home
RSS
Mormon leader's comments on homosexuality provoke protests
October 8th, 2010
06:28 PM ET

Mormon leader's comments on homosexuality provoke protests

Editor's Note: CNN Salt Lake City affiliate KSTU has this report about a protest outside the headquarters of the Mormon Church.

Thousands of gay activists held a silent protest outside the headquarters of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Thursday.

The protestors expressed outrage to comments made by church leader Elder Boyd K. Packer saying homosexuality is an immoral condition that can and should be overcome. Packer, president of the church's Quorum of Twelve Apostles, made the comments Sunday during a semiannual conference.


"Some suppose that they were pre-set and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?" said Packer at the conference.

Activists at the protest said the remarks are hurtful and could lead some gay Mormons to suicide.

"Our message is very simple. It's hate speech equal LGBT suicides," said Eric Ethington, Pride in Utah blogger and organizer of the event. "You can not tell kids for their entire lives there is something wrong with them."

Ethington organized the event using the social networking site Facebook. He said his event staff counted nearly 4,500 participants involved in the protest, who all wore black in symbolism of the loss of gay Mormons to suicide. The protestors all laid down, forming a human chain surrounding the Church's headquarters and Temple Square.

Several activists said the suicides are growing within the LGBT community.

"This last September there were three confirmed suicides among LGBT youth in Utah," said Creig Neilson, leader of gay rights organization, the Trevor Project. "In Utah this last weekend there was another one. When these brothers and sisters take their lives, it's because they think that there's no other answer, I understand. When ending your life becomes the better answer, or the better solution, something is wrong."

The LDS Church released a statement in response to the protest saying, "Of course, the Church recognizes the right of groups to voice their opinion in the public square. However, those familiar with the Church's doctrine on the importance of marriage and family know it is based on principles of respect and love for all of God's children."

Read the full story here from KSTU.


soundoff (166 Responses)
  1. alCapwn

    "Thousands of gay activists held a silent protest outside the headquarters of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Thursday."

    That is inaccurate. Local law enforcement only estimated 600 protesters.

    October 11, 2010 at 6:54 pm |
  2. The Force

    @MadPanda and David Johnson

    Not a thing different that neither one of you said...Except MadPanda likes talking to himself. I am not listening to neither one of you. You are wrong. Period!
    David Johnson Everything you say is trash, so whats new? You are so filled with Satans lies you reek!

    October 11, 2010 at 4:56 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @The Force

      Calling names and declaring I smell, even over the internet, is not a good argument. That was hurtful. But, I forgive you.

      What are your thoughts? What are your arguments for there being a god? Did you read Maybe's comments? He is totally right. Think for a while. Pray to your god. Then see if you and He can come up with a decent argument for His existence.

      Cheers!

      October 11, 2010 at 9:42 pm |
    • Frank

      "Calling names and declaring I smell, even over the internet, is not a good argument. "

      hypocrisy

      → noun
      (pl. hypocrisies) [mass noun] the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more laudable opinions or beliefs than is the case.
      – ORIGIN Middle English: from Old French ypocrisie, via ecclesiastical Latin, from Greek hupokrisis ‘acting of a theatrical part’, from hupokrinesthai ‘play a part, pretend’, from hupo ‘under’ + krinein ‘decide, judge’.

      October 11, 2010 at 9:47 pm |
  3. IrishPub1

    So, if one decides to marry his dog, because its a preference he has, its ok??? Where does the line get drawn?

    October 11, 2010 at 9:35 am |
    • David Johnson

      We should decide to allow an action or not, base on its effect on society.

      Marrying animals would be detrimental to animals and society. It should not be allowed.

      Now you will ask what about brother and sister marriage?

      Incest produces children with webbed feet. That is detrimental to the child and to society. It should not be allowed

      Gay marriage hurts no one and would make happy, a segment of our population.

      Starting to see how this works?

      We don't need no stinking god to decide if an action should be allowed.

      Cheers!

      October 11, 2010 at 4:01 pm |
    • Centaur

      The marriage is between two consenting adults.

      October 13, 2010 at 3:48 am |
  4. TheForce

    David Johnson

    I know! I know! I say, frantically waving my hand to be called on to answer!

