet Smith, isn't your

god's hand bloodier?

You will have your political victory. Good for you. It will come falling down when the Christ determinsto dismantle it. I hope you are not in the rubble when it all collapses.

Reformed Christians believe that you are responsible for your actions, even every idle word. You'll have

a lot to answer for in your day of destruction.

I know I can't persuade you with argument -- since God has hardened your heart and mind. So Iencourage others to stop trying. Acknoweldge Chris for what he is -- a son of Belial and worshiper of a

demon. Pray for him, but let's stop conversing, because Reformed Christians know conversation mattersless than prayer.

__________________

Let us also learn that nothing is less consistent than to punish heavily the crimes whereby

mortals are injured, whilst we connive at the impious errors or sacrilegious modes of

worship whereby the majesty of God is violated.

John Calvin

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#9

48726005.doc Page 9 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9484&postcount=9http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9484&postcount=9http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9484&postcount=9


10/30

10th August 2006

angelawittman

Active Member +

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: SW Illinois

Posts: 325


Dear Mr. Sovereign,

You must suspect that I have been far too busy reading how to be a good Calvinist than to keep up with

science fiction movies... So, I went to this link, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedifor a definition of aPadawan (?)

It is true that you did take time to teach me about the political concept of liberty, and I am very grateful.

However, your religious beliefs have warped your mind. I am sorry to say this, but someone needs to.An example of this is your warped explanation for the exception of murder via abortion for babies

conceived by rape and/or incest.__________________

For Christ's Crown and Covenant,Angela Wittman

http://www.angelawittman.net/Member, American Heritage Party

http://www.americanheritageparty.org/

48726005.doc Page 10 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=42http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedihttp://www.angelawittman.net/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=42http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedihttp://www.angelawittman.net/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/


11/30

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#12

10th August 2006

angelawittman

Active Member +

Join Date: Aug 2005Location: SW Illinois

Posts: 325


Dear Mr. Sovereign,

You have a pretty good concept of political liberty, but you do not have liberty in real life as you are

chained to a dead religion. You claim to be a freedom fighter? Then please cast off the dead men chainswhich Joesph Smith advocated and Satan uses to drag rebellious men to hell with. No, I do not need an

exorcism as I have true liberty which is only found in Christ Jesus... I am saved by grace through faith inJesus Christ and the work He did on the cross.

Do you remember you once told me that you would be the friend to tell me if I were getting too fat for

my dress? Well, I am the friend to tell you that you have been misled and deceived by the false teachingof the LDS church and all the rebellious Mormon men who have been making false claims to be

prophets of God.

48726005.doc Page 11 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9488&postcount=12http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=42http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9488&postcount=12http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=42


12/30

They are leading you and others to hell -- a place of torment.

May God have mercy on your soul.

__________________

For Christ's Crown and Covenant,

Angela Wittmanhttp://www.angelawittman.net/

Member, American Heritage Partyhttp://www.americanheritageparty.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#13

11th August 2006



Posts: 20


From the miasma of self-enraptured delusion, Sovereign writes:

Quote:


48726005.doc Page 12 of 30
http://www.angelawittman.net/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9498&postcount=13http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=481http://www.angelawittman.net/http://www.americanheritageparty.org/http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9498&postcount=13http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=481


13/30

The Mountain Meadows Massacre was self-defense to anyone that reads the whole story. Your view is

one of the Mormon haters. Of course you disagree.

Your diction is as shaky as your reasoning, but if I take your meaning correctly, you seem to be saying

that objecting to the murder of innocent children by Mormon priesthood leaders makes me "one of the

Mormon haters."

You also seem to be saying that the murder of the children among the Fancher party at Mountain

Meadows was in some sense an act of self-defense.

Would you care to elaborate? I make that request not in the anticipation of a rational response, giventhat the capacity to offer one clearly does not reside within you, but out of curiosity to see to what

depths you're willing to descend in the defense of child-killing -- which is, after all, the subject of this

thread, however assiduously you seek to change it.

You continue to emit a squid-like ink of directionless abuse, hoping, perhaps, to divert our attention

from the fact that you've not answered my question. Here is its again:

Your belief that the spirits of aborted children transmigrate and are born to other mothers effectively

justifies any abortion for any reason. It is a 100% pro-abortion position. Why, then, have you entrenched

yourself in what had been a 100% pro-life party?

Quote:Originally Posted by SOVEREIGN

And YES the Mormons have secret spaceships filled with Jedi Masters waiting just behind the moon tocome in and sweep the world clean and establish a Jedi Theocracy. That is what they learn in the

temples now. You have been gone for years so you would not know.

