How can I do damage to the Mormon Church?

bob x

bob x

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,618
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Location
California, USA
You know, I've never cared much about their beliefs, silly though I consider them. I've always been polite to the apple-cheeked missionary boys knocking on my door to peddle that absurdly fraudulent book. What have I ever done to them that they should attack me with spite and deceit, so that on what should have been a happy night I still cannot feel like a citizen in my own country?

My first instinct is to hunt down one of those missionaries and strangle him; or to firebomb a Mormon temple; or at least go to one of their services and slash everybody's tires. Don't worry, I'll get over that. But what should I do?

I am thinking, maybe push for local ordinances and statewide ballot initiatives to require a license for going door-to-door with religious literature. Or craft a special clothing tax whose wording makes it applicable only to their sacred underwear. Sound discriminatory and flatly unconstitutional? DAMNED STRAIGHT! I want to make them run to the "liberal activist judges" to beg for their rights to be protected. Hopefully it will cost them a lot of money.

Or: doesn't the LDS church own a lot of businesses? Maybe find a list of those, promote boycotts, and spread viciously slanderous rumors on billboards frequented by gullible paranoids. Or: try to recruit Anonymous to put the Mormons on their list next to the Scientologists?

Any other ideas?
 
boy, bob, are you ahving a bad day.? Perhaps you could just put a sign on your door or letterbox and say,,,,,, No Mormons, or Religious persons please.
 
bob x said:
You know, I've never cared much about their beliefs, silly though I consider them. I've always been polite to the apple-cheeked missionary boys knocking on my door to peddle that absurdly fraudulent book. What have I ever done to them that they should attack me with spite and deceit, so that on what should have been a happy night I still cannot feel like a citizen in my own country?
Click to expand...

What did they say?

bob x said:
My first instinct is to hunt down one of those missionaries and strangle him; or to firebomb a Mormon temple; or at least go to one of their services and slash everybody's tires. Don't worry, I'll get over that. But what should I do?

I am thinking, maybe push for local ordinances and statewide ballot initiatives to require a license for going door-to-door with religious literature. Or craft a special clothing tax whose wording makes it applicable only to their sacred underwear. Sound discriminatory and flatly unconstitutional? DAMNED STRAIGHT! I want to make them run to the "liberal activist judges" to beg for their rights to be protected. Hopefully it will cost them a lot of money.
Click to expand...

I suggest infiltrating the Church and revealing that the current Prophet has been unfaithful to his wife and has been having an affair (ie. uncover a sex scandal). But then, I must say, that probably isn't considered a problem if he's a Mormon.

bob x said:
Or: doesn't the LDS church own a lot of businesses? Maybe find a list of those, promote boycotts, and spread viciously slanderous rumors on billboards frequented by gullible paranoids. Or: try to recruit Anonymous to put the Mormons on their list next to the Scientologists?
Click to expand...

lol. Start a religious war? It would definitely be interesting to see the two of them at war with each other. They are both fairly powerful phenomena.

The Scientologists will try and audit the Mormons out of existence. A Mormon will fall nude out of a window holding onto five dollars. Having spent all his life savings on audits, he might have decided to commit suicide. Maybe it's a last desperate sprint to seek sanctuary at the Temple to escape another audit.

The Mormon will be kidnapped and taken away to a hospital run by Scientologists. He will be prescribed a number of controversial medications intended to treat Scientology-associated illnesses. Mormon prophets will come to the hospital to ask why he is undergoing the treatment.

I wonder how the rest will play out....

The Mormons will date Scientologists and marry them in the Temple.

The worst thing that can happen is the two Churches merging to become the Church of Mormontology. They both seem to be fascinated with the terrestrial, telestial and celestial and the cosmic order and scheme of things. They are also both quite meticulous in nature, with all kinds of arcane matters to consider in life. Scientologists dabble in the pseudo-medical/physiological, while Mormons believe they are the ultimate manifestation of love and holiness, working hard to be holy, to be kind at all times, striving by all means to be "noble" all the time, losing their souls in the process. If the two theological systems were married, you'd have Mormontology. You could look forward to Mormontologists knocking on your door in the coming years asking for an audit of your home.