    Ask this question:
    If there was no god, how would the world look different? Would defective children be born? Would babies be given to parents who can't possibly provide for them? Would cancers and other diseases main and kill the children?

    The answer is, the world world would look exactly as it does now.

    This is the greatest evidence for there being no god. It is what convinced me beyond any doubt.

    If there is no difference between god and no god, then what good is god?

    You say:

    This is the greatest evidence for there being no god. It is what convinced me beyond any doubt.

    Parents with children they can't take care of...they need to use protected s-e-x...a manmade problem here.
    Defects in children can be caused by many things.
    Would cancers and other things maim and kill children? When you live an any imperfect environment, the answer would be most likely,Bacteria and Viruses exist, and sometimes they also are helpful in cures, to eliminate them, would also eliminate that. The same venom from a snake that can kill you, is also used to protect you.
    How much of what man does, causes some things? Like smoke from factorys that has toxins, sprays used for vegetation, etc.
    Do you find it amazing that man had a fuctional appendix that at one time filtered out poisons from things men ate back in days of old? It is now not needed.

    If there was no God, how would the world look different?

    You would not have what you have today. There is perfect rhythm in the world, that causes seasons, sunrise, sunsets, which effects vegetation, and many other things. There is an order in the universe and in the world, without it Earth would not exist as it does today.
    Now, don't tell me that Dawkins said No God needed, cause that may be what he thinks right now, but science is always being updated. Theorys change. Tell me what caused the Big Bang and Prove it. If you can't, then you can't rule out God.

    There is a difference between no God and God...you just refuse to see it and depend on Science for all your answers.
    Science is not foolproof! It is based on what man knows to be at the time, but as I said, even theories based on "facts" has been proven to change.

    October 11, 2010 at 9:13 am |
    • MadPanda

      "Now, don't tell me that Dawkins said No God needed, cause that may be what he thinks right now, but science is always being updated. Theorys change. Tell me what caused the Big Bang and Prove it. If you can't, then you can't rule out God."

      Someone hasn’t been keeping up to date with modern theoretical physics have they? Turns out that there are quite a few very smart highly educated people who think that the big bang (beginning of a universe) can happen without a god at all (and must happen). It shouldn’t affect your stance however. More than likely you will just move the goalposts back like religious individuals have been doing for centuries. Let me show you what i mean.

      Church: earth revolves around the sun
      Modern science: no it doesn’t
      church: oh, heh, just kidding.

      Church: humans and the world were created 6000 years ago.
      Modern science: evolution created the world over the course of billions of years
      Church: God made evolution and 6000 years was just a metaphor

      Church: God created the universe, and everything, in the beginning.
      Modern science: Looks like the beginning of our universe was a huge explosion where everything came from a single point in space time. ie big bang
      Church: Really? That cant be true...Oh, that microwave background radiation is pretty convincing. *light bulb* oh but of course....That is what the bible must have meant when it said god created everything. Looks like god created the universe *Dirty smug smile*

      Church: god created the universe
      Modern science: There is no longer a need for god in the explanation of how the universe came to be. To add "god" into the equation would just add one more pointless, not-needed, step into the explanation.
      Church: Your crazy, what you smoking? Do you think you could just add that god part into the equation anyway? We could be bestys (bestys=best friends).
      Science: Uhhh, you’re missing the point.
      Church: Well then, screw you anyway. God must have created whatever there was before the big bang. To allow for the big bang to happen
      Science: *palm to the forehead* Ugh.

      October 11, 2010 at 2:57 pm |
    • MadPanda

      ewww, Change the first couple lines in conversation to:

      Modern science:earth revolves around the sun
      Church: no it doesn’t
      Church: church: oh, heh, just kidding.

      Church: humans and the world were created 6000 years ago.
      Modern science: evolution created Humans over the course of billions of years
      Church: God made evolution and 6000 years was just a metaphor

      October 11, 2010 at 3:32 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @TheForce

      MadPanda beat me to an answer. Most of your comment was trash. Cheers!

      October 11, 2010 at 3:46 pm |
    • Maybe

      The Force,
      "There is an order in the universe and in the world, without it Earth would not exist as it does today."

