I couldn't really watch. It made me too angry. Why does the press let them get away with everything?Can you imagine Mormon spokesguy being grilled the way Hillary Clinton was? The interviewer was bending over backward for these two Mormon guys. "Oh you were so oppressed! You were the most oppressed people who ever walked the planet! Faugh! The Jews of the Holocaust can't hold a candle to your sad, sad tale!" "You guys just love love love your families, don't you. It is all about family for you." I got physically ill watching. Wouldn't you love to hear a real journalist ask a few hardball questions? "So if the Mormon Church is so big on family, why do many Mormons get the message they should abandon anyone in their family who doesn't want to be Mormon? Your husband? Divorce him. Your mother. Never speak to her again. Your child? Cut them off. How is that pro-family?" Or someone ask, "Wasn't the early oppression of the Mormon Church brought on by society's rough attempt to protect traditional marriage? Wasn't the real problem that Mormon men insisted on marrying more than one woman?"
Anyone else have something to say? I just hated it because slanted, unbalanced as it was, babied as the Mormons were, they still came off as jerks.
The thing that kept cropping up, was the "church guys" attempt to separate themselves from the FLDS....yet they kept showing old footage of members in Sacrament meeting with tons of kids and women....it didn't quite come off as they'd planned. Allowing the reporter "in the Draper Temple" but no real-time footage, only stock film....was silly. (They don't allow cameras inside.) The whole "interview" was irritating....like two cagey guys were winking and nudging....they looked shady and deceitful...like they were trying to hide something in plain sight.
I couldn't watch all of it. I think it was at the point that they were praying for rain in the temple during a drought and before they got outside, it had started to rain. Then I just wanted to puke, so shut it down.
CLzip:
I couldn't watch all of it. I think it was at the point that they were praying for rain in the temple during a drought and before they got outside, it had started to rain. Then I just wanted to puke, so shut it down.
That was my visceral reaction too. I didn't even take the time to rebutt on the comments page... like big deal... temples are visited before dedication... (although I didn't tour the new one here in Edmonton) OR, sure it's all about family.. the church's way or the highway.
AND, those conference speaking voices... even in a TV interview...
I only watched the first couple of minutes because I wanted to punch my computer screen (watched it online).
They talk about people judging them without knowing the facts... how in the WORLD can they say something like that when they are not being honest with members and investigators??? Facts? Are you kidding me?
If I remember all the names correctly, it was Dan Harris interviewing 2 of the 12 apostles, Ballard and Cook. They tried to make a big deal of it saying this dialogue format had never been done before. They also mentioned the interview was at the request of the LDS Church as they had been getting so much flack over the FLDS and Proposition 8. Maybe that is why Harris was waltzing so nicely with them.
I was highly disappointed Harris did not press the two clones with their position on Prop 8---he did ask them why, as a church that so much emphasizes the importance of family, they would not sanction same-sex marriages. Their response was the "man and a woman" baloney.
So much for the tough questions.That was about it.
I hope the unwitting stooge Harris receives universal condemnation for his cotton-candy handling of the obvious trap set for him by the two GAs.He wound up playing the game on their terms.
They want people to be less timid about "defending" their religion?!
The problem is that members don't have all of the fact TO defend their own religion. If they did have all of the facts then they wouldn't be ABLE to denfed their religion. In fact the majority of them would probably leave!
The leaders of the church can go to the press and spin it any way they want, but that doesn't matter to me. My point is that I know the truth and I can share it with anyone who knows me. Case in point: I have 5 siblings, a mom, former stepmom, dozens of aunts, and uncles, cousins, and friends who are not members. They know I've left the church and they understand why. I've told them that if any of their friends, associates, neighbors, are ever contacted by the missionaries, to contact me and get the straight scoop on the history of the church, doctrine, etc. So as I see it, in the long run it's a losing battle for the leaders of the church.
I think everyone here has the potential to stop the church in it's tracks from converting more members. We don't have to actively go knocking door to door, just let family and friends know that well be happy to help them know the truth about the mormon church.
CLzip:
I couldn't watch all of it. I think it was at the point that they were praying for rain in the temple during a drought and before they got outside, it had started to rain. Then I just wanted to puke, so shut it down.
