Reader comments
Holocaust survivors halt talks with LDS
297 comments | Read story
oh boy | 11:13 a.m. Nov. 10, 2008
here we go again...
Disturbing trend. | 11:14 a.m. Nov. 10, 2008
It's disturbing that this keeps happening. "The Church" has been
asked to stop this a number of times and they have said they will stop doing
it.
It's about time they actually live up to their word and respect others beliefs.
It's about time they actually live up to their word and respect others beliefs.
Dallas | 11:22 a.m. Nov. 10, 2008
"We do not ask for, or want your love"
I'm LDS, and would be touched if a Jew, Catholic, Muslim, etc...would devote any resources to my salvation, whether or not I believed it would help.
I'm LDS, and would be touched if a Jew, Catholic, Muslim, etc...would devote any resources to my salvation, whether or not I believed it would help.
Comments continue below
Ricky | 11:23 a.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I'm LDS and know Baptisms for the Dead is a valid practice, whether anyone
believes it or not. If someone who is Catholic prays for a Jewish friend who
then died and had a mass service to bless the Jewish friend, what effect does it
have upon Judaism? Zero. It is simply a gesture of goodwill faith and charity
towards one another, not taking away the Jewish identity nor any other religion
for that matter. I've had friends who are Baptists, Lutherans, among other
non-denominatal religions pray for my Catholic father at his funeral and I
appreciate that very much. Wouldn�t it be sad if the
younger Jewish generation didn�t know whose ancestors were
in the holocaust? I think it builds faith and family bonding for everyone and
takes nothing away from us.
What does it matter? | 11:59 a.m. Nov. 10, 2008
If the Jewish group does not believe in the practice that the Mormons are doing,
what does it matter if the Mormons continue? What are they afraid that this
practice will do to their deceased loved ones? Could someone explain why this
is such a big deal?
Confused | 12:00 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
If the Jews, like the Catholics who also have pulled back on the availability of
their geneological records, don't believe that the Mormons are the
'true faith' anyway, then why the concern over the proxy practices of
the LDS Church? If a person leaves the LDS faith and decides to join another,
will the new denomination accept his Mormon baptism? Of course not, and if the
sect requires baptism for entrance, he will be baptized again. Call me
simplistic, but if you don't recognize the spiritual authority of a
religion in this life, why are you worried about it's standing in the next?
With all due respect to the Jewish (and Catholic) leadership, their position
couldn't be more intellectually inconsistent. Mormons let all other faiths
worship "how, where and what they may," and simply ask the same
privilege in return.
Anonymous | 12:00 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Why don't you stick to baptizing your own? Leave the Holocaust families
alone -- you have no idea how the idea of Baptism hurts Jews.
Kathy Baumgarten | 12:09 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Would they be angry if Catholics were lighting candles for them? I guess I feel
that in this way we are saying "we will never forget" those who
perished. We will keep these names connected to their other family members safe.
We are Christians who take the responsibility of caring for others very
seriously indeed- we do not talk, but we act.
Free Agent | 12:14 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Compassion for the living should outweigh concern for the dead: Leave Holocaust
victims out of the geneology/temple work program. If this is the Lord's
work, it will all get sorted out in the eternities.
confused | 12:20 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
What happened?
I thought LDS authorities had promised this practice was to be halted?!!!
I thought LDS authorities had promised this practice was to be halted?!!!
Anonymous | 12:28 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
If Jews do not believe the LDS religion is a true religion then why do they
worry so much about this? If they don't believe in it then why are they so
upset? I am hurt that it was said that the Jews from the Holocaust have been
hurt enough and that they don't need any more pain (through doing baptisms
for the dead). Baptisms for the dead do not hurt anyone it quite does the
opposite.
Don't blame the Church | 12:29 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Members of the Church can add names of their ancestors; it is not necessarily
the Church itself putting the names in.
respect? | 12:30 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Time and time again the LDS church has violated their agreement with the Jewish
community to cease baptizing holocaust victims. With the sophisticated
computers and equipment the LDS Church uses to track geneology and baptisms,
surely its an easy proposition to flag the names of these victims as ineligible
for baptism. It seems extremely hypocritical for church spokesman Mike Otterman
to accuse the Jewish community of belying mutual respect when it is the LDS
church who first violates that respect. This issue and the agreements were made
over a decade ago, how long does it take to ensure this practice stops? The
statements and agreements and expressed respect for the Jewish community that
have been made by the LDS Church appear to be more and more hollow every time
they violate their agreement. How can the church possibly expect to be
respected when they are the first to repeatedly violate that mutual respect
themselves?