      Perfect order? Stuff is crashing into stuff all the time out in space. Erratic and devastating weather and earthquakes and other natural disasters occur quite often. Cancer cells run amok in us. Genetic and congenital deformities happen. Perfect order? I don't think so. What works, works; and what doesn't work, doesn't. We adapt... or not.

      October 11, 2010 at 7:32 pm |
    • And the winner is...

      @ The Force
      Good christian! Now, sit...stay.

      October 11, 2010 at 9:20 pm |
    • Frank

      "Do you find it amazing that man had a fuctional appendix that at one time filtered out poisons from things men ate back in days of old? It is now not needed."

      It's not needless. It's a reservoir of useful bacteria.

      October 11, 2010 at 10:10 pm |
  5. Kate

    OK, riddle me this.

    At some point, LDS as a whole practiced polygamy – multiple wives.

    Since there's a finite number of women, this means that there would have been a large number of male LDS members who couldn't find wives (for some obscure reason, the idea that women could have multiple husbands never seems to factor into such practices – go fig)

    So you have a lot of men who aren't getting any, so it doesn't make sense that somewhere along the lines homosexuality wouldn't be considered as a safety or relief valve (pun intended) for those guys who were otherwise just shit out of luck.

    Especially if the old LDS had the equivalent of Christine O'Donnell in their ranks sharing her views on the perils and condemnation of masturbation!

    So, why didn't the LDS consider this simple solution to the problem of too many men, not enough wives? Why are they so dead set against it as a possible solution right now for a practice they say they don't do any more after the US made it a demand they stop doing it if they wanted Utah to become a recognized State? I'm not saying that the LDS continues such practices, but think about it and look at Mike Huckabee for a moment, then tell me there's not evidence not only of polygamy but inbreeding!

    Just observin'

    October 10, 2010 at 10:25 pm |
    • Frank

      How in the hell were you able to get that post through?!

      October 10, 2010 at 11:37 pm |
    • Kate

      @Frank

      The web and intricacies of the internet are my domain (no pun intended), I know exactly how their badwords list works and the glaring ineffectiveness built right into it because whoever is running it for CNN isn't a SysAdmin and card carrying BOFH as I am.

      Just geekin'

      October 10, 2010 at 11:58 pm |
    • Kate

      p.s.

      For the record I'm not going to post how to bypass the filters, mostly because there'll be hordes of 14-year olds who'll just abuse the knowledge, and I have no real tolerance for skiddies (wannabe hackers who get all their info from web sites but have no real clue what they're doing, how to do it, or why it works).

      If CNN's techs would simply add a space before and after each word in their badwords list, there'd be no reason to have to get technical to have decent conversations here in the first place – unfortunately, no-one at CNN seems to have picked up on the offer of fixing the list for them for free (or wanted to).

      Just shruggin'

      October 11, 2010 at 12:03 am |
    • Frank

      Ah, I see. *is ashamed by his technical stupidity*

      October 11, 2010 at 12:04 am |
    • Kate

      @Frank

      That would be like saying you're ashamed because you're not a rocket scientist (assuming of course that you're not, in fact, a rocket scientist). It's what I do for a living, if I couldn't get through such an archaic and badly configured set-up, I'd end up bitter warped twisted and generally useless.

      Kind of like Reality, only not as much fun to poke fun at.

      Just sayin'

      October 11, 2010 at 12:32 am |
    • Josh

      @Kate

      Your argument has absolutely no logic to it at all. Nice try though.

      October 11, 2010 at 7:25 am |
    • Reality

      Male Muslims are allowed four wives. Female Muslims are allowed only one husband. Based on Kate's reasoning does not today's Islam then suffer from the same problems of Mormonism before po-lygamy was abolished i.e. ho-mos-exuality and inb-reeding?

      October 11, 2010 at 11:13 am |
    • Kate

      @Reality

      As usual, you seem to be in an alternate you – I never said homosexuality was a problem, I asked why it wasn't used as a solution for those men who couldn't find wives because they were all taken up by a select few.

