Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

[Michael]

I found this quite interesting: Warren Jeffs: another polygamous 'Prophet'


HILDALE, Utah (AP) -- He has been described as a prophet, a religious zealot and a dangerous extremist. Warren Jeffs, the 50-year-old leader of a polygamous sect, last week landed on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list alongside such figures as Osama bin Laden.

Head of a renegade Mormon splinter group called the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Jeffs is accused of arranging marriages between underage girls and older men. He is charged with child sexual abuse in Arizona and being an accomplice to statutory rape in Utah.

Jeffs exercises extraordinary control over 10,000 or so followers who live mostly in the side-by-side towns of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Arizona. Church dissidents say that during Jeffs' four-year rule, the number of underage marriages -- some to girls as young as 13 (f*cking discusting) -- escalated into the hundreds. Families have been fractured in the process.


This basically sums up most humanity for the last 5000 years. A sexual pervert talks to god and the sheeple follow. Sure enough OooooHooooHooooo as luck would have it, God wants ole' Warren-boy to have himself as many young wives as he can persuade mothers to give him. Can you imagine - 10,000 f*cking zealots in 4 years? If this were 2000 years ago and Warren-boy were able to mobilize these 10,000 zealots into an army and then if “God” told Warren to purge the Earth of non-Warrenists and went off and sacked various defenceless cities. Well there you are. Humanity in a nut shell.

Some things change and some things stay the same. It’s really quite scary that Religious sheeple can be so easily led like .... sheep :bugeye: OK maybe not. But, we scientists need to find out exactly what this meme is doing to people. I mean – 10,000 in 4 years?!?! Crazy. No actually Scary. Its a f*cking virus.

And people wonder why we’re atheists?


Michael

 

[Jenyar]

It's more like 10 000 after 150 years. Mormonism's founder, Joseph Smith, was polygamous (he had between 33 and 48 wives - the youngest was 14). The Fundmentalist church are those who still hold to the beliefs on which Mormonism was originally built.

 

[Confutatis]

Another atheist on a mission to save the world... yawn....

Is there more to this forum than silly threads like this?

 

[SkinWalker]

It would seem that the world needs saving from religion. Feigned tedium doesn't change the fact that the OP is informative. Your attempt at derision, however, just shows your willingness to defend superstitious nonsense even at the expense of the pediphiles and rapists of the Mormon church.

Religion and the religious tendencies of humanity are, indeed, a subject that needs inquiry. In this day and age, communication is instantaneous and globalization has shrunk the world with regard to travel, communication, economics, etc. Religion is dangerous enough by itself, but if a cult like that of Jim Jones' were to emerge today, the consequences could have far more reaching effect than a few believers drinking kool-aid in Guayana.

Understanding what drives people to believe the nonsense they do might give insight in how to address it in the future. Of course, believers like Confutatis will object to inquiry, since this threatens the very nature of religious superstitions. It violates the taboo of questioning religion and not simply respecting the beliefs of others. But these beliefs we are ignoring cause followers to drink poison kool-aid, commit suicide for comets, drive rental trucks full of explosives to federal buildings, release poison gas in crowded subways, bomb and assassinate physicans who perform abortion, and fly planes into public places.

 

[Confutatis]

It would seem that the world needs saving from religion.

The world needs saving from idiots, and there are lots of atheist idiots. Atheism is not the cure.

Feigned tedium doesn't change the fact that the OP is informative.

What bores me is this constant theme of "the world will be a better place without religion". It's just a mindless mantra. I have yet to see someone address the fact that the atheist Stalin was responsible for one of the greatest, if not *the* greatest genocides in human history.

Your attempt at derision, however, just shows your willingness to defend superstitious nonsense even at the expense of the pediphiles and rapists of the Mormon church.

My attempt at derision is aimed at the unfounded, unsubstantiated, ridiculous notion that religion is the cause of pedophilia and rape.

Religion and the religious tendencies of humanity are, indeed, a subject that needs inquiry.

Couldn't agree more, except you are not doing it. You are just bashing it without providing any intellectual argument whatsoever.

Religion is dangerous enough by itself, but if a cult like that of Jim Jones' were to emerge today, the consequences could have far more reaching effect than a few believers drinking kool-aid in Guayana.

