LDS Freedom Forum

ChemtrailWatcher wrote:Mummy, perhaps YOU should read your scriptures a little more carefully:

Alma 30:11

11For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man’s belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal grounds.

I have more to say about this, but do not have the time at the moment.

OK, here's some more:

Regarding Nehor and his following:

Alma 1:16-24

15And it came to pass that they took him; and his name was Nehor; and they carried him upon the top of the hill Manti, and there he was caused, or rather did acknowledge, between the heavens and the earth, that what he had taught to the people was contrary to the word of God; and there he suffered an ignominious death.

16Nevertheless, this did not put an end to the spreading of priestcraft through the land; for there were many who loved the vain things of the world, and they went forth preaching false doctrines; and this they did for the sake of riches and honor.

17Nevertheless, they durst not lie, if it were known, for fear of the law, for liars were punished; therefore they pretended to preach according to their belief; and now the law could have no power on any man for his belief.

Now let's go further in this chapter and see what happened to people within the Church:

Alma 1: 21-22

21Now there was a strict law among the people of the church, that there should not any man, belonging to the church, arise and persecute those that did not belong to the church, and that there should be no persecution among themselves.

22Nevertheless, there were many among them who began to be proud, and began to contend warmly with their adversaries, even unto blows; yea, they would smite one another with their fists.

Also:

Article of Faith #11:

11We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

ChemtrailWatcher wrote:

ChemtrailWatcher wrote:Mummy, perhaps YOU should read your scriptures a little more carefully:

Alma 30:11

11For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man’s belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal grounds.

I have more to say about this, but do not have the time at the moment.

OK, here's some more:

Regarding Nehor and his following:

Alma 1:16-24

15And it came to pass that they took him; and his name was Nehor; and they carried him upon the top of the hill Manti, and there he was caused, or rather did acknowledge, between the heavens and the earth, that what he had taught to the people was contrary to the word of God; and there he suffered an ignominious death.

16Nevertheless, this did not put an end to the spreading of priestcraft through the land; for there were many who loved the vain things of the world, and they went forth preaching false doctrines; and this they did for the sake of riches and honor.

17Nevertheless, they durst not lie, if it were known, for fear of the law, for liars were punished; therefore they pretended to preach according to their belief; and now the law could have no power on any man for his belief.

Now let's go further in this chapter and see what happened to people within the Church:

Alma 1: 21-22

21Now there was a strict law among the people of the church, that there should not any man, belonging to the church, arise and persecute those that did not belong to the church, and that there should be no persecution among themselves.

22Nevertheless, there were many among them who began to be proud, and began to contend warmly with their adversaries, even unto blows; yea, they would smite one another with their fists.

Also:

Article of Faith #11:

11We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

If you can't see the difference then I'm afraid there isn't much point in continuing....

f you can't see the difference then I'm afraid there isn't much point in continuing....

I'd say ditto.

Many people followed Nehor and his teachings. The law (which was correct) had no power to stop people from believing in Nehor's words (EVEN IF THEY WERE WRONG.) The crime of priestcraft is different from the freedom that people should have to believe what they like.

And let me make this clear: I would NEVER go so far as to say that Mitt supporters should be equated with followers of Nehor or Korihor.

ChemtrailWatcher wrote:

f you can't see the difference then I'm afraid there isn't much point in continuing....

I'd say ditto.

Many people followed Nehor and his teachings. The law (which was correct) had no power to stop people from believing in Nehor's words (EVEN IF THEY WERE WRONG.) The crime of priestcraft is different from the freedom that people should have to believe what they like.

So you are saying Ammon was wicked and disobedient to the law???

Have you heard the parable about the camel getting the nose in the tent?

Please re-read my last post regarding priestcraft. Of course I am not saying that Ammon was wicked. I am done with this. The contention on here is too much for me.

The Spirit has withdrawn long ago (not that I have felt it on this thread one iota). Satan is having a heyday.

ChemtrailWatcher wrote:Please re-read my last post regarding priestcraft. Of course I am not saying that Ammon was wicked. I am done with this. The contention on here is too much for me.