You're really in a bad spot here, Sovereign baby, since Mormonism is so absurd on its face as to be

parody-proof. Nothing spawned by the fecund imagination of Lucas, Tolkien, or L. Ron Hubbard cancompete with the tales spun by Ol' Joe about the Lords of Kolob, or the Quakeresque Moon-Men, or themighty "Zelph, the White Lamanite" (stronger than He-Man!), or Brigham's insights about the

inhabitants of the Sun.

Besides, in the Star Wars universe, the Mormons would be the Sith.

In an atavistic display of pure, unalloyed Mormon racism, Sovereign belches:


It appears you have returned to the roots of the curse placed upon your ancestors and become a dark

and loathsome person. How sad when so many of your tribe are coming to the Lord by the millions.Return to your vomit Lamanite. You have embraced your father's ways instead of Christ's ways. I will

be eating at Christ's table in the end and sit, as He promised, on His throne.

The only "throne" you'll ever occupy is the one on which you sit twice a day extruding new Mormon

revelations. I hope when you're finished you'll crack a window and light a match.

I am not a Lamanite, nor is anyone else. NOBODY is joining the Mormon church "by the millions,"

48726005.doc Page 13 of 30


14/30

since it is in a state of contraction: There are two Mormon apostles, Dallin Oaks (about whom moreanon) and Jeffrey Holland, who have been assigned to the Philippines and Argentina/Chile, respectively,

for the purpose of shutting down surplus "stakes." This is happening, by the way, in regions populatedby supposed descendants of the "Lamanites."

When looking on your adopted Hispanic daughter, do you see in her complexion the residue of an

alleged curse? Or has she miraculously been rendered "white and delightsome"?


One last thing. Do you pay income taxes? Do you have a Social Security Number? Of course you do soyou voluntarily support all the things you say you oppose. Hypocrite.

We've already been there and done that, Sovereign, and I've explained on another thread why I'm not

going to indulge your adolescent need to assert moral primacy by way of that non sequitir.

But while we're on the subject....

Why do you belong to a church whose "inspired" leaders collaborate with the IRS in flushing out tax

resisters? In my files I have a photocopy of a letter from Apostle Dallin Oaks to an IRS official in

Odgen pledging the church's full cooperation in that regard.

I would call this "food for thought," had you displayed any appetite for the same.

But in any case: There is a question pending (see above). Answer it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#14

11th August 2006

SWhitemanForum Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: Maryland, My Maryland

Posts: 489

48726005.doc Page 14 of 30


15/30


Quote:Originally Posted by Sovereign

I have no victory Scott. I wanted you guys to win. That would have caused a split and many stateswould have gone with us to form a new party. That is what I wanted but I LOST. Janine and Bill

wanted to save the party, not me. But God did not want that so now I must tuck my tail between my legsand do all I can to support this party. I wanted to work with the likes of you as much as you wanted to

work with the likes of me.

But we both lost so maybe we should throw out our pride and dislike for one another and work

together. I want to build not spend forever with infighting.

I have been debating with Calvinists for decades. In the end they are responsible for nothing. Their

works are all filthy rags and all righteousness is the work of God and they have nothing they can sayabout it. They are saved by grace alone and faith without works is alive. Unborn babies are either

damned to Hell before they breath air or are saved even if they become as evil as a Hitler and cannot

fall.

You may have a different belief but that would not surprise me as there are so many so-called

Christian faiths that they can believe anything. Each congregation has its own peculiarities. The LDS,Catholics, Eastern Orthodoz and Church of England are the only ones with real leaders and

established doctrine. The rest are left to private interpratation of the many versions of the Bible andwhichever one they choose at the time.

Chris:

As for your legal maxims, perhaps they are true for men, but God is not trapped in a logic box.

Second, I don't want to, nor will I, debate or argue with you -- to what end? You know nothing about

Calvinism other than what anti-Christians have alleged against us. Frankly, I know next to nothing aboutMormonism. I don't study counterfeit religions. You think you've debated Calvinists? You are probably

fighting light-weights, and you, a heavy-weight, of course destroy them. They are probably as ignorantabout their professed religion as they are about yours.

Further, if you want to throw in my face that all to many professed-Calvinists aren't, some claim private

interpretation, and there is no system of doctrine in our Churches, which are a mess. If so, so what?Christianity/Calvinism does have a system of doctrine, Protestantism does not provide for autonomous

interpretation, and our standard in points of debate is the Bible in the original tongues -- not the KJB vs.NIV, vs. Geneva, vs. NASB, vs. whatever else you like.

48726005.doc Page 15 of 30


16/30

I guess if you're claiming I'm not a Calvinist, that's something else, but define the terms properly, andyou'd discover that I am, and/or strive to be by the Grace of Christ. But I won't debate predestination,

works, responsibility, or anything else with a hardened-Mormon. Debate is futile. Like war, it onlydisarms opponants, for a while. If you beat me in debate, and? Am I convinced of Mormonism? If I beat

you, and? Are you convinced of Calvinism? I don't want you to be persuaded of the rightness of

Calvinism, since that would put my powers of persuasion, and your freedom of choice, in control.

