Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Oct 12, 2011 Full story: CNN 31,995

Editor's note: Dean Obeidallah is an award-winning comedian who has appeared on TV shows such as Comedy Central's "Axis of Evil" special, ABC's "The View," CNN's "What the Week" and HLN's "The Joy Behar Show." He is executive producer of the annual New York Arab-American Comedy Festival and the Amman Stand Up Comedy Festival.

Full Story

Since: Sep 12

Sparta, MO

#25358 May 8, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
Elizabeth Smart gives honest report on how it was the teachings of Mormonism that caused her to stay with her captive after he raped her:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/...
"“I felt like my soul had been crushed. I felt like I wasn’t even human anymore. How could anybody want me or love me or care about me? I felt like life had no more meaning to it.”
“It’s feelings of self-worth. It’s feelings of ‘who would ever want me now?’ I’m worthless. That is what it was for me the first time I was raped."

I think any woman would feel this way, regardless of her religious, or non-religious, belefs.

“I was raised in a very religious household, one that taught that sex was something special that only happened between a husband and a wife who loved each other."

Mormons are not the only ones who teach morals to their children. I personally don't know any parents who teach their children that it's okay to be promiscuous.

"Smart remained in the Church of Latter Day Saints after her 2003 rescue; she attended Brigham Young University and served a mission in France."

These facts speak volumes of that it really has nothing to do with being Mormon. The WP is taking what she said out of context and drawing a conclusion that it's the Churches fault, and that of her parents, for teaching abstinence before marriage.

" Double XX Factor saying that “when we instruct teenagers to dress modestly, abstain from alcohol, never go out alone, and certainly never engage in sex, we’re not actually helping them prevent rape—but we are telling them that when they are victimized, they are partially to blame.” That is absolute BS.

When a young girl is raped, she is robbed of her virginity. She did not willingly give herself to another. He took it from her. She cannot get that back. It is gone. However, it is not her fault. And, Moroni 9:9 does not teach that it is.

Point is: It was NOT the teachings of Mormonism. The headline and article is nothing but hype and are intentionally misleading, aimed to bolster the critics of the LDS Church.

“Protest / support the marchers”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#25359 May 8, 2013
If Mormons are following the inspired Word of God, then why did they have to change His words so much that they had to write their own version, inspired by an evil man who was, in turn, inspired by Satan?

When I get time, I'm going to research what they changed and why.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#25360 May 8, 2013
Livinginthelandofcrazy wrote:
<quoted text>
"“I felt like my soul had been crushed. I felt like I wasn’t even human anymore. How could anybody want me or love me or care about me? I felt like life had no more meaning to it.”
“It’s feelings of self-worth. It’s feelings of ‘who would ever want me now?’ I’m worthless. That is what it was for me the first time I was raped."
I think any woman would feel this way, regardless of her religious, or non-religious, belefs.
“I was raised in a very religious household, one that taught that sex was something special that only happened between a husband and a wife who loved each other."
Mormons are not the only ones who teach morals to their children. I personally don't know any parents who teach their children that it's okay to be promiscuous.
"Smart remained in the Church of Latter Day Saints after her 2003 rescue; she attended Brigham Young University and served a mission in France."
These facts speak volumes of that it really has nothing to do with being Mormon. The WP is taking what she said out of context and drawing a conclusion that it's the Churches fault, and that of her parents, for teaching abstinence before marriage.
" Double XX Factor saying that “when we instruct teenagers to dress modestly, abstain from alcohol, never go out alone, and certainly never engage in sex, we’re not actually helping them prevent rape—but we are telling them that when they are victimized, they are partially to blame.” That is absolute BS.
When a young girl is raped, she is robbed of her virginity. She did not willingly give herself to another. He took it from her. She cannot get that back. It is gone. However, it is not her fault. And, Moroni 9:9 does not teach that it is.
Point is: It was NOT the teachings of Mormonism. The headline and article is nothing but hype and are intentionally misleading, aimed to bolster the critics of the LDS Church.
I have to disagree. When you add all the teachings trying to bring shame to teens for even masturbating, and giving talks about having them come home in a coffin rather than losing their chastity, the teachings of the church did play a part in her staying. I know I was taught that it was a sin comparable to murder. The LDS church can't make those claims and then not be responsible when the member actually listens to the leaders and takes to heart what they are taught.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#25361 May 8, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
Elizabeth Smart gives honest report on how it was the teachings of Mormonism that caused her to stay with her captive after he raped her:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/...
“I was raised in a very religious household, one that taught that sex was something special that only happened between a husband and a wife who loved each other and that’s what I’d been raised, that’s what I'd always been determined to follow, that when I got married then and only then would I engage in sex."
A...Regarding any religious upbringing, her words above describe the mindset of nearly any virgin religious male and female that grow up feeling/being taught the same way and want to remain a virgin till their married. It's not just a Mormon way of thinking Dana, really :)