It's the Church of L. Ron Hubbard of Latter-Day Scientologists.

I think the Church of JC of LDS would be an attractive target for Sci's as it's an incredibly large organisation with a well-defined structure whose adherents have a highly systematic approach to life. Audit that.
 
lunamoth said:
I guess this is about Prop 8. It's a bad day for California to be sure. :(
Click to expand...
I think it isn't. It is all about debate and discussion and since we are we will see this overturned and state by state make changes.

The outward anger though is an indication that the perceived other side is winning. If one is willing to give up ones power by resorting to negative attacks, we've joined the other ranks. Change will occur from within and then support will be everywhere.
 
As a pseudo-Californian (currently residing in Washington, but been in CA for 28 years prior), I was appalled. To be honest, I and a whole lot of folks in my generation (Gen X/Gen Y) find the tendency to single out gay people and deny them equal civil rights is inexcusable. The nation should allow marriage of any two (or more, in my opinion) consenting adults who are not under duress of any kind. Why? Because who one marries is an individual human right in my book.

I think it has nothing to do with religion. Churches could continue to deny homosexual couples a religious marriage, thereby upholding their religious faith. After all, does the U.S. government actually have a say in who GOD thinks is married? The lack of separation between church and state on this issue boggles my mind from both my own perspective and when I consider marriage as being defined by religion. I fail to see how a secular government's rules about marriage would impact the church or God in any way.

Which leads me to believe that people are just being discriminatory and want to harm gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered people.

Otherwise, they'd be content that their rules of marriage already apply in their own faith. And if their faith is indeed deeply held, and they do believe God works only in their own church and their own perspective, then what do they care about the secular rights of homosexual people???
 
wil said:
I think it isn't. It is all about debate and discussion and since we are we will see this overturned and state by state make changes.

The outward anger though is an indication that the perceived other side is winning. If one is willing to give up ones power by resorting to negative attacks, we've joined the other ranks. Change will occur from within and then support will be everywhere.
Click to expand...

I agree. It's like trying to forcefully stop dialog via authority. (In this case, legislation by the State.) The problem is, you can't legislate morality.
 
wil said:
The outward anger though is an indication that the perceived other side is winning.
Click to expand...
The anger is about the viciousness and dishonesty of their campaign. I did not think people would fall for it, but I guess I should never overestimate the general public.
seattlegal said:
The problem is, you can't legislate morality.
Click to expand...
Then they should keep their goddamned "morality" out of the laws. I only ask to be treated as an equal citizen. Apparently that is too much to ask.
greymare said:
Perhaps you could just put a sign on your door or letterbox and say,,,,,, No Mormons, or Religious persons please.
Click to expand...
I don't care if they come to my house. Some days, I even enjoy talking to them, or the JW's, or whoever. I want them to let me have the equal protection of the laws. If they cannot do that, then I must do whatever is in my power to weaken them.
 
Path_of_one said:
Churches could continue to deny homosexual couples a religious marriage, thereby upholding their religious faith. After all, does the U.S. government actually have a say in who GOD thinks is married? The lack of separation between church and state on this issue boggles my mind from both my own perspective and when I consider marriage as being defined by religion. I fail to see how a secular government's rules about marriage would impact the church or God in any way.
Click to expand...
For a time, people tried to outlaw homosexuality altogether, but they found it was impossible. In increments the country realized that homosexuals needed a place in society -- including protective laws. For the same reason its impossible to change the public's mindset about marriage through legislation. People often want to create social change through legislation, but legislation can only encourage and foster what is already there. Legislation that denies this is overambitious and may backfire. The Mormons remain as they are.
 