The funny thing about that is during the drought I also prayed for rain in my own (apostate) way.That was during one of the hardest years of my life, and I'd been reading a novel where a "spiritual master" was teaching his apprentice how to vaporize clouds...and I thought,"I would'nt want to vaporize clouds during this drought, I want to make it rain!"So all day at work I was doing this "spirital experiment" where I would visualize little clouds forming and getting larger and larger, darker and darker and finally letting loose with a massive rainstorm...I was excited as I held onto the vision, and it seemed as though the elements were reacting...as clouds formed outside and got progressively larger and darker...When I got off work it was starting to rain with very large drops.I stopped to talk to another ex-Mormon named Linda and told her what I'd been up to...She was like "Oh, so you ordered this?"...I'm sure I wasnt the only one...Not long after that I was parked at the park in Orem by the police station and I saw a young couple get out of their car and dance around in the rain as it started to pour down harder...Though I was in about the hardest time of my life, I felt euphoric at that moment...
That was a very beautifull day during one of the hardest times in my life...My point is, I dont know if I was really responsible for making it rain...I'm just saying that if my belief in a God is true, it may be that this God is just as likely to listen to the prayer of one "apostate" as he is for two "apostles"...
"Thats all I got to say about that"...(Forrest Gump Quote)
I don't want to rain on anyone's parade here (he he he), but the drought is still on -- whether or not a clever camerman caught a timely drop to punch up a weak storyline. If that was the Mormons' idea -- shame on them for continuing sappiness and irrationality. If it was Nightline's idea, shame on them for buying so easily into Mormon sappiness and irrationality.
If the Mormons can not just make it rain but end the drought, which, ironically enough, is hitting Utah hardest, would they please do so. Not to do so when it is within one's power has become criminal. While they are at it, they can save Australia. And northern California. And the arctic ice caps. And the rain forest. And end the reign of super-storms like Katrina. And...
Tessa:
The GAs can control the weather...(so do we blame them for global warming/freezing/HAARP???)
Why yes, they can control the weather. All the hot air coming out of their mouths and backsides contributes to the greenhouse gasses, causing global warming. Estimates show that the average GA puts out more greenhouse gas than 20 cows. For prophets this number is around 200 cows. For Brigham it was around 600 cows-- Joe was over 1500. If you divide the number of GA cow equivalency emissions by eight (for eight cow wives) you get the minimum number of wives the GA can expect in the next life.
If I remember all the names correctly, it was Dan Harris interviewing 2 of the 12 apostles, Ballard and Cook. They tried to make a big deal of it saying this dialogue format had never been done before. They also mentioned the interview was at the request of the LDS Church as they had been getting so much flack over the FLDS and Proposition 8. Maybe that is why Harris was waltzing so nicely with them.
I was highly disappointed Harris did not press the two clones with their position on Prop 8---he did ask them why, as a church that so much emphasizes the importance of family, they would not sanction same-sex marriages. Their response was the "man and a woman" baloney.
So much for the tough questions.That was about it.
I hope the unwitting stooge Harris receives universal condemnation for his cotton-candy handling of the obvious trap set for him by the two GAs.He wound up playing the game on their terms.
This interview was pathetic. Harris was a pawn and completely bowed to the whim of the church on this one. When the two of them were being interviewed and asked why the dialogue was with two leaders, I thought to myself to cover their ass in case one of them speaks out of line..namely Cook who is the new guy. They're giving Cook some exposure that's all. When the topic of polygamy came up and Ballard said the church doesn't practice it, I was hoping Harris would ask about why the doctrine is still included in the churchs standard works, namely the D&C, but he didn't even blink. This interview as more like a regurgitation of the public relations spin that the church likes to portray about family and how wonderful they all are. What a crock of BS!
Edited to add: I posted the following comments on the ABC site.
If the truth was restored by Joseph Smith, why does the Church not closely mirror what Joseph restored? The statement was made that the Church no longer practices polygamy and hasn't since 1890. That is the first lie. The truth is the practice continued in secret for several more years. Secondly, while the Church today may not openly practice plural marriage, it does however believe in the doctrine as is still recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants considered by the Church to be scripture. Men can marry a women in the temple and later on if the spouse dies, he can remarry another woman in the temple for time and all eternity, meaning celestial plural marriage having more than one wife in the hereafter. Harris could have done a better job of questioning the leaders as to the beliefs and changes in doctrine.
The Mormon church does indeed still practice polygamy, just not earth side. True members would know that men are very much able to be sealed to more than one woman and thus have multiple wive in heaven. The same can not be said for women. They can not have more than one husband here nor in the afterlife.
I encourage everyone who thinks that what some have said to be "lies" to simply head to their precious "LDS official web-site" and research the so called "lies" and you'll find information to back up the truths you call lies! I find it funny you haven't done this yet! If you use it you will find that the "LDS official web-site" will say that Joseph Smith inded "translate" the Book of Mormon by placing his seer stone into a hat, placing his face into the hat to block out light to which letters, words, or sentences would appear to him with the Golden plates nowhere NEAR him. You'll also find that Joseph Smith actually indeed married 14 year old girls as well as married women who already had LIVE husbands aka polyandy and it was done without knowledge to Emma. All of these can be found on the "LDS official web-site" if one actually researches it.