“I felt like my soul had been crushed. I felt like I wasn’t even human anymore. How could anybody want me or love me or care about me? I felt like life had no more meaning to it.”
“It’s feelings of self-worth. It’s feelings of ‘who would ever want me now?’ I’m worthless. That is what it was for me the first time I was raped."
A...The above is a classical description of how most all victims of rape feel. It's not just a feeling due to a religious upbringing. Those feelings have little to do with religious teachings. They've been forced into an act of physical and mental violence by the perp and virgins suffering a first time rape more so than non-virgins suffering a first time rape appear to suffer more mentally as she insinuates herself.

“...And so, for that first rape, I felt crushed –’Who could want me now?’ I felt so dirty and so filthy I understand so easily all too well why someone wouldn’t run. Because of that alone. I mean, you can imagine the most special thing being taken away from you –not that that was your only value in life –but something that de-valued you? Can you imagine going back into a society where you’re no longer valued? Where you’re no longer as good as everybody else?

In the above she described how most victims of rape feel mentally afterwards be it the first time or a third time. Studies have shown that people who are first time victims of home burglary describe some similar feelings of having been mentally raped.
She reacted to rape like most rape victims describe how they feel after being raped and then uses the church as her reasoning for staying with him? Did the church also teach her if she was kidnapped she should never try to escape? Did the church teach her kidnapping was sanctified by God as good and well and she should stay with her kidnapper and or marry him because she had sex with him regardless? Obviously no.
Her issue for why she stayed with a kidnapper for so long goes beyond a connection to her Mormon upbringing Dana, nice try dude :)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#25362 May 8, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
So, white skin is a curse, then, not black? All those Mormons are lying about having the priesthood then, yes?
So, I don't know. Is white skin a curse? Is that your belief that you're cursed because you believe Adam and Eve are black and if their black, that would show colour favoritism by your logic so according to you and Osirica God's a racist who created the first (as Osirica likes to say it) racial skin colour out of favoritism.
Since you think your cursed to have white skin, I'm curious to know your theory of how God came to curse you with white skin instead of having black skin as Adam and Eve had as you have stated.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#25363 May 8, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to disagree. When you add all the teachings trying to bring shame to teens for even masturbating, and giving talks about having them come home in a coffin rather than losing their chastity, the teachings of the church did play a part in her staying. I know I was taught that it was a sin comparable to murder. The LDS church can't make those claims and then not be responsible when the member actually listens to the leaders and takes to heart what they are taught.
http://fox13now.com/2013/05/06/video-elizabet... .... Elizabeth Smart makes it clear that main reason she did not run was she feared for her families safety.

Your extremism knows not when to know a difference and stop. Why don't you try reading more of her own words? Blogger comments who read between the lines...

MarcNMaria
6:00 AM GMT-0800
Wow. A child's thoughts at time of trauma, and what one or 2 volunteer teachers may have said, is taken as Fact, regarding LDS teachings?
I expected more of the WPost.

By comparison, the writer would look at a beautiful set of evening clothes, and write the article about the wearer's one untied shoe.........

ScottinVA
10:42 AM GMT-0800
Rape is an assault. The victim is just that, and in no way responsible for the attack.
Modest apparel is to be taught and practiced -- not to avoid rape -- but in consideration of the men who are not rapists, yet are visually stimulated sexually (which is all men).

