LDS Freedom Forum

Here's what Wiki thinks:

"Anti-Mormonism is discrimination, persecution, hostility or prejudice directed at members of the Latter Day Saint movement, particularly The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church). The term is often used to describe persons or literature that are critical of their adherents, institutions, or beliefs, or physical attacks against specific Mormons or the LDS Church as a whole.

Opposition to Mormonism began before the first Latter Day Saint church was established in 1830 and continues to the present day. The most vocal and strident opposition occurred during the 19th century, particularly during the Utah War of the 1850s, and in the second half of the century when the practice of polygamy in Utah Territory was widely considered by the U.S. Republican Party as one of the "twin relics of barbarism" along with slavery.

Modern-day opposition generally takes the form of websites offering alternative views about Mormonism or non-violent protest at large Latter-day Saint gatherings such as the church's biannual General Conference, outside of Latter-day Saint pageants, or at events surrounding the construction of new LDS temples.

Opponents generally allege that the church's claims to divine origin are false, that it is non-Christian, or that it is a religion based on fraud or deceit on the part of its past and present leaders."

Todd wrote:Here's what Wiki thinks:

"Anti-Mormonism is discrimination, persecution, hostility or prejudice directed at members of the Latter Day Saint movement, particularly The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church). The term is often used to describe persons or literature that are critical of their adherents, institutions, or beliefs, or physical attacks against specific Mormons or the LDS Church as a whole.

Opposition to Mormonism began before the first Latter Day Saint church was established in 1830 and continues to the present day. The most vocal and strident opposition occurred during the 19th century, particularly during the Utah War of the 1850s, and in the second half of the century when the practice of polygamy in Utah Territory was widely considered by the U.S. Republican Party as one of the "twin relics of barbarism" along with slavery.

Modern-day opposition generally takes the form of websites offering alternative views about Mormonism or non-violent protest at large Latter-day Saint gatherings such as the church's biannual General Conference, outside of Latter-day Saint pageants, or at events surrounding the construction of new LDS temples.

Opponents generally allege that the church's claims to divine origin are false, that it is non-Christian, or that it is a religion based on fraud or deceit on the part of its past and present leaders."

The bolded part stood out to me. I see this more often in members accusing others of being apostate and anti mormon than in the people being accused of anti-mormon. Just an observation.

But thank you for this post. It's a perfectly objective definition of Anti-Mormon! Perfect.

Stahura wrote:I see this more often in members accusing others of being apostate and anti mormon than in the people being accused of anti-mormon. Just an observation.

Hmmmm a thread about labelers, conveniently labeling those who label.... /:)

iWriteStuff wrote:

Stahura wrote:I see this more often in members accusing others of being apostate and anti mormon than in the people being accused of anti-mormon. Just an observation.

Hmmmm a thread about labelers, conveniently labeling those who label.... /:)

and you labeled me a labeler of labelers which makes you a labeler of labelers of labelers. :ymsmug:

iWriteStuff wrote:

Stahura wrote:I see this more often in members accusing others of being apostate and anti mormon than in the people being accused of anti-mormon. Just an observation.

Hmmmm a thread about labelers, conveniently labeling those who label.... /:)

side note, I didn't label anybody.

If anything, I judged others

Stahura wrote:

iWriteStuff wrote:

Stahura wrote:I see this more often in members accusing others of being apostate and anti mormon than in the people being accused of anti-mormon. Just an observation.

Hmmmm a thread about labelers, conveniently labeling those who label.... /:)

and you labeled me a labeler of labelers which makes you a labeler of labelers of labelers. :ymsmug:

And you're implying a label on him, so do we just shorten it and call you a labii?

I would say anti-Mormon is being actively opposed to the LDS Church, its leaders, members, or teachings.

skmo wrote:

Stahura wrote:

iWriteStuff wrote:

Stahura wrote:I see this more often in members accusing others of being apostate and anti mormon than in the people being accused of anti-mormon. Just an observation.

Hmmmm a thread about labelers, conveniently labeling those who label.... /:)

and you labeled me a labeler of labelers which makes you a labeler of labelers of labelers. :ymsmug:

And you're implying a label on him, so do we just shorten it and call you a labii?