For most members they just throw the site out there never having actually researched the site themselves, LOL.
Did the Mormons buy ABC?! WTF?! I am sure there is a damn mormon on there marking all of the negative comments to the story as "Violations" which means ABC has to remove them and then when they have all of the time read each one and make sure it's within guidelines.
I don't know if folks here follow AmericaBlog. Long story short, it's got massive readership, and it's now running a front page mention of the Nightline segment:
I am surprised mine hasn't been deleted since some of you had that experience. I pointed out the LDS church isn't what it claims, and reading church history makes that clear.
The leaders of the church can go to the press and spin it any way they want, but that doesn't matter to me. My point is that I know the truth and I can share it with anyone who knows me. Case in point: I have 5 siblings, a mom, former stepmom, dozens of aunts, and uncles, cousins, and friends who are not members. They know I've left the church and they understand why. I've told them that if any of their friends, associates, neighbors, are ever contacted by the missionaries, to contact me and get the straight scoop on the history of the church, doctrine, etc. So as I see it, in the long run it's a losing battle for the leaders of the church.
I think everyone here has the potential to stop the church in it's tracks from converting more members. We don't have to actively go knocking door to door, just let family and friends know that well be happy to help them know the truth about the mormon church.
Hope this was on topic with the thread.
Way to go, Wankel! I completely agree--all the PR in the world can't counterract the power of word-of-mouth.That's why the morg puts so much pressure on its members to appear happy (the whole "people are always watching you" BS) and why Utah county is so coked out on prozac. :) But enough ranting. Keep up the good work!
Well, that did it. I happened to check the ABC blog tonight and found a number of posts deleted. I wrote the "ABC Contribute":
RE: Nightline Dan Harris/LDS Church comments
So I am wondering how come so many of the comments critical of the LDS piece have been removed from the blog. They really were rather benign and not offensively articulated.
This is a national news station, not some podunk local dive, and I find it rather ludicrous that rational comments were censored. Why comment at all if the post is ultimately going to be removed? Where is the balanced reflection of the issue in that?
I am also curious why an "ABC News Commentator" finds it necessary to interrupt the flow of discourse with seemingly apologetic inserts.
The problem with "over-abusing" that button, is that the websites get wise....and stop the spurious "reporting" often canceling the member rights of those who keep pushing that cause.
Soon, no deletion will occur.
The problem for the rest of us is that the over-zealous types get a kick out of re-registering under new aliases. By the time they're done playing, the rest of us have grown bored of their antics and gone home. Anyway, it's still ultimately a matter of very poor comment moderation. It's ABC, fer cryin' out loud. You'd think they'd welcome a lively discussion over at their place. Apparently not.
"We are for marriage between a man and a woman because that is the issue that will protect the future of this country and a civilization."
"... this isn't because its directed at another group its for protection of a 5,000 year history of marriage between man and a woman."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is he trying to say the world is 6,000 years old????
Well if Adam and Eve were the first married couple, at the very least that humans have only been around for five or six thousand years.
I caught that too. Assuming their comments were fairly well prepared, I thought this could mean one of two things:
They are starting to seed the well for the new doctrine that we were actually 1,000 years off on the whole millenium thing. So that's why no second coming yet, and "this generation" really meant the last 1,000 year dispensation. ... That clears up a number of sticky doctrines AND gets people to stick it out another 1,000 years!
They are starting to fudge dates so later they can show many instances where the "prophets, seers, and revelators" were not specific with dates. That will clear up a number of sticky doctrines.
It really does seem like TBM's come out of the woodwork on any message board involving mormonism.
They really do seem obsessed with image. They're willing to lie and sweep things under the rug in order to try and win new converts. That's the part to remember. When someone lies, cheats, manipulates, etc. and yet at the same time thinks they are morally superior.....they aren't playing with a full deck of cards.
Perhaps it's not paranoia at all in thinking the mormon church's goal is to take over the world. Or at least America. Can you imagine if one day they start buying up all the major tv and news networks, newspapers, etc.?
Creepy.
I don't think they will be happy until America is one big Provo Utah.
Men and Women have only practiced marriage for 5,000 years....before that, people just hooked up, and nobody knew who the father was. Marriage was a "tribal" dictate, begats and all that....because some dude wanted to be King and prove his lineage back to some big, buff, fighting ancestor.
Which is why Hercules, Zeus, Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed and others have been claimed....and the current wars are going on, to perpetuate that mythology.