The Spirit has withdrawn long ago (not that I have felt it on this thread one iota). Satan is having a heyday.

We need continually to fortify our homes and families and defend them against the onslaught of evils such as divorce, broken families, brutality, and abuse, especially of wives and children. We need to constantly guard against immorality, pornography, and sexual permissiveness that would destroy the purity of the family members, young and old.

Such evils are very real and very threatening. One has but to read the headlines of our newspapers and magazines to become frighteningly aware of the crumbling, destructive influences which surround us.

Perhaps I sound like an alarmist. If so, it is because I am alarmed. I am greatly concerned, and so are my Brethren in the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles and others of the General Authorities.

If we could but suggest you go home and lock these evils out by closing and bolting the windows and locking the doors of your homes securely, it would be a simple matter.

However, such security would be ineffective against the evils of which we speak. They come into our homes on ether waves by radio and the television screen. We find these evil forces almost everywhere we go. Exposure is almost constant. We track them into the home from the school, from the playground, from the theater, the office, and the marketplace. There are but few places we go in our everyday world where we can escape them.

What then must be our service? What must we do? We must be constantly alert to their evil presence in our homes and destroy them as we would the germs and filth of disease. We must hunt them from the closets of our minds, freeing ourselves of such worldliness, quenching the embers of wickedness before they become destructive flames. How do we do this?

If we would escape those deadly thrusts of the evil one and keep our homes and families free and solidly fortified against all destructive influences so rampant about us, we must have the help of the very founder and organizer of this family plan—the Creator himself. There is only one sure way and that is through the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and being obedient to its profound and inspired teachings. Surely we must be made to realize that the purchase price of a family hearth free of such evil influences is the keeping of the commandments of God.

http://lds.org/ensign/1979/05/fortify-y ... ence+homes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Then I consider this forum an evil presence in my life and I must be done with it. The disease of contention on here is strong.

ChemtrailWatcher wrote:Then I consider this forum an evil presence in my life and I must be done with it.

To each their own.....your choice. The contention is one sided though.....

Janadele asked the wrong guy "Why not do so yourself lundbaek, no need to wait for someone else to do it for you." What do I do in support of restoration of constitutional principles to government ? Well, let's see:

I was a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2008. I knew I didn't have a prayer's chance in a barroom of being elected. But in the course of my campaign for myself and Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate for US President, I was able to inform over 1000 Latter-day Saints here in Arizona of their/our responsibility to the US Constitution and its preservation/restoration

I serve as treasurer of the Maricopa County Constitution Party, and was formerly secretary of the Arizona State Constitution Party.

I am active in the John Birch Society

I participate in two seperate local Tea Party organizations

My wife and I hosted a fireside here this past Sunday Evening at which the topic “The Book of Mormon, The Constitution, And You” was presented by a member better versed in the topic than I am.

I participate in occasional seminars to further educate myself in constitutional principles.

I could go on, but basically, I follow the 1987 admonition of President Benson's talk “Our Divine Constitution” in the General Conference which began with:“How then can we best befriend the Constitution in this critical hour and secure the blessings of liberty and ensure the protection and guidance of our Father in Heaven?”
http://classic.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.j" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 82620aRCRD
Read just that much of his talk and then try doing it.

I may not be leading the charge, but I am in the thick of it.

Who's cruel ? Me ? For trying to awake LDSs to our responsibility to the US Constitution and its preservation/restoration ? I have been accused of being hateful and unforgiving just because I calls 'em as I sees 'em. But if that's cruel I stand guilty as charged and I am proud of it.

Janadele wrote:Mitt takes the doctrine of free agency seriously, it is a fine line when political decisions on matters affecting others are required. Mitt was not a dictator in Massachusetts, his was not the sole decision making voice... many others had input, influence and rights of opinion which determined policies.