The LDS cult has many aberrant teachings; but I think even they don't blame the victim for the crime.
This looks like a hit piece.

WayneDequer
9:10 AM GMT-0800
Unfortunately this article perpetuates some misperceptions encouraged by Joanna Brooks' article and an earlier one she links to the Christian Science Monitor They did not misquote Elizabeth Smart-Gilmour's remarks but they did misrepresent them. Before considering this topic further I strongly suggest that we all watch her fascinating talk that looks back to 10 years ago with amazing candor and insight at http://fox13now.com/2013/05/06/video-elizabet... .... Elizabeth Smart makes it clear that main reason she did not run was she feared for her families safety. She does indeed criticize shame-based programs which do need to be eliminated. Elizabeth Smart wants people to be empowered to fight back against human bondage and rape. She also was clear that she never doubted her families love for her which helped to sustain her through her horrendous ordeal. She also spoke eloquently about hope and trust in God. It was a wonderful speech and only 10-15 minutes long which is well worth the time.

Since: Sep 12

United States

#25364 May 8, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>I have to disagree. When you add all the teachings trying to bring shame to teens for even masturbating, and giving talks about having them come home in a coffin rather than losing their chastity, the teachings of the church did play a part in her staying. I know I was taught that it was a sin comparable to murder. The LDS church can't make those claims and then not be responsible when the member actually listens to the leaders and takes to heart what they are taught.
We're talking about teaching morality and being chaste versus having a crime committed against our person. I didn't read anywhere in that article that her parents taught her that if she were raped, it would be her fault and that she would be worthless. Nor did I read that the Church said anything of the sort. In fact, she went on staying a member of the Church, going to BYU, and serving a mission. That is not the actions of a person who blames the Church and her parents. No. It's plain the WP is sensationalizing and trying to mislead the reader by drawing that particular conclusion.

Since: Sep 12

United States

#25365 May 8, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>“I was raised in a very religious household, one that taught that sex was something special that only happened between a husband and a wife who loved each other and that’s what I’d been raised, that’s what I'd always been determined to follow, that when I got married then and only then would I engage in sex."
A...Regarding any religious upbringing, her words above describe the mindset of nearly any virgin religious male and female that grow up feeling/being taught the same way and want to remain a virgin till their married. It's not just a Mormon way of thinking Dana, really :)

“I felt like my soul had been crushed. I felt like I wasn’t even human anymore. How could anybody want me or love me or care about me? I felt like life had no more meaning to it.”
“It’s feelings of self-worth. It’s feelings of ‘who would ever want me now?’ I’m worthless. That is what it was for me the first time I was raped."
A...The above is a classical description of how most all victims of rape feel. It's not just a feeling due to a religious upbringing. Those feelings have little to do with religious teachings. They've been forced into an act of physical and mental violence by the perp and virgins suffering a first time rape more so than non-virgins suffering a first time rape appear to suffer more mentally as she insinuates herself.

“...And so, for that first rape, I felt crushed –’Who could want me now?’ I felt so dirty and so filthy I understand so easily all too well why someone wouldn’t run. Because of that alone. I mean, you can imagine the most special thing being taken away from you –not that that was your only value in life –but something that de-valued you? Can you imagine going back into a society where you’re no longer valued? Where you’re no longer as good as everybody else?

In the above she described how most victims of rape feel mentally afterwards be it the first time or a third time. Studies have shown that people who are first time victims of home burglary describe some similar feelings of having been mentally raped.
She reacted to rape like most rape victims describe how they feel after being raped and then uses the church as her reasoning for staying with him? Did the church also teach her if she was kidnapped she should never try to escape? Did the church teach her kidnapping was sanctified by God as good and well and she should stay with her kidnapper and or marry him because she had sex with him regardless? Obviously no.
Her issue for why she stayed with a kidnapper for so long goes beyond a connection to her Mormon upbringing Dana, nice try dude :)
I agree.

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25366 May 8, 2013
Yep

Bunch of silliness. IT's obviously a bunch of people memorizing how to "get the right answers" and "act".