Linda | 12:37 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
No one can be baptized for another person, especially if that person is dead.
That person can be baptized only if he/she believes in Christ and wishes to be
saved per Christ's teaching. There can be no baptism of the dead as
practiced by the Mormon church. You can do proxy baptism until you are as
WRINKLED AS A PRUNE and it will still not be valid. You can only pray for
people's eternal souls. If they didn't get baptized while they were
alive, then you can't do it when they're dead. It was THEIR choice
and IS NOT YOURS OR ANYONE ELSE'S. Worry about your own souls!
BobP | 12:39 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I am by Jewish tradition a Jew although I am a fifth generation active Mormon.
My mother's mother was a Jew as my LDS geneolgy has turned up. I have
therefore submitted a few names of that line for temple ordinances. None were
holocaust survivors, but had they been I would have submitted the names.
For the life of me, I cannot see the problem
For the life of me, I cannot see the problem
Ricky is exactly right! | 12:42 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Not only is Ricky right but what organization in this world has a greater right
than that of a literal descendant? I say none!
JR | 12:43 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
When my father died, the Filipino Roman Catholics in my office collected
donations and sent them to a monastery in Mississippi to have his name prayed
over. At first, I was taken aback. He was not Catholic. But after thinking about
gesture, I realized that my co-workers were trying to show me their love in the
way that was most meaningful to them. I do not consider it disrespectful, just
different. People should accept genuine love when it is shown to them.
Relocated Southerner | 12:44 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I've never understood the anger over this. If you're not LDS and
don't believe the baptism is valid or has any effect, what could it
possibly hurt to allow it to be carried out? I had a baby sister (born three
years before I, over 50 years ago) who lived only three days. She (as I) was
born in a Catholic hospital, and when the nuns realized she was not going to
survive, they made arrangements to have her baptized. Now we were not Catholic,
but the nuns felt they were doing the right thing, and one of them came
apologetically to my mother following my sister's death to tell her what
she had done and ask for my mother's "forgiveness" for doing this
without her consent. I always remember that my mother told the nun she had
nothing to worry about -- that the baptism had not "hurt" my sister
since we didn't believe in infant baptism anyway or the validity of it.
She knew the nun's heart was in the right place and that there had been no
ill intention on her part. The same would seem true in this instance.
Anonymous | 12:45 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
How magnanimous of you to tell me it's a valid practice. Mormons spend so
much time telling everyone else that they have the real way to salvation, that
they think little of trampling on other religions. How about if I, as a
Catholic, knocked on your door repeatedly to tell you the "one true
way?" I'm sure you'd be as welcoming as I am to your
Missionaries.
Anonymous | 12:46 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Ricky,
Why wouldn't younger Jewish generations know whose ancestors were in the Holocaust? Please explain yourself.
Why wouldn't younger Jewish generations know whose ancestors were in the Holocaust? Please explain yourself.
Abominous | 12:51 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
In the great Abominous church, we baptize the phone book to extend our Abominous
blessings to everyone listed therein.
If you're listed in any of the Salt Lake area phone books, you're already an Abominator. Congratulations!
Utah county is next, then we'll be moving North to Davis and Cache counties. I hope you newly baptized Abominators don't mind. After all, we baptized you out of love.
If you're listed in any of the Salt Lake area phone books, you're already an Abominator. Congratulations!
Utah county is next, then we'll be moving North to Davis and Cache counties. I hope you newly baptized Abominators don't mind. After all, we baptized you out of love.
Anonymous | 12:51 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
This just isn't ever going to go away - is it?
Anonymous | 12:52 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I guess the "Lost tribe of Israel" thinks it can do whatever it wants
with or without anybody's permission.
Kind of like today's neoconservative movement.
Kind of like today's neoconservative movement.
benjamin hyam | 12:53 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
This is certainly good news. Why should Jews continue to be discrimated against
regarding temple work. Promises have been made that should not be made or kept.
Leave this issue alone. There is no way this group could be satisfied in any
case. I am LDS of Jewish descent. I have done temple work for over 3000 of my
ancestors, and yes some of these are Dutch. Some of the Dutch by name are
Groomsfeldt, Hamburger and Hamilberg. It grieves me to see 200,000 Jewish names
removed from the database. While this does not cancel the work, it makes it
difficult for Jewish geneologists. I hope this is the end of this whole farce.
