Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Oct 12, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: CNN

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.

Comments
28,901 - 28,920 of 32,000 Comments Last updated Wednesday Jun 25

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30367
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Your sarcasm is noted. But since 2000 years ago they didn't keep accurate birth and death records at the local courthouse that also didn't exist, yes. Scholars have had to make 'best guesses' as to the age of Mary when she concieved Jesus and as to what age she was when she died. But you'll tell me you knew all of that right? And than you'll enlighten me as to what 'standard' history scholars have used for Mary's age that is more accurate than a best guess from historical information of the time?
My how you lower your standards of proof when you try to protect the pervert. From all the accounts of the day, it's much more than a "best guess" that Smith had sex with his wives.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30368
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
So the need to show proof is still on you. Smiths buds doing as he commanded taking several to many wives in illegal marriages had many many children proving they were having sex as you stated of married couples married legally or illegally. So now it's up to you to explain why Smith didn't follow his own command and with 30 plus wives we haven't evidence for a single love child. Explain the difference intelligently please. And remember Smith and all his buds were hiding their secret illegal marriages, not just Smith.
Why do I bring that up? because if as you theorized and others theorized that Smith though wanted wives but no kids and used one or more forms of birth control to keep other Mormons and non-Mormons from knowing what was going on, that it stands to reason his buds would have been doing the same exact thing to not have kids.
In that scenario history would have recorded we would have a bunch of Mormon guys with many wives and no kids! But that isn't how it worked. Smith was the only one not having kids. Please explain intelligently please.
Why does it stand to reason? They were true believers, he was a con artist. No law applied to him. That is why you have him marrying women who were already married and his "buddies" did not.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30369
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Finally you read between the lines????? pearl acknowledged you and nomo were nothing but negative rage haters of Smith and that's why you have the biased opinions of him that you do. She insinuated you two are incapable of non-biased thought concerning Smith. She did hit it on the head of you two. Nice to see you saw that :)
If that is what you read, than you again show what an idiot and a assclown you are. It also shows why you can't get even the simplest things right.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30370
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I know what Mormon opinion states. I know according to the writings of most Bible scholars and historians they have affirmed for over a thousand years that Mary was but 14 to 16 when she gave birth to Jesus. That means she was 13 to 15 when she was sired by your god. Your god is a pedophile by your logic of what a pedophile is. You gave the criteria not I. I use your and nomo's criteria for what you claim a pedophile is to show you that you worship a pedophile god and you love him to. heard you say you love him :)
Now that your confronted with information you don't like, you don't know how to respond intelligently. But every time you call Smith a pedophile so you describe your god a king of all pedophiles and had himself raised by a pedophile. You don't like that info that's your own logic.
I understand what you confuse concerning God. I think twice before I make statements as you do which you give no thought to. You have defined your god and the man that raised him pedophiles and you have issues with Smith, really really sad dude. Really.
My God didn't have sex with Mary, so he wasn't a pedophile you moron. Only the LDS God did, and it was with his daughter to boot. And the fact is, outside of Joseph Smith, the majority of the LDS members also would gut any 40 yr old pervert who tried to hit on their teen daughters. So trying to make exceptions for a pervert just because you have been fooled into thinking he was sent from God doesn't make him less of a pervert. No lie is too big for you to try to pull, is it?

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30371
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
We were not discussing whether polygamy was right or wrong. You were wrong and can't be honest to admit it. You didn't think polygamy existed in the "many" percentages I claimed and not even in "modern countries". I proved I was correct and you are wrong. I didn't shove that in your face till now. Grow up dude.
You tired to declare it is normal, by using the examples of third world countries that have little to no standards at all.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30372
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
To someone being an idiot at the moment as you were in this post, web information would mean nothing to you obviously. That's how you dodge a conversation you can't toss your negative hate at.
And you don't have to go back to lying really you don't. I have accepted the general ages of the wives of Smith that were in their teens as has been substantiated as accurately as possible by non-Mormon and Mormon scholars/historians. They give a grace period of at least a year for most.
I'm holding you to the same standards you are trying to demand of us. If that is "lying", that is your form of "lying".

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30373
Dec 16, 2013
 
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
My how you lower your standards of proof when you try to protect the pervert. From all the accounts of the day, it's much more than a "best guess" that Smith had sex with his wives.
So to you Smith's a perv for having sex with females he wasn't legally married to. Well you have defined yourself said pervert for having had sex with females you weren't married to. And in some older posts months ago you braged of what a self declared/defined perv you were for the non-marital sex you had engaged in prior to marriage. So now we all get to see how you make a difference of what kind of a perv you are to Smith. You did define the rules for Smith being a perv by claiming he had so many non-marital sexual affairs. Now that you have branded yourself the same perv by your definition what have you to say to logically excuse yourself from your own language this time eh?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30374
Dec 16, 2013
 