Nothing is real
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
So, have you been to a mormon church meeting?

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25367 May 8, 2013
Oh you lost track of that conversation. Let me get you back on board.

Muslims enslaved whites (a lot of them) and blacks.

Now can you keep up or do I have to go back to the entire thing for you?

Muslims enslaved whites ALSO, but there is nothing about Cain or whites skin being from him...

so you can see... that previous statement makes no sense.
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
Hold on, are we talking about the African slaves?

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25368 May 8, 2013
Nile -

Look again...

http://adventure.howstuffworks.com/nile-river...

Back then the Nile ran on a different path. It is clearly possible and probably likely that it parted and then reconnected further downstream.

Furthermore, "Ethiopia" may not have been such a large area, and the range of it may be relative to what we know now.

The Bible speaks of the land of the Kushites, not the modern country of the Ethiopians. The Kushites lived along the river, not all over the continent
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Reading comprehension. Do you understand what reading comprehension is? You don't write like you do. In fact you write like you have no idea of what reading comprehension is.
I did state..."Jew/Israelite ". That meant the writer could have been a Jew and if not a Jew he was a descendent of one of the tribes of Israel. Thus my statement which was correct to anyone with reading comprehension, Jew/Israelite.
No river surrounds all of Ethiopia. Neither does the other rivers make a complete circle about their lands.

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25369 May 8, 2013
Yes, and I have done this over and over and over...

BY NOW, it is very easy for you to google search

"skin of blackness" and "mark of Cain"

I refuse to believe, that in this thread, you are "UNAWARE" of these quotes from the pearl and the BoM.

And that website, which has been analyzed does NOT address these issues, because it makes excuses (other religions were doing it too) excuses, and tries to paint it all as a metaphor (which was not what the mormon prophets taught, nor was it appropriate, considering blacks were oppressed because this concept/ and the misinformed passage was taken SO LITERALLY).

It's like saying some Germans in europe went around calling Jews "devils" as a metaphor, during the 1930s... and we should just, right now
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have some direct quotes?
Here is a website that addresses many of the supposed issues.
http://www.blacklds.org/Reynolds

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25370 May 8, 2013
So WHAT you believe in a modern, living, breathing church.

So do CHristians. WE taught YOU that!

You clearly don't believe the actual stone walls breathe oxygen and live. You are speaking of a metaphor of some sort.

YOUR metaphors are always designed to be vague yet presumptive.

The Bible had already "NOT" had any misinformation that needed "Mormon revelation"

If the Bible does NOT have "skin of blackness", then it's absurd for Mormons to adopt it based on lies, then later,(oh wait, you haven't done this yet) renounce it with revelation.

When are you going to actually adjust? Because you STILL Have it in your scriptures and what not.

See we the black people KNEW it NEVER mattered, what we are seeing is your falsehood exposed when you tried teaching in your foundation that it MATTERED, only then to simply say "it doesn't matter"

then to say "forget about it"

We don't have a concern about it. The concern is you teaching LIES about it. It's like Bernie Madoff saying, "Ok, yea I embezzled the money, but look, after 2008, everything that happens from here on out, forget about the past, it's in the past"

No... there is accountability for those lies, there is correction, there is confession, there is some kind of justice for it.

And at the bottom of it all is the adjustment... you know... the very thing you start off talking about.

So again, where is it? Where is that adjustment.
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
We believe in a modern, living, breathing church. We act according to the doctrine that is revealed and we adjust when more light is given from God. On this issue Bruce R McConkie said,
"There are statements in our literature by the early brethren which we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things… All I can say to that is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world. We get our truth and our light line upon line and precept upon precept.
We have now had added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness, and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don’t matter any more. It doesn’t make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June of this year [1978]. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject. As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them. We now do what meridian Israel did when the Lord said the gospel should go to the gentiles. We forget all the statements that limited the gospel to the house of Israel, and we start going to the gentiles."

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25371 May 8, 2013
Genesis 2:8 8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden.

The garden is IN eden.

Genesis 2:9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food.

All kinds of trees...

Genesis 2:10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters.