Janadele wrote:That was at the time many years ago, as mentioned above, when as part of her duties as the wife of the Governor, Ann made a $150 contribution to Planned Parenthood to attend their public meeting. She also attended pro life meetings and joined a pro life group.
On January 24, 2011 Governor Romney issued the following statement on the March for Life in Washington, DC: “In great number, men and women from across our country are gathered today on the Mall in Washington in the cause of defending the rights of the unborn. All of them are marching today in the spirit of compassion and mercy, and I share their commitment to laws that protect the innocent and uphold a culture of life.”

Janadele wrote:That is untrue. Having been on the board of directors of Marriott does not mean any of the directors support porn. Mitt has never supported abortion personally. That many years ago he struggled to equate the principles of free agency with legislating what a woman could choose to do, did not ever mean he favoured abortion. For years now he has actively declared that the rights of the baby to life overrule any rights of free agency of the mother.

Hi Shadow, I repost the above in response to your question

Janadele wrote:

Janadele wrote:That many years ago he struggled to equate the principles of free agency with legislating what a woman could choose to do, did not ever mean he favoured abortion. For years now he has actively declared that the rights of the baby to life overrule any rights of free agency of the mother.

Hi Shadow, I repost the above in response to your question

You may be right. Thanks.

Mitt Romney is Pro Israel... some here prefer Ron Paul to Mitt, from the below post we can see Ron is not Pro Israel:

Ron Paul to Israel: Drop Dead! but righteous Christians and Jews and freedom lovers fought back.
We are very happy to report that Rep. Paul no longer intends to offer his amendment! While we do not claim to understand the workings of Ron Paul's mind, we do know that the thousands of e-mails we sent to Capitol Hill have spoken loudly and clearly. Those who seek to rupture the U.S.- Israel relationship now know that they will face the determined opposition of America's vast Christian community. It is now clearer than ever that the great American heartland stands with Israel!

If you've already e-mailed your Congressman, thank you. You have made an important statement at a critical time. If you have not yet e-mailed your Congressman, we still encourage you to do so. The Paul family has certainly not abandoned its dream of ending our support for Israel. It is crucial that your Congressman understand just how strongly you would oppose such a move.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atla ... dment.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Who gets more aid in the Middle East, Israel or all of Israel's enemies combined?

Ron Paul wants to end aid to Israel AND all the others! With Israel's vast lead in nuclear weapons and military hardware, this would be in Israel's best interest AND America's best interest.

If people in this country feel that Israel needs financial assistance, why have the government take your money, take their cut out of it, and then give it to Israel? Why not just send the money VOLUNTARILY if you feel the cause is that important - rather than USE THE FORCE OF LAW to FORCE those who may not agree to also support Israel. Force is Satan's plan.

The founders clearly expressed that we wanted trade and friendship with any who wanted it, but we should have ENTANGLING ALLIANCES with NO ONE. And with us being trillions of dollars in debt, we certainly have no business giving foreign aid to ANYONE.

Indeed each country should look after their own.

But as far as siding with the enemies of your allies, in a war of words and propaganda, that is another matter altogether.

Janadele wrote:Indeed each country should look after their own.

But as far as siding with the enemies of your allies, in a war of words and propaganda, that is another matter altogether.

Could you please point out who's who?

Mitt Romney: America needs strong allies.
This is one reason why I am so very concerned by the current drift in our government’s relationship with Israel. In pursuit of a peace process, the United States today has exerted substantial pressure on Israel while putting almost no pressure on the Palestinians and the Arab world.

Consider how little we ask of the Arab world. Why is it that only Egypt and Jordan have peace agreements with Israel? What about Saudi Arabia? The Saudi government will not even sit in the same room as the Israelis, let alone normalize relations or work toward a realistic peace agreement. In 2007, at the height of the Olmert-Abbas peace talks, the Saudis were demanding that more U.S. companies comply with their boycott of Israel.

Israel, on the other hand, has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to a lasting and realistic peace. In 2005, for example, Israel handed over the Gaza strip to the Palestinians. This generous, unilateral act was met in return with rockets fired into Israel, with a coup by Hamas in Gaza and with two wars — one on the Lebanese border and another in Gaza.