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it stand to reason? They were true believers, he was a con artist. No law applied to him. That is why you have him marrying women who were already married and his "buddies" did not.
You dodged the questions dude. Don't deflect. You always deflect when you can't explain something. I'll repost my statements and see if you'll respond intelligently. You made a claim now explain the mitigating factors that weaken your claims for why Smith had no kids and all his buds did.
"So the need to show proof is still on you. Smiths buds doing as he commanded taking several to many wives in illegal marriages had many many children proving they were having sex as you stated of married couples married legally or illegally. So now it's up to you to explain why Smith didn't follow his own command and with 30 plus wives we haven't evidence for a single love child. Explain the difference intelligently please. And remember Smith and all his buds were hiding their secret illegal marriages, not just Smith.
Why do I bring that up? because if as you theorized and others theorized that Smith though wanted wives but no kids and used one or more forms of birth control to keep other Mormons and non-Mormons from knowing what was going on, that it stands to reason his buds would have been doing the same exact thing to not have kids.
In that scenario history would have recorded we would have a bunch of Mormon guys with many wives and no kids! But that isn't how it worked. Smith was the only one not having kids. Please explain intelligently please."
1 post removed

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30376
Dec 16, 2013
 
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
If that is what you read, than you again show what an idiot and a assclown you are. It also shows why you can't get even the simplest things right.
Why do you have to be so pathetically stupid at times like this? Why is that? You and nomo are angry rage haters of all things Mormon. You two have nothing but negative biased filthy dark comments to say of anything dealing with Mormons.
That said, Pearl defined those qualities of you two. Are you that stupid to read it and comprehend it?
She stated of you two...parenthesis mine...
"...Dana and Nomo do not believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet and that he knew he was not a prophet. So if one believes that, they might ask why did he marry these women?... About the only thing these women had to offer was sexual submissiveness. If he was not a prophet, as Dana and Nomo believe, what would the logical reason be for these marriages?...If one believes that Joseph Smith was not a prophet, than one must believe he was a con or nuts, Based on that belief what conclusion would be intelligent and logical(of angry rage hating anti-Mormons like dana and nomo?) His only benefit would appear to be sexual..."
Pearl nailed it on the head why two angry rage hating anti-Mormons would have all the negative comments you have of Smith. Because you have proved beyond a doubt your both angry, rage hating anti-Mormons and you would have no other view even if you were incorrect.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30377
Dec 16, 2013
 
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
My God didn't have sex with Mary, so he wasn't a pedophile you moron. Only the LDS God did, and it was with his daughter to boot. And the fact is, outside of Joseph Smith, the majority of the LDS members also would gut any 40 yr old pervert who tried to hit on their teen daughters. So trying to make exceptions for a pervert just because you have been fooled into thinking he was sent from God doesn't make him less of a pervert. No lie is too big for you to try to pull, is it?
lol...doesn't matter how you claim your god did it. You're god by whatever means impregnated a little virgin girl called Mary. That's what your god did. Than Joseph a pedophile as you also describe him for being an older guy going after the little virgin girl Mary, that so named/described pedophile was enlisted by your pedophile god to raise himself when he would be born as a human. You defined the pedophiles you revere and worship dude, not me.
By the way, mary was called the daughter of God. All female humans by the Bible are called the daughters of God, just as all the male humans are called the sons of God. They are called that because the Bible in the OT and NT declare we are all the children and sons and daughters of God.
Therefore according to your belief of your god, as a pedophile he incorporated sexual activity with Mary his daughter so she would become pregnate with him inside of her when she was a little virgin girl. That's your logic back at you dude. Call Smith a lover of beastality for all I care. You defined the mortal father of your god and your god as pedophiles of the same pod.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30378
Dec 16, 2013
 
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
You tired to declare it is normal, by using the examples of third world countries that have little to no standards at all.
No I did no such thing. You're resorting to lying. Again. I stated (not declared) that in a community of people that embraced polygamy if you openly rejected it, they would think you're the abnormal one for rejecting what they consider to be normal. I said nothing of my opinion of marriage of any form. By the way, marriage is a man made construct. The natural impulse of humans is to act like animals, to breed and move on and bred some more. That's what socially monogamous is about. Except for humans it's about aquiring as many sex partners as possible as you have called perverts, yourself included.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30379
Dec 16, 2013
 
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm holding you to the same standards you are trying to demand of us. If that is "lying", that is your form of "lying".
No you're not. You're dodging credible sources you don't want to see as credible so you reject them to maintain your purposeful ignorance on the matter.
When you give a link as evidence, it's not what I'm reading that's so important but as to what the sources of the article are that are important. If their credible sources than I consider the opinion of the writer.
The web is full of credible hits on the age of Mary when she had Jesus. And their all in agreement of a localized age between 14 to 16, your "little girl" age your pedophile god took advantage of instead of using an older virgin "WOMAN". Eat your own logic dude you served it.
1 post removed