      Just correctin'

      October 11, 2010 at 11:46 am |
    • Reality

      Male Muslims are allowed four wives. Female Muslims are allowed only one husband. Based on Kate's reasoning does not today's Islam then suffer from the same problem of Mormonism before po-lygamy was abolished i.e.inb-reeding? With solutions/cures for Islamic males being hom-o-s-exuality and/or mutual/mono mastur-bation?

      October 11, 2010 at 4:07 pm |
    • Frank

      Ah, you're kind, Kate. 😛

      October 11, 2010 at 9:27 pm |
  6. Frank

    "The protestors expressed outrage to comments made by church leader Elder Boyd K. Packer saying h0m0s#xuality is an immoral condition that can and should be overcome."

    Bigotry is an immoral condition that can and should be overcome.

    Mr. Packer should reaquint himself with Christ's Teachings. If he ever knew them in the first place.

    October 10, 2010 at 9:58 pm |
    • jmb2fly

      Just because you disagree with someone's comments or beliefs that does not make those comments or beliefs bigotry or hate speech. Silencing all opinions but your own is not freedom unless your the tyrant and it's only your freedom you care about.

      October 11, 2010 at 11:34 am |
    • Frank

      Oh, please. Where did I say anything about removing his 'free speech' rights?
      Funny how the First Amendment canard really only comes up nowadays when it's someone spouting something obviously hateful and distasteful. I don't hear people like you b!tching about government/big business wiretaps and the stalking – even murder – of people who are bringing to light certain uncomfortable facts. So, stuff it. Or is that 'threatening' your freedom of speech?

      October 11, 2010 at 9:32 pm |
  7. Frank

    "In an evolutionary biology sense there is some thing wrong."

    Obviously not if h0m0s#xuality, bis#xuality and the changing of s#x is found throughout the animal kingdom. If it was an evolutionary disadvantage, it would've disappeared long ago. But you (I'm supposing) straight people keep on popping out qu##r kids!

    October 10, 2010 at 9:57 pm |
    • Maybe

      Frank,

      "But you (I'm supposing) straight people keep on popping out qu##r kids!"

      If indeed hom0se#uality is strictly genetic, maybe the genes have not disappeared because hom0se#uals have been pressured culturally to deny their natural state and have been pressured to conform to heter0se#ual behavior and to procreate. Maybe when and if fewer reproduce, eventually fewer presentations from recessive genes will occur. Evolutionary changes can take a long, long time.

      October 10, 2010 at 10:40 pm |
    • Frank

      I don't believe it's strictly genetic. It's certainly not akin to a congenital handicap such as Down's Syndrome. That implies that the quality of life for an LGBT person is inherently less than 'normal' people. It's just playing into that old canard that gays are 'sick' in some fashion, with a hint of eugenics.

      October 10, 2010 at 10:49 pm |
  8. JS

    "Some suppose that they were pre-set and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?" said Packer at the conference.

    Dear Dope/Packer,

    Because there isn't one? Have you realized you just asked the very question that could set you free?

    Sigh.

    October 10, 2010 at 12:18 pm |
  9. Bob

    "Our message is very simple. It's hate speech equal LGBT suicides," said Eric Ethington, Pride in Utah blogger and organizer of the event. "You can not tell kids for their entire lives there is something wrong with them."

    LGBT are now different than a kid with Down's syndrome. They have malfunctioning genetics that reduce their evolutionary fitness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitness_(biology). In an evolutionary biology sense there is some thing wrong. Sorry, probably going to catch a lot of flack for that.

    However, a mentally handicapped person is not a "bad" person they just are. LGBT are not "bad" people they just are.

    The mormon guys point is if you have a propensity towards violence it is not okay to act on those impulses. If you are LGBT according to their religion it is not okay to act on those impulses. Wether he is right or wrong is another matter altogether, I just don't see why everyone has their panties in a twist.

    October 10, 2010 at 10:20 am |
  10. Ed

    I love it.... An argument between a bunch of cultists and a bunch of freaks who can't figure out where to put their genitalia. Sounds like a good candidate for a South Park episode.

    October 10, 2010 at 8:19 am |
  11. feather

    Aaaaaaaaaaaand this would be why I persist in telling my mother that no, I really don't have any intentions of going back to church.

