Reader comments
Groups want church to back historic landmark status
22 comments | Read story
joe | 3:41 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Enough already! We can no more continue this 150 year old mormon witch hunt
than we can hate all of the residents of Missouri for past wrongs from the same
time period. Research the story as far as possible, protect the hallowed ground
and move on!
Astarte | 4:10 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Joe, you speak as if we have been continuously persecuting the Mormons for the
entire 150 year history of this event. The truth is, most Mormons and citizens
of the U.S. are just now becoming aware of this event, and it is due to the
accidental unearthing of the remains in 1999. If it hadn't been for that
singular event, I highly doubt that this tragedy would have been elevated to the
high scrutiny that it has fallen under today, and the church has only themselves
to blame for that. The church was actively trying to rebury the remains before
a full accounting of the anthropologists and forensic scientist could assess
what their manner of death was, and likely point to the murderers, be they
Indians or Mormons. But because of the hasty action of the church authorities,
we may never really know how many individuals are there, why they died,or who is
to blame. And that is what the church wants: plausible deniability. As long
as there is a chance that Indians can be blamed, or that only a couple rogue
Mormons took part, the church will look better. If it could be shown that most
of the victims fell by close range shots to the head, or in the back, the church
would look worse to its faithful members who are just learning of the events for
the first time ever. Even the fact that the Arkansas history books never
mention this event should be telling enough that this is not a 'witch
hunt' but an effort to discover the truth, a cause the church cannot
support. Why should the church get to be the sole stewards of the land?
REMAY | 4:35 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
How about a monument in Arkansas, provided by its citizens, at the spot where
vengeful bigots chased down and murdered Parley P. Pratt while local authorities
looked the other way, and then did nothing to bring justice to the murderers?
How about a national monument in Carthage, Illinois where Joseph and Hyrum Smith were murdered while in the custody of the government who did nothing to prevent it or prosecute it after the fact? Why don't we have a chapter in the history books about that murder?
How about an apology from the states of Illinois, Missouri, New York, Ohio, etc. for illegally allowing Mormons to be deprived of their liberty, lives and property while doing nothing to uphold their constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion?
Does all this fuss about one isolated incident by some wild-eyed settlers in Southern Utah seem a little one-sided given the complete history of the LDS church?
How about a national monument in Carthage, Illinois where Joseph and Hyrum Smith were murdered while in the custody of the government who did nothing to prevent it or prosecute it after the fact? Why don't we have a chapter in the history books about that murder?
How about an apology from the states of Illinois, Missouri, New York, Ohio, etc. for illegally allowing Mormons to be deprived of their liberty, lives and property while doing nothing to uphold their constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion?
Does all this fuss about one isolated incident by some wild-eyed settlers in Southern Utah seem a little one-sided given the complete history of the LDS church?
Comments continue below
joe | 4:46 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
REMAY,
Well put, thank you!
Well put, thank you!
Eye for Eye | 5:59 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Does anyone know if any of the people from Arkansas that were murdered at
Mountain Meadows were former Slave Owners? If so, I believe that the
descendants of those people should be responsible for slave
reperations.(spelling) Any thoughts?
Martin Harris | 6:27 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Joe and Remay,
So now it is about a monument for a monument? The LDS church has plenty of resources available for researching and memorializing its own history however it sees fit.
Why the animosity towards descendents who want to have control over the ground their ancestors were murdered on? This group is not trying to deny the LDS church its own history, they are simply trying to gain control over a part of their history.
Any injustices suffered by members of the LDS community in the past have no bearing on this monument. Rhetoric like yours is simply divisive and totally side-steps the issue at hand.
Would you suggest that the LDS church buy up other historic lands to leverage them towards memorializing their own history? Who are you angry towards?
So now it is about a monument for a monument? The LDS church has plenty of resources available for researching and memorializing its own history however it sees fit.
Why the animosity towards descendents who want to have control over the ground their ancestors were murdered on? This group is not trying to deny the LDS church its own history, they are simply trying to gain control over a part of their history.
Any injustices suffered by members of the LDS community in the past have no bearing on this monument. Rhetoric like yours is simply divisive and totally side-steps the issue at hand.
Would you suggest that the LDS church buy up other historic lands to leverage them towards memorializing their own history? Who are you angry towards?
talktokeri | 7:07 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Martin Harris,
What did you just say in plain English? Should the descendents of those killed or affected by the Twin Towers have a right to own that plot of ground? Maybe some of them want the story told differently.