I don't give a damn if they remain as they are. They can think whatever nasty things about me they like. Laws, however, should be equal for all.
 
Bob,

I am a former Elder in the LDS church and a 'kind of' Elder in the Community of Christ. I apologise for my former co-religionists. I have fought long and loud for equality including the leadsers of the Community of Christ my considered opinion on the disenfranchisement of GLBT folk.

It is not acceptable for a Christian, IMO, to support something as discriminatory as Proposition 8.
 
bob x said:
Then they should keep their goddamned "morality" out of the laws. I only ask to be treated as an equal citizen. Apparently that is too much to ask.
Click to expand...

bob x said:
I don't give a damn if they remain as they are. They can think whatever nasty things about me they like. Laws, however, should be equal for all.
Click to expand...

Is there any room to introduce civil union legislation that would be applied equally to all?
 
isn't it all a bit tit-for-tat..?

However... the best way to get them is to make them look bad. You don't want them to look too ridiculous- that way ppl will laugh and not view them as a threat. Make ppl fear them, and the battle is half won. Then... well.. if you're sure... drive them out...

You can't commit to this kind of campaign if you're filled with hate, as consequences and confrontations will invariably ensue, and you're too raw to avoid an assault charge or something.

The best way to do it is with facts. Are there stories about them locally? Anything sinister? Mary-Lou joined them and left college and now is married and lives in a trailer with another eight wives? Let the ppl know it might happen to their Mary-Lou's and Johnny's too. Can you get info from a cult-watch type org you can use as facts and figures? print an A6 sized leaflet, put some facts on, refer them to a site, do your leaflet drop. Let people know what they're about, and then it's a person' choice to patronise such businesses, and hold such views, etc. Scare ppl, and then make them choose what they want for themselves.

Are they all white? Do they treat women badly? Do they hate ****? etc, etc. State the facts. How many average Joes know about Moroni and polygamy, et cetera? There'll probably be more than one angle, and the more angles you exploit the better for your campaign.

It's perfectly legal. So long as you avoid anything inflammatory and stick to the facts, and be calm, and polite.

Be careful though. They might play the same game back.
 
Namaste Bobx,

I do believe you should be dancing. I am positive you are aware that when you attract that much attention, that much adversity the end is near. 40 years ago the vote would have been 99%, 20- 80%, 10 - 70%, the tide is definetly turning and society is definitly speaking.

When the unspeakable (anti slavery, anti segregation, anti women rights, anti abortion, anti gay, anti same sex marriage) when the debate starts the die is cast and the bigotry will be over...tis just a matter of time.

In all of the above the bible was used to propagate the crime for an extended period and in all cases lost eventually as 'society spoke'.

Tis like the analogy of carving a marble statue, first it appears an impenetrable rock...and then you chop away at it, then chip away, then grind away, sand away, and finally polish. All the time the end result is hard to see, all the time it seems you'll never get it just right, but it takes patience and while none of us like the sanding and grinding, if you give up or give in or worse yet refuse...it'll never end.

Don't join the fray, celebrate the victory and join the dance!
 
seattlegal said:
Is there any room to introduce civil union legislation that would be applied equally to all?
Click to expand...
Yes. It's called "marriage". That is the word that is embedded throughout the laws. If Christians want the legal institution and the religious institution to be called by separate names, then THEY can change the word THEY use: they are welcome to the word "wedding", which does not appear in the law codes.
 
bob x said:
Yes. It's called "marriage". That is the word that is embedded throughout the laws. If Christians want the legal institution and the religious institution to be called by separate names, then THEY can change the word THEY use: they are welcome to the word "wedding", which does not appear in the law codes.
Click to expand...
Oh, so it's about co-opting a word, rather than about providing an avenue for homosexuals to form legal partnerships? I see. (Btw, it's not only Christians who want to keep the meaning of the word "marriage" to refer to heterosexual partnerships.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top