Advise to the Church : Leave it Alone.
J W Goethe | 12:55 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
On the one hand, I can understand why Jews object to the LDS practice of proxy
baptisms for the dead. However, it is purely an emotional response, and not
based on anything rational.
On the other hand, if people have a choice whether to accept or reject a baptism performed on their behalf in the afterlife, or if the descendants of the dead person believe the whole thing is meaningless and pointless, I really don't understand why it should be a problem.
The Church doesn't identify Holocaust victims whose names are submitted for temple work. If a descendant of a victim joins the Church and wants to submit their name for temple work, should we really expect the Church to refuse to do it?
On the other hand, if people have a choice whether to accept or reject a baptism performed on their behalf in the afterlife, or if the descendants of the dead person believe the whole thing is meaningless and pointless, I really don't understand why it should be a problem.
The Church doesn't identify Holocaust victims whose names are submitted for temple work. If a descendant of a victim joins the Church and wants to submit their name for temple work, should we really expect the Church to refuse to do it?
Carol | 12:56 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
If we are right, then it increases there chances for a greater heavenly reward.
If we are wrong, what could it possibly matter...they are dead.
CiCi | 1:05 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Collecting souls? I thought that was the Lords job!
Respect them and leave them alone! You can't change their religion after they are gone! Ambulance chasers, good grief!
Respect them and leave them alone! You can't change their religion after they are gone! Ambulance chasers, good grief!
Anonymous | 1:04 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
who cares? It is children fighting children over superstitions.
Since none of it is valid. I don't care.
Since none of it is valid. I don't care.
hev | 1:06 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Dear Brother Otterson:
Please just admit there has been a faux pas somewhere along the line, where some of the over-zealous and faithful family historians have entered more Jewish names since the agreement. Have the names taken off and know that when the Millenium occurs all will be taken care of then.
Let's show respect for the Jewish point of view in spite of their anger. That is what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is: loving unconditionally. :)
Please just admit there has been a faux pas somewhere along the line, where some of the over-zealous and faithful family historians have entered more Jewish names since the agreement. Have the names taken off and know that when the Millenium occurs all will be taken care of then.
Let's show respect for the Jewish point of view in spite of their anger. That is what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is: loving unconditionally. :)
Reality | 1:07 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
The reality of the situation is that although the LDS Church itself has
stipulated that Holocaust names not be submitted for temple ordinances,
individual members seem to be unaware of or disregarding that stipulation. Since
individual members can submit names for ordinance work, it's a challenging
task to police every submission.
If you believe, as I do, that these ordinances are essential for all God's children, then you also recognize the beauty of His plan to assure that those who lived and died on the earth when they were not available now have the opportunity to accept the ordinances (or not) done on their behalf in modern-day temples. It is a massive task, however, when you consider the hundreds of millions who've lived on the earth and the relatively small number doing the work. Managing the resulting database has been an ongoing challenge for the church. Preventing submissions of a particular group such as this is one difficulty. The most frustrating to me, however, is the inability to prevent the work being done multiple times for the same individual�that is time and effort better spent on those whose ordinance work remains undone.
Eventually the issues will be resolved�patience!
If you believe, as I do, that these ordinances are essential for all God's children, then you also recognize the beauty of His plan to assure that those who lived and died on the earth when they were not available now have the opportunity to accept the ordinances (or not) done on their behalf in modern-day temples. It is a massive task, however, when you consider the hundreds of millions who've lived on the earth and the relatively small number doing the work. Managing the resulting database has been an ongoing challenge for the church. Preventing submissions of a particular group such as this is one difficulty. The most frustrating to me, however, is the inability to prevent the work being done multiple times for the same individual�that is time and effort better spent on those whose ordinance work remains undone.
Eventually the issues will be resolved�patience!
Anonymous | 1:07 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I have a difficult time wondering why the Jews care. The people are dead and if
they don't want to accept the baptism done for them by the living, they
don't have to. Just because a baptism is performed for them doesn't
mean they have automatically become LDS. They still have to accept the baptism.
The Jewish people need to stop worrying about it and move on. Unless they are
concerned about their people having a choice in choosing to accept the baptism
and don't want them to have any say in how they spend their time in
eternity, I don't understand whey they are making such a fuss. Surely
there are other things to be more concerned about.
bilbo | 1:12 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Come on, does a RELIGION own the soul and afterlife of members?