And, why should a church or person be expected to apologize for something that happened 150 years ago? Are they supposed to publicly apologize everytime one of their members or employees makes a mistake? Should I go out and find all of the descendents of the man my fourth great-grandfather killed in a fight and apologize to them because their ancestor and my ancestor had a fight when who knows why the fight happened?!!!
If left alone, the LDS Church will take very good care of that property. The Federal Government has enough things to worry about spending their money on why make the tax payers pay for one more thing?
What did you just say in plain English? Should the descendents of those killed or affected by the Twin Towers have a right to own that plot of ground? Maybe some of them want the story told differently.
And, why should a church or person be expected to apologize for something that happened 150 years ago? Are they supposed to publicly apologize everytime one of their members or employees makes a mistake? Should I go out and find all of the descendents of the man my fourth great-grandfather killed in a fight and apologize to them because their ancestor and my ancestor had a fight when who knows why the fight happened?!!!
If left alone, the LDS Church will take very good care of that property. The Federal Government has enough things to worry about spending their money on why make the tax payers pay for one more thing?
Just a Note | 7:33 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Remay,
Parley Pratt was killed by the husband of a Woman he took on as a polygamous spouse while she was still legally married. He wasn't even from Arkansas.
Parley Pratt was killed by the husband of a Woman he took on as a polygamous spouse while she was still legally married. He wasn't even from Arkansas.
D.G. | 7:42 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Martin Harris is correct. What I find interesting is the silence from
descendants of John D. Lee and Juanita Brooks. Regardless of whether or not
Brigham Young or George A. Smith knew about, condoned, or ordered the massacre,
there can be no doubt that John D. Lee was following orders from religious and
military superiors, and that, too, under threat of death himself! As such, and
despite his original acquittal only a couple of years after the massacre, Lee
was tried 20 years later and executed for the massacre! Shouldn't his name
be cleared and his superiors - either the Stake President and head of the
militia, or perhaps even Brigham Young or George A. Smith be "blamed"
for the event?
Similarly, as part of a century-long cover-up, Juanita Brooks was excommunicated for publishing the most well-known, scholarly report on the subject. I understand that her "blessings" were restored years later, but the story (the cover-up) is incomplete without an official apology to her, don't you think? If the Church is going to come clean, they need to come completely clean.
Similarly, as part of a century-long cover-up, Juanita Brooks was excommunicated for publishing the most well-known, scholarly report on the subject. I understand that her "blessings" were restored years later, but the story (the cover-up) is incomplete without an official apology to her, don't you think? If the Church is going to come clean, they need to come completely clean.
Martin Harris | 8:28 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
talktokeri,
First of all I thought my English was quite plain, you seemed to understand my point. . .somewhat.
First of all, the descendants of the Mountain Meadows Massacre victims are not trying to "own" the ground. Much like the relatives of the 9-11 victims you drew your analogy from, they would like the ground owned by their representative government, not the religious organization to which the murderers of their ancestors belonged. The situation now is more akin to Saudi Arabia owning the site where the Twin Towers stood.
Secondly, what is everyone's big rush to simply forget what happened 150 years ago? I'm sorry, but that is NOT that long ago, and I find it curious that the people who want to say it was long ago are not the descendants of the victims. Is the argument that historical events somehow have NO bearing on the present if they occurred far enough in the past? If so, what is the limit on that? 50 years ago? 100? When is it OK to begin forgetting about 9-11, this event we all feel call on with such ease to explain our understanding of being a "victim".
There is a political dimension to memory, and that is what is at issue here; who has the power to dictate how we will remember the past. I'm sorry, but good intentions on behalf of the LDS church to take care of this site misses the point entirely.
First of all I thought my English was quite plain, you seemed to understand my point. . .somewhat.
First of all, the descendants of the Mountain Meadows Massacre victims are not trying to "own" the ground. Much like the relatives of the 9-11 victims you drew your analogy from, they would like the ground owned by their representative government, not the religious organization to which the murderers of their ancestors belonged. The situation now is more akin to Saudi Arabia owning the site where the Twin Towers stood.
Secondly, what is everyone's big rush to simply forget what happened 150 years ago? I'm sorry, but that is NOT that long ago, and I find it curious that the people who want to say it was long ago are not the descendants of the victims. Is the argument that historical events somehow have NO bearing on the present if they occurred far enough in the past? If so, what is the limit on that? 50 years ago? 100? When is it OK to begin forgetting about 9-11, this event we all feel call on with such ease to explain our understanding of being a "victim".