    October 10, 2010 at 12:33 am |
    • Bill Kilpatrick

      I hear ya.

      October 10, 2010 at 12:11 pm |
  12. And_I_Would_Add

    What's the difference between 'God' and 'No God'? A helluva lot! Without the threat of 'persecution' from a 'God' this world might be in a worse state than it already is! The well instilled threat of 'God's wrath' has helped many intelligent men control the thoughts of those who are less skilled in the commonsense arena. Without the threat of a 'God', how would we ever get a witness to tell the truth? Without the threat of a 'God', how would we ever get the wealthy to help feed the hungry? Without the threat of a 'God', how would we get the uncivilized to act civilized? You may answer by saying 'it's the moral think to do' but using 'God' provides a nice quick and dirty shortcut... We just sometimes have to accept the good (getting these dimwits to do the right think) with the bad (religious fanatics who think the world was formed a little over 2000 years ago)...

    October 10, 2010 at 12:30 am |
    • Chiniquy

      Our physical makeup has the DNA from our earliest ancestors.

      We feel with every fiber of our being that The All-Mighty Creator has caused destruction to societies in the past who went beyond the bounds of proper human behaviour.

      That is why the majority of us have a fear of violating HIS Commands.

      The Atheists are trying to convince themselves and everyone else who will listen that The Supreme Being doesn't exist.

      October 10, 2010 at 7:31 am |
    • Grist

      And_I Would_Add: You need to read a bit on the evolution of morality. We are evolved creatures. Those groups of animals which evolved the ability to help each other, were more likely to survive. How about reading "Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved" by Frans de Waal, or "The Altruism Equation" ed Lee Alan Dugatkin. We don't need gods to be moral. How would you explain that atheists are able to be good. Atheists are way under-represented in our prison system compared to persons believing in gods.

      October 10, 2010 at 9:32 am |
    • David Johnson

      @Grist

      Yes! You understand. Great post dude! Cheers!

      October 10, 2010 at 9:53 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @And_I_Would_Add
      You said, "What's the difference between 'God' and 'No God'? A helluva lot! Without the threat of 'persecution' from a 'God' this world might be in a worse state than it already is! The well instilled threat of 'God's wrath' has helped many intelligent men control the thoughts of those who are less skilled in the commonsense arena. Without the threat of a 'God', how would we ever get a witness to tell the truth? Without the threat of a 'God', how would we ever get the wealthy to help feed the hungry? Without the threat of a 'God', how would we get the uncivilized to act civilized? You may answer by saying 'it's the moral think to do' but using 'God' provides a nice quick and dirty shortcut... We just sometimes have to accept the good (getting these dimwits to do the right think) with the bad (religious fanatics who think the world was formed a little over 2000 years ago)..."

      You have missed the point of : "If there is no difference between god and no god, then what good is god?"

      If god suddenly left. If he just wasn't here anymore, what would be different? Would natural disasters kill thousands of innocent people? Would people contract diseases and die painful deaths? Would there be children's cancer wards? People who starve? Birth defects? War? Priests attacking children? – BUT WAIT! THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW! If there is no difference between god being here, and not being here, then what good is god? Even if He exists, he might as well not exist.

      I believe it was Isaac Asimov who told a story, of being out on a boat. The mainland was suffering a drought. But out in the ocean, it was raining cats and dogs.

      You talk about controlling people with god. That has been done many times. The South used the bible to justify owning another human. Certainly there is nothing in the good book that talks against slavery.

      Religion is again depriving a group of people of their rights, and using the bible to justify it.

      If you are going to scare me with the bogey man under the bed, you will need to first make me believe in the bogey man.

      A wise man said, "Religion poisons everything." – C. Hitchens

      October 10, 2010 at 10:31 pm |
  13. kls817

    You liberal hypocrites that criticize the Mormons are the same ones that want to welcome muslims into our society. Muslims want to kill gays, let alone prevent them from marrying. You really don't care at all about gays; you just use this as an excuse to spread your hate of mainstream Americans.

    October 9, 2010 at 11:54 pm |
    • feather

      You're cute. Delusion and bigotry are so adorable when they're coupled with self-righteousness.

