Reader comments
Mountain Meadows: Church asked to turn over site, take names off records
198 comments | Read story
Get today's headlines via email
Afternoon edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In Faith
Across Site
- Top Republican wants vote on birth...
- 'I Believe' license plates available...
- Fire destroys barn storing items...
- Army officer wants humanism...
- Will Islam embrace pluralism?
- Conservatives shrug at Obama birth...
- As Syria burns, neighboring Lebanon...
- Faces beyond the numbers of long-term...
- Court to decide if religious...
- Bishops seek forgiveness for clergy...
In Faith
Across Site
- Ties that bind? How interfaith...
- Evangelicals and Mormons: Can we talk?
- Faces beyond the numbers of long-term...
- Obama: Birth control policy meets...
- Court to decide if religious...
- Vatican besieged by leaks, conspiracies
- Conservatives shrug at Obama birth...
- Will Islam embrace pluralism?
- As Syria burns, neighboring Lebanon...
- New lawsuit filed against Catholic...
In Faith
Across Site
- Obama revamps birth control policy
80 - Evangelicals and Mormons: Can we talk?
53 - Obama to change birth control policy
28 - Boehner: Congress to overturn birth...
21 - Hatch says Obama violated freedom
12 - Obama birth control policy
6 - GOP vows to reverse Obama birth...
6 - Faces beyond the numbers of long-term...
5 - Vatican sex crimes prosecutor warns...
5 - Army officer wants humanism...
4







How can someone reporting the news make a statement like that? You could say that there is disagreement, but a comment like that belongs in op-ed. What kind of NEWS reporting is this?
Just to see the pictures of this site I can feel the sacredness of this area. And I shed a tear.
When you come to the area, offer a prayer, and thank your Father in Heaven for those who died here and those who remain. Let love and forgiveness heal the heart. Thankyou.
1-GIVE US YOUR LANDS, which don't belong to us.
2-GIVE US YOUR DIARIES, JOURNALS, PAPERS etc. which don't belong to us.
3-GIVE US YOUR RELIGION, (baptisms for the dead 1 Cor. 15:29), which
does not belong to us.
The LDS Church has been great stewards of this property for many
years and treated it with respect and dignity, as hallowed ground.
Now here comes the demands of rabble rousers, with their false
accusations and pathetic anti Mormon film september dawn. Universally
panned by critics worlwide.
If this keeps up, then maybe it's time to put out
"NO TRESPASSING" signs.
The Mormons have not been paid one cent for the
properties stolen from them. Let alone the hundreds upon hundreds who
lost their lives because of the persecutions they endured.
The case can just as well be made that compensation should be
given to the Mormons for the properties stolen from them in Ohio,
Missouri, and Illinois.
In fact, some of the relatives of these groups, now making irrational
demands, may have even been involved in the wrongs done to the Mormons
in the mid-west.
The atrocities committed on the Fancher wagon train were no greater
nor less than those committed upon the Native Americans, African
Americans, the Mormons, or the Witches of Salem.
It's a long line. Q up.
What these groups are trying to establish is complicity of Brigham
Young and the Church itself. History does not support this and yet,
they don't care. Beware of those who seek not truth and attempt to
re-write history to satisfy their own objectives. In actuality they
are trolling for dollars, a big payday.
Stop the Grandstanding!
There is a "Spitit of Contention" in the air, and it's not the Mormon's
who are perpetrating it.
Clearly, this author has presented evidence from unbiased experts PROVING Young was not involved. In the previous paragraph the author states: "A book by three LDS Church historians detailing their research into the events is scheduled for publication by Oxford University Press in the near future."
What more evidence could you want? It's in a book, by no less than THREE historians. Maybe it was just one historian I would be suspicious, but we are talking about THREEE historians. That's good enough for me.
"Beware of those who seek not truth and attempt to
re-write history to satisfy their own objectives."
I can't help wondering who cjarizona voted for in the last presidential election.
Doen't the Federal Government have enough to care for? This memorial might draw a couple dozen visitors a year. Should the Govenment be spending its funds to assauge a few individuals?
This story needs to be told in its complete historical context. We have a long institutional memory, something that seems to be lacking among the American Mainstream. I am all for seeking reparations, but that would mean that WE would have to get in line. Be gratefull that the winds of hell are still raging for there must be opposition in all things; right?
Please get your facts correct. It was Parely P. Pratt who was murdered....and no, it was not justified.
But let me clarify. The author made a statement of opinion. She sides with three LDS historians. It would be natural for any LDS historian to have a bias. When I read a book by Al Franken or Rush Limbaugh, I am aware that they will have a bias. It doesn't make it wrong, I just need to take that into account.
There are historians who would argue that Brigham Young was involved. His 19th wife, Ann Eliza Young, in her autobiography claims he planned it from start to finish. One may choose not to believe these points, but that is my argument... it is about who you CHOOSE to believe. If you are going to be making choices, rather than reporting news, your article belongs in the opinion section. I am not so concerned about an LDS leader or this argument of history, but on HOW the NEWS is reported.
My bad! I'm no expert, I was just wondering if it was true that Parley Pratt was killed while running off with another man's wife. There are two sides to every story and even the persecution put upon early Mormons had a causation. Remember when the Hare Krishna type cult tried to take over the town in Oregon? I'm sure to the people of Missouri a mass immigration of people with strange (to them anyway) religious beliefs was threatening. Especially when the early Mormons tried to take over politically. And aggressively tried to convert family members to the new religion. Much like many LDS folks in Utah tell gentiles to leave if they don't like the LDS influence, the Missouri pioneers reacted to new influences. Unfortunately they reacted terribly. I am not justifying or defending Missourians. Just trying to use the logic used by posters here to mitigate the actions at Mountain Meadows.
Thought you'd slip that one by eh Carrie. Sorry, that's bad and biased journalism. There's argument on that point and you claimed it as an error. Your Mutual teacher might give you brownie points for that, but intelligent readers won't. C'mon Deseret News--you are at your best when you deliver the news fairly, (which, I have to admit, you usually do).
As for those who continue to erroneously believe that the LDS Church attempts to deny the fact of the massacre or sweep it under the rug, you clearly have not looked beyond the anti-Mormon propaganda. Hate the Church if you must, but at least do your homework first. Start by actually GOING TO the site. Yes, take your physical body to the actual location. Explore the site. Read the information provided there. Next, get a copy of the September 2007 edition of the LDS Church's OFFICIAL publication, The Ensign, and read the article regarding Mountain Meadows. THEN try to tell me the Church is attempting to hide or deny the massacre.
Think about this: If the families of the people who shot Joseph Smith owned the land where is grave was, wouldn't you be saying that the Church should maintain that site? I assume you would. I know you believe it is a perfect Church, but for being perfect it sure has a lot of skeletons in the closet.
Any not agreeing with the church doesn't make me ANTI-Mormon. You know people can disagree without being an ANTI-Mormon. I'm no more Anti-Mormon than I am Anti-Religion is general. It's all the same to me anyway; I just deal with Mormons more often.
Anyway, go pray about it or something. God may or may not answer.