There is a political dimension to memory, and that is what is at issue here; who has the power to dictate how we will remember the past. I'm sorry, but good intentions on behalf of the LDS church to take care of this site misses the point entirely.
petersneal | 10:03 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
As a lifelong member of the church, I find it extremely embarrassing that the
church does not give up the site to the federal government. That's all the
descendants of the victims are asking for. Sadly, the only real reason the
church won't give this site up is because they fear a monument will be
erected that tells the real story of what happened, i.e., local Mormon leaders
directed faithful followers to conduct a mass murder. The contemporary
leadership bases policy decisions upon what they fear to be public PR disasters,
instead of just doing what seems right. That's why as kids growing up
attending seminary in high school, we were taught a highly sanitized version of
LDS history, instead of real LDS history. I.e., we were never taught about peep
stones, Danites, blood atonement, second endowment, dynastic marriages,
leadership crises (yes, there were a few instances where years went by where we
didn't have a prophet), and my personal favorite: not even church leaders
followed the WoW until the early 20th century. We were never taught that stuff
because the leadership was scared to death that if anybody ever did find out
about it, general faith would decline. Well....unfortunately, sweeping the truth
under the rug is never a good policy, because even if it takes 150 years, the
truth will come out. Thanks for nothing, Boyd. BKP's policy of trying to
sanitize church history will ultimately do nothing but harm the membership.
Darwin | 10:30 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
It's just an observation REMAY, but if my new neighbor was commenting on
how he had to leave Illinois, Missouri, New York and Ohio because he was being
persecuted by the authorities, loaning him my lawnmower wouldn't be my
first thought.
Let the persecution thing go, it doesn't sound the way you think it does.
Let the persecution thing go, it doesn't sound the way you think it does.
Anonymous | 10:52 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Juanita Brooks was never excommunicated. Period.
Petersneal | 11:09 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007
Yeah, Brooks was never ex'd. Perhaps this person is confusing Juanita
Brooks with Fawn Brodie, who was ex'd.
ImaVictimYouraVictim | 8:14 a.m. Sept. 12, 2007
Mormons should demand reparations for atrocities committed against them by the
U.S., Missouri, etc.
MMM-decedents are demanding the confiscation of private land and looking for the words "apology," so they can sue the LDS church and get money, money, money!
Blacks deserve reparations for their slave history.
Native Americans... Don't get me started on how much the government owes them all.
Japanese held at camps in Utah should sue, sue, and sue some more.
Muslims deserve billions for having to put up with the funny looks and mean "I-think-you-a-terrorist" stares they encounter every day in America.
GLBTs denied equal status under law...
Chinese should get past pay for building our rail system--not to mention money for enduring that William Hung thing (Racist funny laugh at China man, Okay)...
We should all hate each other forever and ever and drag up any and all offenses that anyone ever committed against anyone until we are satisfied, but we will never be satisfied until Satan rules the land. He owns us all, unless we drop the animosity and move on living in today.
Don't forget the past, but don't act like you lived their, either!
MMM-decedents are demanding the confiscation of private land and looking for the words "apology," so they can sue the LDS church and get money, money, money!
Blacks deserve reparations for their slave history.
Native Americans... Don't get me started on how much the government owes them all.
Japanese held at camps in Utah should sue, sue, and sue some more.
Muslims deserve billions for having to put up with the funny looks and mean "I-think-you-a-terrorist" stares they encounter every day in America.
GLBTs denied equal status under law...
Chinese should get past pay for building our rail system--not to mention money for enduring that William Hung thing (Racist funny laugh at China man, Okay)...
We should all hate each other forever and ever and drag up any and all offenses that anyone ever committed against anyone until we are satisfied, but we will never be satisfied until Satan rules the land. He owns us all, unless we drop the animosity and move on living in today.
Don't forget the past, but don't act like you lived their, either!
D.G. | 9:29 a.m. Sept. 12, 2007
I think my source is quite reliable - a close relative of Juanita Brooks from
the Bunkerville, NV and Southern NV area who insists that she was excommunicated
for publishing her work on MMM against the wishes of the Church leaders. I am
also told that her blessings were later restored, but that doesn't change
the fact that she was originally ex'd for "disobeying" Church
leaders and publishing a scholarly work.
I would be interested in other sources that show she was NOT excommunicted. Can you tell me where I can find such a thing?
I would be interested in other sources that show she was NOT excommunicted. Can you tell me where I can find such a thing?
Same Old, Same Old | 9:35 a.m. Sept. 12, 2007
It's sad that any time there's a story about the LDS Church, the
anti's take it as an opportunity to spout their hate.
In this particular case, it's truly amazing how we have so many "enlightened" armchair historians who have no problem testifying to the "truth" of what happened 150 years ago.