      October 10, 2010 at 12:23 am |
  14. mensaman

    I'll tell you, if an organization of murderers had the funding and the media support LGBT does, murder would be legal in the US.

    October 9, 2010 at 6:56 pm |
    • LGBT-stuff is not anything like murder dumb-ass

      mensaFAIL

      October 11, 2010 at 5:43 am |
  15. Rhonda Perkins

    Everyone has unconventional thoughts. Some more than others. How one acts on their thoughts is called behavior. Behavior is a choice. ~RP

    It's unfortunate that people are committing suicide, but that's also a choice based on unconventional thoughts. Everyone has those kind of unconventional thoughts, as well. It doesn't mean you were born suicidal... even if you had a dark personality your whole life and everyone "saw it coming." I'm not a big fan of the Mormon church, but people really need to think before they start carrying picket signs and making "hate" accusations. Really, ppl. "We can't stop the birds from flying over our heads, but we can stop them from making a nest in our hair" (unknown). Just b/c you let the birds make a nest in your hair doesn't mean everyone else has to also.

    October 9, 2010 at 6:13 pm |
    • David Johnson

      So, are you for or against birds?

      October 9, 2010 at 7:12 pm |
    • Bill Kilpatrick

      So gays are forcing the rest of us to wear a bird's nest in our hair?

      October 10, 2010 at 1:41 am |
  16. Adam

    People need to realise that these are the same people who changed their stance on polygamy in 1890 in order to make Utah a state lol. Their words and even their book is a complete joke considering they were willing to change their own religious writings in order to be a state. However, these people shouldn't be ignored on the basis of their stupidity. These are nothing less than murderers hiding behind a cloak of false faith and ideals. They are on the major churches aiding in LGBT suicides. People have the right to religion (except aparently the Muslims according to you Americans) but they dont have the right to kill others, by their hands, or by their words.

    October 9, 2010 at 4:58 pm |
  17. Mark from Middle River

    If we are free to question religion then why is it that some things folks can not question.

    Know What- What Dennis is saying is that bigotry and intolerance towards people of faith does exist. It always has. Evil and hatred normally does not exist solely on one side of an equation.

    October 9, 2010 at 2:08 pm |
  18. Luke

    At the risk of sounding snide, but in all seriousness, I bet this guy is gay. Not that I care, but the track record for this sort of man isn't so good.

    October 9, 2010 at 1:47 pm |
    • David Johnson

      You mean, sort of like "Methinks he doth protest too much?"

      October 9, 2010 at 2:25 pm |
    • Luke

      David, and it's quips such as these that has made me respect you so much. Thanks for that.

      October 9, 2010 at 2:28 pm |
    • NL

      David Johnson-
      Meknows that many of the most outspoken anti-gay pastors have been spending too much time in their own closets.

      Some have been abusing their power to coerce followers, and maybe that is what they hate about their own expression of se xu ality. Perhaps, because they know that they are hurting others by forcing them, they see this as the norm for every gay person?

      October 9, 2010 at 4:04 pm |
  19. Dennis

    I'm so glad he called it hate speech. That should be enough proof that the gay marriage battle is about more than just marriage, it's about religious freedom. There is a lot of hate out there, but it's clearly being directed toward religion. The bigotry of intolerance toward religion knows no bounds. God help us!

    October 9, 2010 at 1:22 pm |
    • Know What

      Dennis,
      "The bigotry of intolerance toward religion knows no bounds."

      No, bigotry and intolerance sits in the laps of religion. You are free to have any (otherwise legal) rules that you wish in your sect, but you have no right to demand that they be followed by the general public.

      October 9, 2010 at 1:31 pm |
    • NL

      "The bigotry of intolerance toward religion knows no bounds. God help us!"

      Religion is just an idea, not a people. As far as I know we are free to criticize and debate the merits of people's ideas, right? Otherwise the same should apply to political discussions.

      October 9, 2010 at 1:39 pm |
  20. David Johnson

    No, the gay and lesbian community hates what the Mormon church did with regards to prop 8.

    Source: ABC World News
    Groups are focusing on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints because its members poured in tens of millions of dollars to defeat gay marriage in California.

