Yet more Fun With Mormons!

[theweaselking]

Mormons from Mormon Child-Rape Cult speak to press, insist that it's okay because they didn't KNOW that raping children wasn't okay.

For bonus points:

A man who gave his name as Edson and told Rodriguez he has four children, from almost four-years-old to 11, took issue with the view that youngsters are abused in the compound.

"I think they have a very false perception of the way we live because we're closed mouthed," Edson said. "They assume a lot of things that aren't there."

Asked by Rodriguez if he was saying older men don't marry adolescent girls in the compound, Edson replied, "I didn't say that at all"

Comments

[crazy-alexy.livejournal.com]

I notice it's only "I miss my child." No word on their wives or any other parts of their families.

[kafziel.livejournal.com]

Well, yeah. It's the baby that's important, not the babyhole.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

...apart from the fact that the *adult* wives are free, and still with the husbands?

Thing #1: All the people who got taken by the CPA are children.
Thing #2: Corrolary to #1, Everyone over 18 is *not* in the care of the CPA
Thing #3: Calling one of said children your "wife" means that you are admitting to a crime in the state of Texas.

Therefore, the only missing people are "children", therefore all the fathers can say is how much they miss their children. Their wives are not missing, or else they're admitting to a crime. Since they are admitting to no crime, no wives are missing.

[corruptedjasper.livejournal.com]

How long has this compound been in operation? And any smaller compounds elsewhere but similarly cut off from the real world? I wouldn't be surprised if it's entirely possible for the younger ines to indeed have grown up ignorant of the idea that <18 = hands off.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

This one: 1994. The other ones, including at least one entire town (Colorado City, Utah): more than half a century.

[corruptedjasper.livejournal.com]

It's in Arizona, according to pikiwedia, but, yeah. Huh. This thing's bigger than I'd thought so far.

Okay, yeah, I can definitely think there are young adults -- and even not so young adults -- there that may never have been exposed to the ideas of the sane world.

[gothpanda.livejournal.com]

Firstly, that interview is ultra-creepy. I have seen several parts of it, and the men are barely less zombie-like than the women-folk. One of the men said that they were not aware that it was illegal for underage girls to marry older men, and that he has taught his children to be law-abiding and "morally clean" (a disturbing phrase that was repeated several times), but then literally seconds later he said that if a girl of fourteen wanted to live her life that way, could anyone stop her?

Well, duh, YES. She's a child. You could, you know, NOT HAVE SEX WITH HER, no matter how much she begs.

Secondly, these people are not Mormons. The Mormon Church disavowed the polygamist practice a long time ago. I'm currently dating a (really naughty) Mormon, and he and his friends and family are disgusted, and whenever anyone refers to the polygamists as "Mormons" they get really defensive. The media here has actually been really good about not equating the two--there are Mormons and then there are polygamist sects, who might use the Book of Mormon but were technically excommunicated.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

"Mormon" is a colloquial term for a member of a church that follows the Latter Day Saints theology. To wit, that the Joseph Smith was a prophet, that the Book of Mormon is true, and that further prophets have followed Joseph Smith and expanded on his teachings in accordance with the revelations God has sent them.

These guys believe all that. The only difference between them and the SLC Church of JC of LDS is that they have a disagreement about who one of the subsequent prophets really was.

These guys? Are Mormons.

Arguing that they're not Mormons is like trying to argue that Southern Baptists aren't Baptists, or that Lutherans aren't Protestants, or that Protestants aren't Christians.

He can be disgusted all he wants - it's a natural reaction to this, after all - and if he gets defensive, so be it. His not wanting to admit he shares a religion with these jackasses doesn't change that he shares a religion with these jackasses, he's just from a different sect.

[gothpanda.livejournal.com]

LOL, I see your point. Is an excommunicated Catholic still a Catholic then? I am operating from the assumption that no, they're not, but if they are, then technically all Anglicans and Greek Orthodox Christians and Lutherans, etc. are still Catholics.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

Funny you should mention that - there's an American group that feels that Vatican II was a heresy, and that there was no legitimate Pope between 1958 and 1998 when they elected their own. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_Catholic_Church)

So yeah. They're Catholics. They believe the same things that Catholics do, they hold the same history that the Catholics do, *they call themselves Catholics* - they're just a splinter group.

The same thing happens with the Protestants - they're all still Christians, even the Baptists, who've eliminated Jesus from their teachings entirely, because they still *claim* they're doing what Jesus told them to.

[jerril]

I don't see how excommuniation could change your religion. The Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox, and Lutherans etc are not Catholics because the Catholics as a (semi-splintered) group have the Pope, shared traditions, and history in common. They also all call themselves Catholic, wheras the Anclicans, Eastern Orthodox churches, and Lutherans et al don't call themselves Catholic and have moderately little in common with the Catholics that they don't have in common with the rest of the various Christian groups.

I think a more accurate question would be "Is an excommunicated Christian still a Christian then?"

To which I still answer "Yes, of course. Unless they excommunicated folks start saying 'Well, fine! If you don't want me I'll go worship Zeus then.'" or otherwise change their dogma and practises.

Just because you don't (or can't) go to church every Sunday doesn't stop you from being Christian, after all.

[gothpanda.livejournal.com]

I more or less agree with you both, I'm just making a point here. If a religion doesn't recognize someone as a member, it depends upon your point of view whether they are still a member. To mainstream Mormons who are not polygamist, it is an insult to call these sects Mormon, just as a Catholic might be offended if we called someone who was excommunicated a Catholic.

And as for Anglicans, Lutherans, and Orthodox, there are those who believe that, even though they're not Papists, they are still Catholic. That's a mind-bender, innit?