It appears no one has proprietary responsibilities to the souls of anyone, except what we believe to be a valid practice: Baptism of the Dead.
This practice affects in no way the decisions made here and in the afterlife by any individual these rites involve. If it is valid, then all win. If it is not valid, then there is no harm.
A bit possessive here, it seems.
It appears no one has proprietary responsibilities to the souls of anyone, except what we believe to be a valid practice: Baptism of the Dead.
This practice affects in no way the decisions made here and in the afterlife by any individual these rites involve. If it is valid, then all win. If it is not valid, then there is no harm.
A bit possessive here, it seems.
Waste of time | 1:13 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Why are the Jewish people wasting so much time on this issue? Baptisms for dead
people that have been dead for 60+ years. They'd be better off devoting
that same time to peace efforts in the Middle East that would start saving
Jewish and other lives today.
Just Curious | 1:16 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Who elected these Jews speaking out against baptism to be the spokesmen for the
Jews who died during the Holocaust?
How do you know they wouldn't want this done for them?
If the LDS church is right, they can reject this if they are wrong, it still won't have any effect.
If the LDS church is right and some of them want this work done, who elected or appointed you to deny them this?
Why I ask who?
How do you know they wouldn't want this done for them?
If the LDS church is right, they can reject this if they are wrong, it still won't have any effect.
If the LDS church is right and some of them want this work done, who elected or appointed you to deny them this?
Why I ask who?
KittyCat | 1:18 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
"The Church" is not the only doer of genealogy within The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Members submit family names as well and have
every right to submit their Jewish ancestors, Holocaust victims or not, to have
their temple work done. I can't imagine what is so offensive about it and
completely agree with Ricky and Dallas. Anyone who wants to help me with my
salvation, please step forward!
Ricky | 1:18 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Dear "Disturbing trend," the Church formally honored and kept its word
since 1995 with the Jewish leaders. Be careful not to jump into conclusions
that those names that appeared again may have been performed by their own direct
LDS descendants this time. This is an authorized measure between the LDS church
and Jewish parties. Some people who performed proxy baptisms not related to
their ancestors may not be aware about the standing policy for those not related
to them. There may be some "rogue" genealogists who know and
purposely violate this policy but never sanctioned by the LDS Church. Recently
there's a new system soon in effect that will track each member who submits
the names and if questions or red flags are raised, this person can be easily
located and then counseled not to use names not related to their families.
To Ricky | 1:18 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
the point here isn't how you feel about it, the point is how the Jewish
community feels about it. The bottom line is they don't practice your
religion, they have a different culture and attitudes, and different beliefs and
the vast majority of the holocaust victims don't have LDS descendants. It
is offensive to the Jewish community regardless of your beliefs. Your own
leaders have acknowledged this and promised to discontinue the practice based on
the fact that the Jewish community is offended. At issue here is honoring
promises made and keeping those promises. Unless you've received personal
direction from your leaders saying it's ok to speak up and tell the world
and Jewish community how it's not a big deal to baptize holocaust victims
you might consider expressing regret that you recognize they've been
offended one more time since this agreement was put into place. I doubt you
would be so happy if your own relatives names were used in satanic rituals or
baptized for the dead into some hostile anti-mormon religion? Just because you
feel it's a good thing doesn't mean they do.
Chris D. | 1:19 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
While I don't get it why the Jews are concerned about this-if we said we
wouldn't anymore, we should probably stop.
Or, if we've changed our mind, then we should say that. I think we have a right to baptize anybody who has died. It's a name, that's it. The public record of my name can be uttered by anyone.
No Soup for us, I guess.
Chris D.
Or, if we've changed our mind, then we should say that. I think we have a right to baptize anybody who has died. It's a name, that's it. The public record of my name can be uttered by anyone.
No Soup for us, I guess.
Chris D.
Freedom of Religion | 1:24 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Jews would do well to remember the concept of freedom of religion. Seems like
they don't want those in the afterlife to have the freedom to choose.
Might I suggest if you don't want to do something, then you should make that decision for yourself, and stop trying to impose your will on others.
Might I suggest if you don't want to do something, then you should make that decision for yourself, and stop trying to impose your will on others.
Anonymous | 1:26 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Why don't the LDS beef up their numbers the legitimate way? By converting
their brothers (non-lost tribes of Israel) instead of baptizing dead people
without the permission of the family members?
on second thought | 1:27 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
i dont live in utah and i must say after all the recent press on prop 8 and this
baptism thing -- i wouldn't mind if we went back to being 49 states, one
star less on the flag and no one will notice, you all could go back to doing
your own thing and leave the rest of the country at peace.