I offer myself, to you, Chris, who I have 1.) never met, 2.) harboured anger toward for your false-

statements about Christianity, to converse -- entirely free from public scrutiny or oversight, about theChristian Gospel. Anything said can and will be kept out of public sight. You will quickly learn that I

am not a Church-defender, nor an Americanist. I do not believe our nation's history is one ofChristianity, rather apostacy. I feel no guilt for the slaughter of Indians, the nuking of Japanese cities, or

the present evils in Iraq, because my country had nothing to do with them -- this bloody America,

against-Christ, did those things, but the Kingdom of God did not. If you are interested, let me know.

Otherwise, you're just wasting your time.

__________________

Let us also learn that nothing is less consistent than to punish heavily the crimes wherebymortals are injured, whilst we connive at the impious errors or sacrilegious modes of


John Calvin

Last edited by SWhiteman : 11th August 2006 at 10:16.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#18

13th August 2006



Posts: 20

48726005.doc Page 16 of 30


17/30



NO. Your words demonstrate your heart.No less than what Moses did and he was a prophet of God. Ifyou can justify the Bible then I can justify the acts of just about anyone or anything. Now if you are

saying that Moses was not a prophet of God and was under the direction of God when he slaughteredall those babies then write back. In fact the MMM is very close to the discription of what Moses

did.The rest was too boring to coment on. Just more spew from a septic tank of hate that dwells where

your heart once was just like all that leave the church due to a lack of faith in Christ.

First of all, be clear about the fact that you're not controlling the terms of our conversation or defining

its premises.

You know less about my heart than you do about most things, which is to say that you know literally

less than nothing about it. But the consistency with which you focus on the subject of sewage (a topic

you introduced, let's not forget) is highly suggestive of your own. After all, the Lord instructed us that"... out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh" (Luke 6:45).

Like any other spoiled child caught in a lie, you persist in avoiding the question before us:

Your belief that the spirits of aborted children migrate to other mothers for birth justifies, in principle,

any abortion for any reason. It is a 100% pro-abortion argument. Why, then, did you inflict yourself onwhat had previously been a 100% pro-life party?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#19

13th August 2006

48726005.doc Page 17 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9644&postcount=19http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9644&postcount=19


18/30

SWhiteman

Forum Moderator

Join Date: Aug 2005Location: Maryland, My Maryland

Posts: 489


Chris:

So I got your answer, then. You will be undone at some point.__________________


mortals are injured, whilst we connive at the impious errors or sacrilegious modes ofworship whereby the majesty of God is violated.

John Calvin

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

14th August 2006

catholicresistence

Excommunicated Join Date: Aug 2006

Location: American Union (formerly, USA)

Posts: 140

48726005.doc Page 18 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=26http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=517http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=26http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=517


19/30


Quote:Originally Posted by SWhiteman

Chris:So I got your answer, then. You will be undone at some point.

CHris, in other words-he is bored with you and may be verging on banning you for criticizing him.

One thing, I bet Scott is a tough one in a court room!!!(yes, that is a compliment)

Last edited by catholicresistence : 14th August 2006 at 01:31.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#22

14th August 2006

catholicresistenceExcommunicated Join Date: Aug 2006

Location: American Union (formerly, USA)Posts: 140

48726005.doc Page 19 of 30


20/30



I do not know what you are Scott. You have never said, "I am a ..." to me. Are you a Calvinist? I am a

Christian.

And if you are a Calvinist you cannot allow for freedom. I understand that completely.

Scott is former Catholic, now Reformed. As is Peroutka, but more rejectful of Catholicism thanMichael.

(no, I am not being mean, just an observation. Scott is NOW what he is, whether anyone likes it or not.

IT is what it is). His quote at end of posts is telling of belief.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#23

14th August 2006

chatterboxThe American View Webmaster Join Date: Jul 2005

Posts: 260

48726005.doc Page 20 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9703&postcount=23http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=1http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=1http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9703&postcount=23http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=1


21/30


Quote:Originally Posted by catholicresistence

CHris, in other words-he is bored with you and may be verging on banning you for criticizing him.We don't ban for critical comments. This type of post (perhaps is jest; hard to say) is more likely to irk

the admin than a critical post, because, being new here, you more than likely have not been around

enough bannings to know why. I've left most banned as heads on pikes so that it would be possible to

discern why someone was banned...including leaving notes for you specifically.

Chris won't be banned because "he is "critical of us"" - he, would most likely, however be banned forthe following reason: "That he did not fulfill the purpose of this forum, which is to comment on 'secular'

matters from a distinctly Reformed, that is to say Biblical, perspective."