So Eden was a place, a mountain of sorts where the river started.

The GARDEN is IN Eden. There are all kinds of trees, and FROM that flows four rivers. ONE being a river that surrounds Ethiopia.

Now what mountains, in Europe do you know of, where there would be a good environment for this?

There is no such place.

Only in Africa can this be possible. MAYBE India.

Shut the door on your WAY OUT.
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You're such a fricking racist you can't even read a post without injecting your black racism in between the lines.
I wasn't debating the colour of Cain you fricking racist.
I was arguing the possibilities of where Eden may or may not have been. Understand? I don't care if you're a Mayan and you're trying to convince me Adam and Eve were brown Mayans. I was arguing where Eden may or may not be which we can't see.
Fricking racist, at one point portions of the mid to lower Mediterranean to Africa areas was dense lush tropical jungle.
Next, in the hotter areas of Africa how many non-modern Africans have you seen in documentaries wearing animal skins to cover most of their body in that hot sun burning heat?
It's nice that you want to believe Adam and Eve left one perfect paradise for another, but according to the description from God that waited Adam, you don't find thorns and thistles in tropical jungles or places to plant crops.
17To Adam he said,“Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you,‘You must not eat from it,’
“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25372 May 8, 2013
NO IT WASNT

back then Mediterranean was COLDER than it is now. And was still an SEA!

Sahara was a lush jungle.

YOu don't have to GO to the hotter areas of Africa, there's more than enough area near the NILE to make the point! No one caers about Eden being in an area too Hot.

and you DO find thorns and thistles in tropical jungles or places to plant crops.

They've been DOING it for thousands of YEARS!!!!

You just SAY shit and hope people believe you made a "true" point.

Whats next?

You going to say some dumb shit "Since the earth is flat..." or
"After all, since there's only four elements..."

Shut the F--- UP!
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>

Fricking racist, at one point portions of the mid to lower Mediterranean to Africa areas was dense lush tropical jungle.
Next, in the hotter areas of Africa how many non-modern Africans have you seen in documentaries wearing animal skins to cover most of their body in that hot sun burning heat?
It's nice that you want to believe Adam and Eve left one perfect paradise for another, but according to the description from God that waited Adam, you don't find thorns and thistles in tropical jungles or places to plant crops.
17To Adam he said,“Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you,‘You must not eat from it,’
“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25373 May 8, 2013
LEPROSY IS A DISEASE.

What PLANET ARE YOU ON????

you are a CRACK SMOKING CLOWN!

LEPROSY IS A DISEASE OF THE SKIN. Whole chapters of Deuteronomy is dedicated to keeping the disease from infecting the Hebrews

Naaman's leprosy will cling to you and to your descendants forever

not

"Naaman's new white skin color will cling to you and your descendents for ever."

You sat there and described how Leprosy works, what in the world then makes you think that the descendents will be a new white race???? And if you DONT think that

HOw then

Do you get "mark" to PROTECT cain to be "made him a black man and his descendents the black race"?

Heck, the passage doesn't even say the "mark" would be passed down to his descendents!
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Liar, liar, black racist liar. Go google/bing 'white leprosey' and hit images and see where you won't see a picture of a leper having turned 'white as snow'. Lepers remain their birth colour except for a patch(s) of skin discoloration that is scar tissue.
And leprosy is a disease you pathetic uninformed idiot. It's called Hansen's disease today.
Of the following you don't want to acknowledge that a prophet of God changed the colour of a man you say was black to having "white as snow" skin. And that all his descendants were to be cursed the same forever.
That information works against your opinion that God wouldn't change anyone's skin colour for any reason. Guess what? Your wrong! lol.
2 Kings 5:27
New International Version (©2011)
Naaman's leprosy will cling to you and to your descendants forever." Then Gehazi went from Elisha's presence and his skin was leprous--it had become as white as snow.
New Living Translation (©2007)
Because you have done this, you and your descendants will suffer from Naaman's leprosy forever." When Gehazi left the room, he was covered with leprosy; his skin was white as snow.

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25374 May 8, 2013
Lets go over what YOU said again

I said "it's not a skin color..."

you reply "According to you and your racist rants it was." a skin color.