    Opponents say that church leaders went too far in organizing their members and asking them to donate time and money to getting the proposition passed. Those critics of the church even started an online campaign to identify and embarrass Mormons who supported the amendment.

    Your religion was founded by a man looking into his hat. If there was a Satan, he would be to busy laughing to care.

    Do you realize, not one shred of evidence exists for your religion? No lost tribe, No golden tablets, lots of reason to doubt J. Smith's story. LOL.

    Packer appears to be a bigot. I don't think that meets the definition of a righteous man. Cheers!

    October 9, 2010 at 11:53 am |
    • Chiniquy

      So you think that it is wrong for citizens to organize to fight against a law that they feel is unjust?

      Isn't that what the Sodomites in America are doing?

      Is it okay for them to do it, but wrong for the people who are against the Ways of Sodom to do the same?

      October 10, 2010 at 7:38 am |
    • Ben

      You said, "do you realize, not one shred of evidence exists for your religion?"

      The evidence for our religion is The Book of Mormon. Please don't criticize the religion unless you have sincerely read it and prayed to God asking if it is not true (even if you have doubt as to God's existence). I've read it, and I am entirely, whole-heartedly convinced of its truthfulness. That is why I'm a Mormon.

      God never has and never will use scientifically-proven evidence to convince people; personal agency and faith are more important to Him than trying to prove to every person that He exists or which is His Church. And no, I don't just disregard science (nor the common consensus in matters of politics, social norms, alternative lifestyles, etc.) – I understand the importance, but also the shortcomings of relying on man's own inferences about the nature of life, the universe, and the meaning of existence. For those who have already come to a knowledge of God and His restored Church through faith and the influence of the Holy Ghost, such earthly evidences of His hand and his work are overly abundant.

      October 10, 2010 at 10:09 pm |
    • Maybe

      Ben,

      @David Johnson said, "Do you realize, not one shred of evidence exists for your religion? No lost tribe, No golden tablets, lots of reason to doubt J. Smith's story." He is correct.

      How to Mormons view Islam? Mohammad's book (Koran) had an almost identical presentation as The Book of Mormon... a man was visited by an 'angel' and was given the story to tell. Was Mohammad's angel lying, or simply wrong? Is your 'angel' better? In my opinion, both men just made up these stories, either as a result of hallucinations and delusions or intentionally to gain some kind of 'spiritual' or earthly power.

      October 10, 2010 at 11:01 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Ben

      I think Maybe answered you very efficiently and effectively. I could not improve on it.

      Cheers to Maybe!

      October 10, 2010 at 11:47 pm |
    • Maybe

      @David Johnson,

      Well, you could improve it by changing my, "How to.." to "How do..", but thanks for not noticing and for the compliment.

      Cheers to you too.

      October 11, 2010 at 12:01 am |
    • Jonny

      You say that there's no evidence for our religion, show me something that disproves it cause people have been trying for almost 200 years and haven't found anything yet.

      October 13, 2010 at 3:41 am |
    • Bill Fitzgerald

      Oh, a sign seeker. Show me and then I will believe, God must come down himself and prove his existence! Are you really interested in this conversation or just causing trouble? And to your comment about gays being married not causing and harm to anyone? You may want to check into all of the ramifications of legalized gay marriage as you obviously have not done.
      adoption clinics would then be forced to allow gay couples to adopt. Sorry, against our religion, no can do. Gay marraige taught in schools by force, no can do, EXTREMELY harmful to my children and I do not and would not allow that. So you can bet I will fight to the bitter end on this issue!

      October 20, 2010 at 8:44 pm |
    • Frank

      Bill, are you one of the ones who believes that gay marriage will cause the death of civilization?
      Please tell me how someone else's relationship effects you?
      Just so you know, I'm a Catholic and I believe but I'm not silly enough to think that God is so concerned about LGBT people being themselves. We are all made in His image and He loves us all. Straight people criticising LGBT folks are being hypocrites at best. All the things heteros say we do, they do just the same and in a greater number, since you guys are the 'majority'.

      October 20, 2010 at 8:56 pm |
1 2 3
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.