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30381
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
So to you Smith's a perv for having sex with females he wasn't legally married to. Well you have defined yourself said pervert for having had sex with females you weren't married to. And in some older posts months ago you braged of what a self declared/defined perv you were for the non-marital sex you had engaged in prior to marriage. So now we all get to see how you make a difference of what kind of a perv you are to Smith. You did define the rules for Smith being a perv by claiming he had so many non-marital sexual affairs. Now that you have branded yourself the same perv by your definition what have you to say to logically excuse yourself from your own language this time eh?
Trying to make this about me doesn't make Smith less of a pervert. I have never married a woman who was already married. I certainly have never claim it was the will of the Lord, or make claims of angels with flaming swords threatening to kill me if they didn't. Good try, assclown.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30382
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You dodged the questions dude. Don't deflect. You always deflect when you can't explain something. I'll repost my statements and see if you'll respond intelligently. You made a claim now explain the mitigating factors that weaken your claims for why Smith had no kids and all his buds did.
"So the need to show proof is still on you. Smiths buds doing as he commanded taking several to many wives in illegal marriages had many many children proving they were having sex as you stated of married couples married legally or illegally. So now it's up to you to explain why Smith didn't follow his own command and with 30 plus wives we haven't evidence for a single love child. Explain the difference intelligently please. And remember Smith and all his buds were hiding their secret illegal marriages, not just Smith.
Why do I bring that up? because if as you theorized and others theorized that Smith though wanted wives but no kids and used one or more forms of birth control to keep other Mormons and non-Mormons from knowing what was going on, that it stands to reason his buds would have been doing the same exact thing to not have kids.
In that scenario history would have recorded we would have a bunch of Mormon guys with many wives and no kids! But that isn't how it worked. Smith was the only one not having kids. Please explain intelligently please."
I didn't doge anything, i challenge your claims. Why does it stand to reason? Learn how to read, moron.
1 post removed

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30384
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
lol...doesn't matter how you claim your god did it. You're god by whatever means impregnated a little virgin girl called Mary. That's what your god did. Than Joseph a pedophile as you also describe him for being an older guy going after the little virgin girl Mary, that so named/described pedophile was enlisted by your pedophile god to raise himself when he would be born as a human. You defined the pedophiles you revere and worship dude, not me.
By the way, mary was called the daughter of God. All female humans by the Bible are called the daughters of God, just as all the male humans are called the sons of God. They are called that because the Bible in the OT and NT declare we are all the children and sons and daughters of God.
Therefore according to your belief of your god, as a pedophile he incorporated sexual activity with Mary his daughter so she would become pregnate with him inside of her when she was a little virgin girl. That's your logic back at you dude. Call Smith a lover of beastality for all I care. You defined the mortal father of your god and your god as pedophiles of the same pod.
Again, it was the Mormon god who screwed his daughter, not mine. You can repeat your stupidity til the second coming of Jesus, but it won't change the ignorance of your statement. Why do you insists on being such a dumbass? Oh, that's right, you have to protect your perverted ways.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30385
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
No I did no such thing. You're resorting to lying. Again. I stated (not declared) that in a community of people that embraced polygamy if you openly rejected it, they would think you're the abnormal one for rejecting what they consider to be normal. I said nothing of my opinion of marriage of any form. By the way, marriage is a man made construct. The natural impulse of humans is to act like animals, to breed and move on and bred some more. That's what socially monogamous is about. Except for humans it's about aquiring as many sex partners as possible as you have called perverts, yourself included.
You become more and more ignorant as you go along.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30386
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
No you're not. You're dodging credible sources you don't want to see as credible so you reject them to maintain your purposeful ignorance on the matter.
When you give a link as evidence, it's not what I'm reading that's so important but as to what the sources of the article are that are important. If their credible sources than I consider the opinion of the writer.
The web is full of credible hits on the age of Mary when she had Jesus. And their all in agreement of a localized age between 14 to 16, your "little girl" age your pedophile god took advantage of instead of using an older virgin "WOMAN". Eat your own logic dude you served it.
"Best guess" is an opinion, period, dummy. Where is you "scientific proof"?

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30387
Dec 16, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah what ever...lol. You worship a god of pedophilia and you cast stones at the same. That's about your speed :)
Joseph smith married little girls. Just like Warren Jeffs. The truth will set you free, crazy man. Lies just keep you in turmoil.(And it's really obvious in your case)

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30388
Dec 16, 2013
 
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
Joseph smith married little girls. Just like Warren Jeffs. The truth will set you free, crazy man. Lies just keep you in turmoil.(And it's really obvious in your case)
Polygamy will now be legal, are you Sodomites happy now?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30389
Dec 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Trying to make this about me doesn't make Smith less of a pervert. I have never married a woman who was already married. I certainly have never claim it was the will of the Lord, or make claims of angels with flaming swords threatening to kill me if they didn't. Good try, assclown.
lol...and you think because you sweet talked them out of their clothes or got them drunk or stoned before bedding them makes you a better sex pervert of bedding females? Fricking get real please.
All I did was use your definition of what a sex perv is and applied it to you. How a guy gets a female and or male to bed(whatever floats their boat)isn't the point. You did as you claim he did. You had sex with females you weren't legally married to like you claimed Smith did and that makes you a perv by your own definition.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••