I would say anti-Mormon is being actively opposed to the LDS Church, its leaders, members, or teachings.

As shown by Todd below, Mormons say this about each other.

Modern-day opposition generally takes the form of websites offering alternative views about Mormonism or non-violent protest at large Latter-day Saint gatherings such as the church's biannual General Conference, outside of Latter-day Saint pageants, or at events surrounding the construction of new LDS temples.

Opponents (including members) generally allege that the church's claims to divine origin are false, that it is non-Christian, or that it is a religion based on fraud or deceit on the part of its past and present leaders."

rewcox wrote:
As shown by Todd below, Mormons say this about each other.

Modern-day opposition generally takes the form of websites offering alternative views about Mormonism or non-violent protest at large Latter-day Saint gatherings such as the church's biannual General Conference, outside of Latter-day Saint pageants, or at events surrounding the construction of new LDS temples.

Opponents (including members) generally allege that the church's claims to divine origin are false, that it is non-Christian, or that it is a religion based on fraud or deceit on the part of its past and present leaders."

To be fair, I'm not aware of any of the Apostates that you refer to that think that the Church's claim to divine origin are false or that it's non christian. Only the deceit part of present leaders applies to the people you refer to

skmo wrote:

Stahura wrote:

iWriteStuff wrote:

Stahura wrote:I see this more often in members accusing others of being apostate and anti mormon than in the people being accused of anti-mormon. Just an observation.

Hmmmm a thread about labelers, conveniently labeling those who label.... /:)

and you labeled me a labeler of labelers which makes you a labeler of labelers of labelers. :ymsmug:

And you're implying a label on him, so do we just shorten it and call you a labii?

I would say anti-Mormon is being actively opposed to the LDS Church, its leaders, members, or teachings.

I think the lord would disagree since he said that the majority of lds fight against him in D&c 121 33-40.
If we are fighting against him. We would be anti.

Ezra wrote:I think the lord would disagree since he said that the majority of lds fight against him in D&c 121 33-40.
If we are fighting against him. We would be anti.

I would disagree there. That scripture is talking about LDS who have made wrong choices in how they use their agency, but I see that as different from actively and purposefully fighting against God and His church. We're commanded to be perfect, but it's understood that we'll fail in this. That's why we have an Atonement, and it's why we're also commanded to endure to the end..

I'll amend my statement to say being anti-Mormon is being actively, knowingly, and consciously opposed to the LDS Church, its leaders, members, or teachings.

I just think that scriptures shows that the lord thinks much more Black and white then we do. We love to think there is a grey area. But there is not.

Many called few chosen. Those not chosen as vs 38 says fight against God.

We are either his. Or we are not. And he is the one who defines that.

He has said plainly we cannot serve 2 masters.
He has said if we are not one we are not his.
He has said that we won't be saved in ignorance.
So even if we have good intentions. If we are not right we are not doing his work and defined by him as not his people.

Many called few chosen because the majority care about the things of the world and use unrighteousness dominion .

Most use unrighteousness dominion by voting their fellow men into the bondage of taxation. Which was described by h verlan Anderson in his book called. (Many are called and few are chosen).
That book was recommended to us by our prophet to read in general conference of April 65 I believe.

the scriptures have been pretty plain as far who are and are not the lords.

D&c 76:75
Which is Joseph smiths vision of the 3 kingdoms and who inherited them. Speaking is the terrestrial he said in verse 75

75 these are they who were honorable men of this earth who were blinded by the craftiness of men.

Honorable in my mind is most lds people and others. Bishops, stake presidents and so on. Good honest men and women. Who believe they were right and were not in what they did.
Well intentioned people. Who thought there was "grey". When only black and with existed.
Because they thought "grey"was ok. They never noticed the shackles.

If we are not aware of our standing and situation. If we think we are gods without realizing we are not. We are ignorantly wasting our life's serving another without knowing it.

When we (think) we are something. We are no longer no longer looking to see if we accually are.

If we think we are gods people. We no longer are looking to see how we are falling short of that. becuase in our minds we already are his people.

That's why pride is such a bad thing. Makes us blind to our own ignorance.