In this particular case, it's truly amazing how we have so many "enlightened" armchair historians who have no problem testifying to the "truth" of what happened 150 years ago.
Arkansas? | 9:52 a.m. Sept. 12, 2007
In the article, Burr Fancher said, "for the first time, a chapter on the
Mountain Meadows Massacre will be included in the new Arkansas history
textbook".
First, in the 1850's no one in Arkansas, of European descent, was from Arkansas. They were merely passing through on their way west. Arkansas just happened to be the last place they lived on their journey west. Likewise, most Mormons in the 1850's weren't "from" Missouri or Illinois.
Second, what are they going to print in the textbook; that these people were willing to go through any hardship in order to get out of Arkansas?
First, in the 1850's no one in Arkansas, of European descent, was from Arkansas. They were merely passing through on their way west. Arkansas just happened to be the last place they lived on their journey west. Likewise, most Mormons in the 1850's weren't "from" Missouri or Illinois.
Second, what are they going to print in the textbook; that these people were willing to go through any hardship in order to get out of Arkansas?
John Lambert | 12:07 p.m. Sept. 12, 2007
Juanita Brookes was NEVER excommunicated for anything. To say that she was
shows both ignorance and wilfull distortion.
Neither Brigham Young nor George A. SMith was responsible for the massacre.
I have no problem per say with the designating the site a national historical landmark. However have we done the same for the Cove Creek Massacre site and the Bear River Massacre site?
I do not appreciate the person saying the LDS church's apology was not enough. That the church apologized for what some members did without any official sanction is probably more than can be resonably asked.
I also disagree with their pressure tactics against the church. They should be pressuring the government of Utah.
Neither Brigham Young nor George A. SMith was responsible for the massacre.
I have no problem per say with the designating the site a national historical landmark. However have we done the same for the Cove Creek Massacre site and the Bear River Massacre site?
I do not appreciate the person saying the LDS church's apology was not enough. That the church apologized for what some members did without any official sanction is probably more than can be resonably asked.
I also disagree with their pressure tactics against the church. They should be pressuring the government of Utah.
John Lambert | 12:26 p.m. Sept. 12, 2007
I hate to make another comment, but since the person twice tried claiming
Juanita Brooks was excommunicated I would encorage him to go find a biography of
Juanita Brooks.
I was reading somewhere where they talked about Juanita Brooks being "ostracized" by her ward members.
The person who spouts all they were not told. If you read Joseph Fielding Smith's "Essential in Church History" you will get a discussion of Danites. There were times when there was not a prophet but the church always had a strong leadership.
I do not see what is wrong with the second endownment, and so called "dynastic marriages" are nothing bad. It is your 20th century squimishness that causes you to dislike people marrying women much younger than them.
Stop acting like church leaders conduct cover ups. Especially in regards to Mountain Meadows this is nothing short of a lie.
John D. Lee told Brigham Young that it was the Native Americans who had killed the Francher company. Maybe Young should not have believed Lee, but believing someone is truthful is no crime. Also bear in mind that why the investigation of MMM was delayed was partly a result of the Buchanan pardon.
Last of all, you obviously do not understand the Word of Wisdom's historical evolution. It was not sustained as a commandement that was a requirement to enter the temple until the 1920s. To understand its full evolution you must realize that the Lord had raised up Heber J. Grant, a man who never had a father because his step dad had gone off the deep end into alcholholism, quite possibly because of the strain of leading the handcart company rescue mission.
I was reading somewhere where they talked about Juanita Brooks being "ostracized" by her ward members.
The person who spouts all they were not told. If you read Joseph Fielding Smith's "Essential in Church History" you will get a discussion of Danites. There were times when there was not a prophet but the church always had a strong leadership.
I do not see what is wrong with the second endownment, and so called "dynastic marriages" are nothing bad. It is your 20th century squimishness that causes you to dislike people marrying women much younger than them.
Stop acting like church leaders conduct cover ups. Especially in regards to Mountain Meadows this is nothing short of a lie.
John D. Lee told Brigham Young that it was the Native Americans who had killed the Francher company. Maybe Young should not have believed Lee, but believing someone is truthful is no crime. Also bear in mind that why the investigation of MMM was delayed was partly a result of the Buchanan pardon.
Last of all, you obviously do not understand the Word of Wisdom's historical evolution. It was not sustained as a commandement that was a requirement to enter the temple until the 1920s. To understand its full evolution you must realize that the Lord had raised up Heber J. Grant, a man who never had a father because his step dad had gone off the deep end into alcholholism, quite possibly because of the strain of leading the handcart company rescue mission.
