FLDS Elder Decries 'Terrorist Acts' in Letter to Bush

Monday May 12, 2008, 10:01 pm
If the FLDS were Jews in Germany, during the time of the Nazis, we would all surely protest. Since this is America, they must be wrong.

Right?

I believe in "Freedom of Religion", but I guess America doesn't.

Monday May 12, 2008, 10:04 pm
The allegations of child molestation are, of course, subject to proof. Innocent until proven guilty is just a saying, after all.

Tuesday May 20, 2008, 10:07 am

The Mormon Church ended their polygamist practices when they decided that they wanted Utah to become a state. They did this both freely and knowingly. That was well over a hundred years ago. Polygamy is illegal in the United States. Freedom of Religion is just that, freedom of religion, it isn't freedom of the laws of the United States.

When the Mormon Church did away with polygamy, those that chose to continue in the ways of the original Mormon Church, left the U.S.with most going to an area in Mexico that sympathized. (Polygamy was illegal in Mexico also, but away from the ever watchful eyes of the original Mormon Church, it wasn't actively pursued as criminal.) The FLDS is not a breakaway sect of the the original Latter Day Saints "Mormon" religion. They freely choose to break the laws and claim "freedom of religion" as a way to do it. They claim affiliation with the original Mormon religion as the basis for their claim. They are no more affiliated with the original Mormons than they are with the Catholic Church.

Thank you Eduardo.

Tuesday May 20, 2008, 11:33 am
Thanks for your wise comment, Marian! Religious practice needs to comply with State laws. Polygamists will need to move across our border, as suggested by Marian. Since human beings are born with approximately equal numbers of both sexes, those men who own (marry?) multiple spouses will leave less opportunity for other males.

Tuesday May 20, 2008, 12:09 pm

That was an excellent comment Eduardo. I hadn't thought of a scientific argument against this practise, but as usual, you see the whole picture.

I would like to add also, that the First Amendment actually starts with....
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

Thank you again Eduardo.

Wednesday May 21, 2008, 9:37 am
It would be disastrous for religions to be linked with politics or deviated from the social norm. For religions there is plenty to expand in the realm of inner space and search for freedom therein.

Thursday May 29, 2008, 12:34 am
We may disagree, but I believe "Freedom of Religion" allows people to be nuts! Otherwise, Christians, who believe in symbolic canibalism and vampirism would surely be arrested!

JC

Thursday May 29, 2008, 12:43 am
It's really quite amazing how quickly my comments about Christians was edited and erased. I guess "Freedom of Speech" is just an expression, after all.

JC

Thursday May 29, 2008, 12:46 am
Let's try again. I believe "Freedom of Religion" allows people to be nuts! Otherwise, those who believe in symbolic canibalism and vampirism would be arrested (or something like that).

JC

Thursday May 29, 2008, 12:50 am
Ok, perhaps I've misjudged care2. It seems my comments were only being evaluated. I see they've been included (at least, for the moment).

Thanks care2.
JC

Thursday May 29, 2008, 11:58 am
James, I would agree with you that all the so called "Freedom of ......" is relative, i.e. different degrees of allowance. There is no absolute freedom on earth. Politicians would not allow absolute freedom of speech, and your neighbors would not tolerate absolute freedom of expression neither.