It's a theory that he never involved himself in because it NEVER HAPPENED.

He would be no more likely to involve himself in it than if it was green skin, or white skin. You keep defending the notion that "a theory"... "might" be possible because God can do anyting he wants.

Then I tell you what, speak consistently of a theory that God marked Cain with white skin. Make your points, and make them show us that Cain could have been cursed with white skin...

The Leprosy is a disease... and God said "the leprosy" will be with your descendents forever.

What you cannot stand is that you cannot find proof in the Bible that Cain was turned black. SO... you rely on useless speculation and the power of assumption in your hope that readers will be convinced that it "must" have happened, because it is merely in the realm of infinite possibilities.

And for your assumption to have any kind of hope other nonsense assumptions have to be made:

1. Adam and eve were not Black
2. This mark used to protect Cain would be passed down to his descendents as a means to exploit them.
3. The Bible would never mention this relationship again.
4. Most importantly, a prejudiced assumption, would just somehow be correct, simply because you want it to be.
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
According to you and your racist rants it was.
Cain was supposedly some colour and a theory states the mark/curse he received turned him dark/black. That's the theory you claim God would never involve himself in.
Well God used his prophet Elisha to change a black guy's black skin to white as snow AS PART OF A CURSE TO LIVE THROUGH HIS DESCENDANTS FOREVER.
The leprosy was a curse. Being turned "white as snow" was a curse. Having all his descendants cursed the same FOREVER was a curse.
Your downplaying the fact that I have found an instance where GOD CHANGED A PERSON'S SKIN COLOUR AND THE SKIN COLOUR OF ALL THEIR DESCENDANTS FOREVER THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN BLACK.
God has proved you wrong and you're absolutely hating it...lol. God will curse anyone anyway he see's fit even if you disagree lol.

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25375 May 8, 2013
Unless some very strange type-o occurred, it's obvious I've been calling and we all Know Leprosy as a disease.

I don't even need to know about Hansen's...

Firstly it's all over the Bible in great detail.
Secondly it's well known from the crusades
Thirdly leper colonies are public knowledge.

grow a brain
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, a few posts ago you stated leprosy WASN'T a disease. Nice to see you educated yourself to Hansen's disease :)
Next, to a racist there might be such a thing as a "racial skin colour". But in reality there is no such thing.

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25376 May 8, 2013
Muslims believe in Christ. He's called the Christ in the Quran.

Now what.

Edit that statement of yours... you know the routine.

"of course" you meant blah-blah-blah-blah... right?
not ashamed wrote:
<quoted text> The definition of Christian, is a belief in Christ.

“The Pleasure is all MINE”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#25377 May 8, 2013
I am as open to a Mormon running
as a Jew is open to a "Positive Christian" running.

Yes look up Positive Christianity

Yes religion matters in who you vote to LEAD your country. It's just not right to condemn one as a racist, and ignore the one that actually is racist.

Trinity United was not teaching that whites came from the curse of Cain. They were teaching that white supremacy is the cause of modern atrocity in the world. And that's a valid argument.

The CURSE OF CAIN however, being the cause of black people existence...

No that's not a valid argument... that's simply another example of what Trinity was pointing out.

You see that... DONT you
not ashamed wrote:
<quoted text> That is exactly how you said it. Religion or race have no place in politics.
You seem like an intelligent man, which tells me that you know that as well.
Yes, the curse of Cain is a Mormon teaching, however what does that have to do with running against Obama ?
I honestly wouldn't care if our president was a purple atheist, as long as they put the citizens first.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min Injudgement 1,189,190
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 4 min American Lady 312,082
DOJ: Zimmerman Won't Face Federal Charges 4 min Lawrence Wolf 67
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 6 min Eagle 12 4,713
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 7 min Belle Sexton 57,720
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 9 min replaytime 149,059
CPAC accused a Post reporter of Photoshopping a... 11 min SirPrize 3
Giuliani explains why Obama doesn't love America 24 min californio 327
Net neutrality: FCC approval considered victory... 1 hr goonsquad 6
More from around the web