We can encourage both parties in the conflict, but we must never forget which one is our ally. Nor must we forget that Hamas, like other violent jihadists, does not have a two-state solution as its objective. It has the conquest and annihilation of Israel as its objective. The notion that Hamas and violent Jihadists are motivated by “shared interests” and “common goals” is naive in the extreme and dangerous to the entire free world.

My concern extends to our entire foreign policy. If the U.S. government engages tyrannies and autocracies — countries like Iran and North Korea, Syria and Russia, Sudan and Zimbabwe — based on the conviction that we are dealing with common interests more than competing interests, it will not end well.

Keeping our word to our allies is a matter of honor, but it is also a matter of self-interest. The United States needs allies for economic, political and national security reasons. Good allies and strong alliances allow us to share the burdens we carry, complement and supplement our efforts and present a united front against those who wish us harm.

When we treat any ally in a desultory manner — and especially if we act in a way that causes them to question our reliability, our resolve, our commitment and staying power — then they as well as our other allies, all of whom are watching closely, will turn to others for their security.

When Poland and the Czech Republic are humiliated by us, they lose confidence in America’s support for them, and they may decide that they must incline more toward Russia.

If our friends in Latin America like Colombia become convinced that we are turning our back on them, they may feel compelled to become more accommodating to Hugo Chavez.

If Japan believes the United States is weakening its commitment in the Pacific, it may distance itself from America and draw closer to China.

When defenders of democracy and the rule of constitution and law in Honduras find that we have sided with their pro-Chavez illegal opposition, freedom fighters across the world, recalculate their chances for success.

And if Arab nations believe that we will accommodate Iran’s ambition to dominate the Middle East with nuclear weapons, they will move closer to that very nation.

Whenever or wherever America steps away from one of its friends and allies, or shrinks in the face of belligerent tyrants, those who are allied with us may understandably or inevitably step closer to our foes. The advance of human rights and the defense of liberty demand that America stands firm with its allies — all of them.

Interesting Israel wants peace? Well, the people of Israel do, but not their politicians.

You do know they attacked and took the lives of uniformed US Military?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yeah, Im not much of a fan of Israel, I am a fan of peace though.

EDIT: Im sad for this warmongering nation and people like MItt and his supporters who just don't get it.

Wikipedia is anti LDS, I never go there.

Wikipedia is anti-LDS, I never go there.

It is what those who post to it are. It is not an entity unto itself, it is a public wiki and can be corrected by registrants. I use it all the time for resource material links, not for itself.

"Seek after that which is good."

By the same token ("I never go there"), we would not read any materials printed or posted by the media moguls and their controllers, since they nearly all promote misinformation.

Janadele wrote:Wikipedia is anti LDS, I never go there.

The programming behind Wikipedia itself is neutral, and while there are anti-LDS who try to skew articles about the church, there are many LDS apologists who work to keep them in check. ANYONE can edit Wikipedia, so there is no advantage or preference given to anti-LDS; if you don't like something, you fix it. It's definitely not a place to promote faith or politicians because the articles ask for neutrality (that the pro and anti side of any discussion can agree on), but as a simple research tool to get basic ideas and/or to use as a "jumping off" point for research, I've found it to be a very helpful site. Because of how many people use it, I'm sure the article about Mitt has input from both his supporters and critics. Given politicking today, it would be wise for candidates to have supporters pay attention to and contribute to keeping Wikipedia articles about the candidate favorable/neutral.

True, but the owners /management are notoriously anti LDS who refuse to correct misinformation.

Janadele wrote:True, but the owners /management are notoriously anti LDS who refuse to correct misinformation.

Why don't you correct the misinformation? That is how wikipedia works.... Anyways the article had nothing to do with LDS people, but the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty in which Israel killed 34 Americans and injured another 120.

Im pretty sure Iran has never attacked the US as a nation, but Israel has... Yet your guy Mitt seems to present that Israel loves peace and Iran is evil. Hmm.....

................

I keep finding myself coming back to this thread for some comic relief in this tumultuous world around me. Janadele, do you own any silver?