And what do you really care if a few lunatics kill themselves?

Understanding what drives people to believe the nonsense they do might give insight in how to address it in the future.

Sorry, it has already been done. "Religion is the opium of the masses". We all know where such intelligent analysis leads.

Of course, believers like Confutatis will object to inquiry

You are so full of prejudice. You don't even know me.

It violates the taboo of questioning religion and not simply respecting the beliefs of others. But these beliefs we are ignoring cause followers to drink poison kool-aid...

I'm all for questioning religion, except I think it should be done in an open-minded way. You, on the other hand, only support an inquiry into religion which confirms your prejudices about it.

 

[Provita]

It would seem that the world needs saving from religion. Feigned tedium doesn't change the fact that the OP is informative. Your attempt at derision, however, just shows your willingness to defend superstitious nonsense even at the expense of the pediphiles and rapists of the Mormon church.

Religion and the religious tendencies of humanity are, indeed, a subject that needs inquiry. In this day and age, communication is instantaneous and globalization has shrunk the world with regard to travel, communication, economics, etc. Religion is dangerous enough by itself, but if a cult like that of Jim Jones' were to emerge today, the consequences could have far more reaching effect than a few believers drinking kool-aid in Guayana.

Understanding what drives people to believe the nonsense they do might give insight in how to address it in the future. Of course, believers like Confutatis will object to inquiry, since this threatens the very nature of religious superstitions. It violates the taboo of questioning religion and not simply respecting the beliefs of others. But these beliefs we are ignoring cause followers to drink poison kool-aid, commit suicide for comets, drive rental trucks full of explosives to federal buildings, release poison gas in crowded subways, bomb and assassinate physicans who perform abortion, and fly planes into public places.

I believe in God, God has no specific form and cannot be fathomed and cannot be explained fully for God is infinite. All who believe in a god believe in the real God, just in their own finite interpretation so they may feel closer with God. All who deny God choose to do so and are no bad people. They are not damned, only frowned upon for not believing, but dont deserve eternal suffering, only some type of penance.

God will judge everyone at their death to see if they were Just or not, not according to man-made laws.

Now explain to me, how is this religion I speak of a burden upon this world that must be erradicated?

The world needs saving from idiots, and there are lots of atheist idiots. Atheism is not the cure.

Agreed.

 

[(Q)]

The world needs saving from idiots, and there are lots of atheist idiots. Atheism is not the cure.

Your statement infers what exactly, that atheists are idiots because they don't believe in the same god as you or they are idiots because they're under-educated? Both would be fallacious, nonetheless.

What bores me is this constant theme of "the world will be a better place without religion". It's just a mindless mantra. I have yet to see someone address the fact that the atheist Stalin was responsible for one of the greatest, if not *the* greatest genocides in human history.

Other theists have also come bleating about Stalin, only to be educated about Stalin and finding out he was a theist who robbed trains. Eventually, he did embrace atheism but under his rule, prisons were no more full than that of the US and life expectancy in the USSR was never higher. True, executions during his era were about 700,000, but they were not due to atheism.

You're under the delusion that atheism and communism are one and the same.

Shall we now unravel the rather lengthy list of religious atrocities performed over two-thirds the span of Christianity?

 

[Provita]

Your statement infers what exactly, that atheists are idiots because they don't believe in the same god as you or they are idiots because they're under-educated? Both would be fallacious, nonetheless.



Other theists have also come bleating about Stalin, only to be educated about Stalin and finding out he was a theist who robbed trains. Eventually, he did embrace atheism but under his rule, prisons were no more full than that of the US and life expectancy in the USSR was never higher. True, executions during his era were about 700,000, but they were not due to atheism.

You're under the delusion that atheism and communism are one and the same.

Shall we now unravel the rather lengthy list of religious atrocities performed over two-thirds the span of Christianity?

He didnt say Athiests are idiots, he said the world has many idiots and not all of them are Thiests, many are athiests, because idiots are pretty much everywhere... sadly... so switching to Athiesm wont rid the world from idiots...