Agreeing with us isn't the criteria for membership; owning the opinions we have is not the criteria;

honestly looking and questioning is, however, necessary for those who do not already hold to the

Reformed opinions...

cbx

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#24

14th August 2006

SWhiteman

48726005.doc Page 21 of 30


22/30


Posts: 489


Quote:

Originally Posted by catholicresistence

CHris ... you ... may be verging on banning you for criticizing him.

That's the snitty stuff that does hurt my feelings.

NO ONE has been banned for criticism -- but criticize for crying out loud, and down with the baselessaccusations. Bring something criticalto the table, and we'll feast.

Converse, even antagonistically, and please stop with the conjecturing on another's feelings or intended

course of action.

The alleged "Sovereign" is here to get banned. He admitted such in a private email. You are hear to besnitty. What need have we for either of you?

__________________




John Calvin

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#25

48726005.doc Page 22 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9705&postcount=25http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9705&postcount=25


23/30

14th August 2006

SWhiteman


Posts: 489


Quote:

Originally Posted by catholicresistenceScott is former Catholic, now Reformed. As is Peroutka, but more rejectful of Catholicism than

Michael.

Source? How do you know I was Catholic?

Source? How do you conclude I'm "rejectful" of Catholicism?

Not saying either statement is false. I'm trying to encourage you to put some meat on your otherwisevacant assertions.

__________________




John Calvin

48726005.doc Page 23 of 30


24/30

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#26

14th August 2006

SWhiteman

Forum Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: Maryland, My MarylandPosts: 489



Sorry but I do not understand your answer.

Did you want to discuss religion on the private side or not. I thought that is what you wereconsidering.

I'm not interesting in discussion "religion" in public or private. I was considering it until you insulted myoffer by claiming I was your fool who walked into your trap. Perhaps I wasn't a fool, but a willing

participant, like a sheep being led to the slaughter. That's what Christians do. Christians do our thing inopen, not in a corner. We do it honestly, which is why I advocated making the Tampa Resolution an

anti-Mormon resolution and not a "for the babies" resolution.

You know my position because it is open and my motives are clear. I cannot know yours because you areduplicitous dissembler and a deceiver. I will not have a conversation on those terms.

48726005.doc Page 24 of 30


25/30

I am interested in Christ's advance of the Gospel, which will rail-road over you and your manly-kingdom. You are determined to remain a Mormon, so what use is a conversation about religion with

you?__________________




John Calvin

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#27

14th August 2006

SWhiteman


Posts: 489


Quote:

Originally Posted by catholicresistence

One thing, I bet Scott is a tough one in a court room!!!

48726005.doc Page 25 of 30


26/30

With all due respect, this is the type of stuff that I object too as well. Vain flattery is as offensive to meas vain criticism. Put meat on the bone.

For example, when you criticize (or preferrably flatter ) me, do it like you haveman-handled the alleged Sovereign in this very post. If you disagree with me, beat me down with

argument -- not snits -- and certainly not praise.

__________________



worship whereby the majesty of God is violated.John Calvin

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#28

14th August 2006

catholicresistenceExcommunicated Join Date: Aug 2006

Location: American Union (formerly, USA)

Posts: 140

48726005.doc Page 26 of 30


27/30


28/30

catholicresistence

Excommunicated Join Date: Aug 2006Location: American Union (formerly, USA)

Posts: 140


Quote:

Originally Posted by SWhiteman

With all due respect, this is the type of stuff that I object too as well. Vain flattery is as offensive to me

as vain criticism. Put meat on the bone.

For example, when you criticize (or preferrably flatter ) me, do it like you

have man-handled the alleged Sovereign in this very post. If you disagree with me, beat me down withargument -- not snits -- and certainly not praise.

Not vain, you can be a tough verbal spar-er. You assume I flatter or snit? Just making an observation

counselor.

If I give a compliment, I feel it is well earned.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#30

48726005.doc Page 28 of 30
http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=517http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9713&postcount=30http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/member.php?u=517http://opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch11992/showpost.php?p=9713&postcount=30


29/30

14th August 2006

catholicresistence

Excommunicated Join Date: Aug 2006Location: American Union (formerly, USA)

Posts: 140


Quote:

Originally Posted by SWhiteman

That's the snitty stuff that does hurt my feelings.

NO ONE has been banned for criticism -- but criticize for crying out loud, and down with the baseless

accusations. Bring something critical to the table, and we'll feast.

Converse, even antagonistically, and please stop with the conjecturing on another's feelings or

intended course of action.

48726005.doc Page 29 of 30


30/30

The alleged "Sovereign" is here to get banned. He admitted such in a private email. You are hear to be

snitty. What need have we for either of you?

See below to chatterbox. BTW-as to your former faith, I do NOT post privately discussed info

generally.

0107e wng mormonism&abortion

Documents