DG | 1:59 p.m. Sept. 12, 2007
If the decendents of the victims of the Mountain Meadow Massacre want the land
so bad. Then they should get their group together and raise the money to buy it.
If they are that concerned about the place where their ancestors died, they
should have no problem raising the money to buy the land and maintaining the
monument to their personal ancestors. Instead they are saying give us the land
free of charge so that we can give it to the Government, so that they can
maintain it for us. So it will not cost us a dime. The Government doesn't
need it, because they have a hard enough time getting the funds for the
monuments they already have in the country. There are a lot of other massacres
that have happen in this country. Like Indians by white men; white men by
Indians; Farmers by Cattlemen and so on. Personally, I don't really care
who is to blame. Things like this has happen throughout the history of Mankind.
Does it make it right? NO! But that is life. Back to this issue. Those who are
the decendents of this massacre. If you want the monument get your group
together, raise the money, buy the land, build it and maintain it with your own
money. Don't ask me or any other taxpayer to maintain your monument to your
personal ancestors. Now having said that. I am sorry your ancestors were killed.
I think that it is nice that you want a monument to your ancesttors. But do it
with your own money not the taxpayers.
REMAY | 5:22 p.m. Sept. 12, 2007
To: Just a Note. Even if your assertion regarding PP Pratt were true, so what?!
Regardless of whatever Parley P. Pratt had done or not done regarding the woman in question and her decision to voluntarily leave her husband, does that justify his murder?
The fact that the "aggrieved" husband wasn't a native of Arkansas, the law officials who chose to look the other way were certainly from Arkansas.
My only point here is that there are plenty of "incidents" that happened a long time ago that need to just be forgotten. Otherwise we'll be terminally engaged in "get even" useless recriminations.
It happened 150 years ago. Get over it!
Regardless of whatever Parley P. Pratt had done or not done regarding the woman in question and her decision to voluntarily leave her husband, does that justify his murder?
The fact that the "aggrieved" husband wasn't a native of Arkansas, the law officials who chose to look the other way were certainly from Arkansas.
My only point here is that there are plenty of "incidents" that happened a long time ago that need to just be forgotten. Otherwise we'll be terminally engaged in "get even" useless recriminations.
It happened 150 years ago. Get over it!
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Descendants of Mountain Meadows Massacre victims carry banners with their family names behind a single covered wagon to the memorial event Tuesday.
Related content
- GOP to stage health care read-a-thon 1:54 p.m.
- Stocks mixed as contracts expire 1:52 p.m.
- 700K packages of Vicks recalled 1:51 p.m.
- Groups still seek holiday donations 1:41 p.m.
- Driver drank before Davies crash 1:30 p.m.
- Sanchez to start for Jets vs. Falcons 1:29 p.m.
- Phelps, Hardy help US set record 1:28 p.m.
- Tag Heuer to drop Tiger Woods in US 1:16 p.m.
- Oil jumps after Iraqi oil field seized 1:15 p.m.
- 'Friendly Fire' author Bryan dies at 73 1:15 p.m.
- Susan Powell's family saddened
- 4 people found slain in W. Jordan
- Police: Murder/suicide premeditated
- 'Avatar' a visual feast, but plot fails
- Oregon State helped refine Bronco
- Frances Monson recovering well
- Football forecast as predicted
- Cleopatra relic lifted from sea
- Here are Max Hall's Top 10 wins
- It's official; Heaps signs with BYU
- Here are Max Hall's Top 10 wins
173 - It's official; Heaps signs with BYU167
- Conan mocks Orrin Hatch, Mormons155
- Susan Powell's family saddened147
- Letters: 'Liberal conceit'140
- Jazz stunned by Timberwolves114
- Susan Powell notebook seized114
- Josh Powell meets with WVC police109
- Letters: Explaining Palin104
- Sources: Josh Powell hires attorney100
For the latest news in the health care debate and how it affects you...
Latest comments
I'm sorry you are so bitter. There is a Savior no matter what you say. I am...
"Eliot, how much does Energy solutions pay?" No idea. Why don't you call...
Have you ever considered that some people just weren't cut out to be parents?...
And how is marrying one's sibling any different from gay marriage, assuming...
It is intellectually dishonest as well as factually dishonest to equate...
Won't be in the Super Bowl his team will lose to either San Diego or Cincinnati.
The more I think about this the more it turns my stomach. How is it even...
The reason why I think BYU and its leaders, players, coaches, students,...
I am 100% for helping the poor. However, after volunteering as a financial...
at this point. He and Millsap are too short to compete effectively inside...
Advertisements