Tell me, can you list the top 100 religions and show how they performed religious attrocities? Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are easy ones... but what of Buddhism? Hinduism? what about Wiccan? Sure you can find some on those... what about nondenomination Theists? what about certains sects of Christianity? What about many African religions? Asian? South American? Can you possibly name all of them and giove each an example of their attrocities linked to religion? I doubt it...

Just because a religion may have a few stupid idiots who know nothing and, infact, contradict their beliefs, doesnt mean the religion itself should be destroyed... all it means is that religions should scan all incoming members for criminal records and should go to therapy every week

With all this talk of how religion should be destroyed for the betterment of mankind there may come a time when some lunatic athiest comes to power and has a war against all religions...

 

[(Q)]

He didnt say Athiests are idiots, he said the world has many idiots and not all of them are Thiests, many are athiests, because idiots are pretty much everywhere... sadly... so switching to Athiesm wont rid the world from idiots...

Then, I would ask you the same question, are those atheists idiots because they don't believe in your god or are they under-educated? I suspect the former.

And switching to atheism may not rid the world of idiots, no one ever said it would, but educating idiots will turn them away from religion.

Can you possibly name all of them and giove each an example of their attrocities linked to religion? I doubt it...

You're probably right, there isn't enough hardrive space on the sciforums server to provide so much overwhelming information.

 

[SkinWalker]

What bores me is this constant theme of "the world will be a better place without religion". It's just a mindless mantra.

Is it any more "mindless" than the continued proselytization of religion in every facet of life by religious nutters? The attempts to codify government policy based on religious doctrine? The continued -in your face- attitude that religious nutters take that "the world be will be a better place with religion (but only their particular brand)?

I have yet to see someone address the fact that the atheist Stalin was responsible for one of the greatest, if not *the* greatest genocides in human history.

It may be because you don't pay attention. I answered that in another thread where you posted that same, tired religious bullshit attempt at "bashing" (to use your own word) atheism. I said, "[t]he answer to the Stalin question is obvious: abuse of power. Something that religion has excelled at over the millenia and not surprising that secular rulers should figure out. After all, Stalin had many good examples from which to draw on for his ruthlessness: all of them religious in origin."

My attempt at derision is aimed at the unfounded, unsubstantiated, ridiculous notion that religion is the cause of pedophilia and rape.

True. It cannot be shown that religion causes pedophilia and rape. But only someone with intellectual skills that are lacking would have inferred that from my post. But I would assert that religion (not all, but certainly xianity) permits pedophilia and rape. Not only is it allowed in its written doctrine, but it is rampant in its ministries. Moreover, there is an attitude that forgiveness can be had just for the asking, so get your nut now -say your sorry later and still get into heaven.

And what do you really care if a few lunatics kill themselves?

They're people. I care for people. Even for you. Perhaps that philosophy is somewhat familiar? While I question the historicity of your alleged christ, I *do* agree with nearly every word that was attributed to him. Interestingly enough, I find that it is his alleged followers that seem to have the most problems with adhering to his teachings.

 

[Nasor]

What bores me is this constant theme of "the world will be a better place without religion". It's just a mindless mantra.

If he simply kept repeating that the world would be better off without religion, you would perhaps have a point. But he did more than simply throw out the claim; he backed it up with a specific example. If it weren't for religion, this guy would probably be unable to convince so many parents to let him "marry" their young daughters. Your quick dismissal of his argument as a "mindless mantra" makes it look like you are unable or unwilling to critically examine what he has actually said.

I have yet to see someone address the fact that the atheist Stalin was responsible for one of the greatest, if not *the* greatest genocides in human history.

The difference, of course, is that Stalin wasn't executing people in the name of atheism. In the example given above, this cult leader is having sex with children in the name of religion. Obviously even if everyone were an atheist there would still be all sorts of crimes and terrible things, but if we could eliminate the fairly substantial portion that are religiously motivated it would still be a good thing.

My attempt at derision is aimed at the unfounded, unsubstantiated, ridiculous notion that religion is the cause of pedophilia and rape.

No one ever claimed that religion is the cause of pedophilia and rape - he claimed that religion makes the problem worse by providing this guy with a convenient way to manipulate gullible people into handing over their children.

Couldn't agree more, except you are not doing it. You are just bashing it without providing any intellectual argument whatsoever.

He made a claim (that we would be better off without religion) and backed it up with a specific example (without religion, this cult leader wouldn't be able to sexually exploit children so easily). That constitutes an intellectual argument.

And what do you really care if a few lunatics kill themselves?

Perhaps he simply cares about people and doesn't want to see them needlessly hurt/exploited?

 

[Confutatis]

If he simply kept repeating that the world would be better off without religion, you would perhaps have a point.

This is a philosophy forum, not a news agency. I like to think we are all educated enough to know the atrocities done in the name of God. Listing yet another one adds nothing to the debate.

If it weren't for religion, this guy would probably be unable to convince so many parents to let him "marry" their young daughters.

Possibly. However the real problem here is not with the cult leader, but with the cult follower. We can easily understand what goes in the deranged mind of a man who wants to sexually exploit little girls. It's a lot more complicated to understand what goes in the mind of a man who fails to protect his daughter from such atrocity. And I seriously doubt it has anything to do with his need to understand the universe, simply because that is something we all have.

Your quick dismissal of his argument as a "mindless mantra" makes it look like you are unable or unwilling to critically examine what he has actually said.

Not at all. What I'd like to do is examine the issue from a different perspective. We all know religion often leads people to do bad things, but so do ideologies, greed, fear, and the pursuit of happiness.

Now a person with an open mind would see something obvious about the world: it's a world of struggle. The violence of men is just a reflection of the violence of nature. If we are indeed different from every other animal species, then there must be something super-natural about ourselves. (and I mean super-natural in the literal sense of the word) Otherwise, we shouldn't feel bad about killing other people anymore than a lion feels bad for killing a zebra: we are simply doing what nature has programmed us to do.

The difference, of course, is that Stalin wasn't executing people in the name of atheism.

He did it for an ideology. He could have done it for any other reason. But the most important thing is that he did it because he had the power to do it, and nothing in this world can prevent a man from doing what is in his power to do, except perhaps a good idea. The problem is, which idea would that be? If religion can be ruled out on the historical evidence, then so can atheism.

Obviously even if everyone were an atheist there would still be all sorts of crimes and terrible things, but if we could eliminate the fairly substantial portion that are religiously motivated it would still be a good thing.

Perhaps, but we have no way to know what kind of society we would have, and the historical precedent does not support the notion that an atheist society is better than one where people are free to believe whatever they want.

No one ever claimed that religion is the cause of pedophilia and rape - he claimed that religion makes the problem worse by providing this guy with a convenient way to manipulate gullible people into handing over their children.

Perhaps. In this case, certainly. But that could be like saying food is a bad thing because a lot of people die of food poisoning. Without understanding why people need religion, we cannot be in a position to say they don't.

Perhaps he simply cares about people and doesn't want to see them needlessly hurt/exploited?

I also care about people, but to me that means I must respect and accept them as they are. And that creates a paradox.

 

[Provita]

I believe in God, God has no specific form and cannot be fathomed and cannot be explained fully for God is infinite. All who believe in a god believe in the real God, just in their own finite interpretation so they may feel closer with God. All who deny God choose to do so and are no bad people. They are not damned, only frowned upon for not believing, but dont deserve eternal suffering, only some type of penance.

God will judge everyone at their death to see if they were Just or not, not according to man-made laws.

Now explain to me, how is this religion I speak of a burden upon this world that must be erradicated?

Q, if you could answer that, plz do

Then, I would ask you the same question, are those atheists idiots because they don't believe in your god or are they under-educated? I suspect the former.

Well you suspect wrong... it is not stupid to believe differently than someone else... anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. All i said, and if you look at the post carefully, was that there are idiots in this world, theist and athiest alike, so getting rid of thiests wont cure the planets of stupidity... to cure the planet of stupidty, althought impossible, would be to get rid of all the idiots...

 

[(Q)]

Well you suspect wrong... it is not stupid to believe differently than someone else... anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. All i said, and if you look at the post carefully, was that there are idiots in this world, theist and athiest alike, so getting rid of thiests wont cure the planets of stupidity... to cure the planet of stupidty, althought impossible, would be to get rid of all the idiots...

If you read my post carefully, you'd see that I'm not interested in getting rid of theists, since they are people, just like you and me.

It's religion that harbours stupidity which is the bane of society.