Red | 1:30 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
If Jewish watchdog organizations have no difficulty identifying Holocaust names,
the LDS genealogical/temple theocracy should be able to do it just as easily.
Genealogy/temple "paper"work is actually digital today. How hard would it be to have an automatic pre-screen that would kick out suspect names for closer inspection? Part of "Temple Ready," maybe?
A holocaust name may actually belong to someone else and shouldn't be automatically dumped. Just ask the Jim Smith Society!
Also, it's OK by LDS rules to submit holocaust names, if those names actually represent a direct ancestor. Actual descendants of holocaust victims shouldn't be denied the right to honor their direct ancestors.
One final thought: the practice of periodically removing Hitler, Stalin, holocaust victims, and suchlike from the IGI doesn't have any real effect according to LDS theology. AFAIK there's no way to actually "un-baptize" a dead person. Proxy excommunication, maybe?
Genealogy/temple "paper"work is actually digital today. How hard would it be to have an automatic pre-screen that would kick out suspect names for closer inspection? Part of "Temple Ready," maybe?
A holocaust name may actually belong to someone else and shouldn't be automatically dumped. Just ask the Jim Smith Society!
Also, it's OK by LDS rules to submit holocaust names, if those names actually represent a direct ancestor. Actual descendants of holocaust victims shouldn't be denied the right to honor their direct ancestors.
One final thought: the practice of periodically removing Hitler, Stalin, holocaust victims, and suchlike from the IGI doesn't have any real effect according to LDS theology. AFAIK there's no way to actually "un-baptize" a dead person. Proxy excommunication, maybe?
re: respect? | 1:31 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I agree with your sentiments, but I don't see it as an "easy
proposition" to flag 6 million names as ineligible.
To Anonymous at 12pm | 1:32 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
"you have no idea how the idea of Baptism hurts Jews." Perhaps I am
callous then. Explain it to me. Are Jews being persecuted by this? While there
have been some legitimate scatterings, gatherings, re-scatterings, wars and
persecutions, are you saying that performing a baptism rite in the name of a
deceased Jew creates some type of unfathomable pain for their descendants? I
thought Jews were much more practical and realistic than that. I think the
Jewish people as a nation have been through far worse than to have to worry
about the recitation of a prayer that includes their great-grandparent's
name. Feelings hurt? Perhaps, but without cause. I also don't see the
Mormons indicating their feelings have been hurt through the multiple forced
migrations of their ancestors, or asking for their original land be returned
back in Missouri, Ohio, and Illinois.
Does it hurt you | 1:33 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Do people think this is really a threat to baptise (by proxy) for those who have
passed on. They have their free agency on the otherside also, to accept it or
not. Personally I know they are asking for their work to be done, there are
some of those who know more than some of us here know. Just wondering why it
bothers people so much. You get a two for one, their work done and a connection
made through geneology to your ancestors wow!, that is amazing. And you really
don't have to feel a thing. It is a painless gift the one who has passed on
gets, if they want it, when it is offered to them. Doesn't hurt you at
all. I would love to hear if it does hurt you in anyway.
Oh Brother | 1:34 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I guess the world is not that bad off, if we can worry about such things as how
many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
Your life must be worry free | 1:38 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Go ahead and baptise me, just don't start withdrawing from my bank account
and have tithing automatically withdrawn.
Whew are there not more serious problems to worry about?
Whew are there not more serious problems to worry about?
Henry Drummond | 1:39 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
The Church has been aided by many organizations in building its database of
names. Some of those organizations have insisted that the names they provide
not be used in Mormon religious rituals. The Church has agreed. I think what
is missing in this article is a reply to the accusation that the agreement has
not been lived up to. If it hasn't been lived up to was it on purpose or
inadvertent? I suspect the later. So much of this is being done with databases
meshing untold millions of records.
Re: Confused | 1:44 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
The problem here is that the Jews want the LDS Church to stop ALL proxy baptisms
of Jews, even if the names are submitted by living relatives who are members of
the Church.
In the past, persons had submitted the names of Holocaust victims or Jews they were not related to for baptismal work. By previous agreement, the Church removed these names from the records.
However, there are members of the Church who are related to these persons and they re-submit the names as part of their genealology. The Jewish group in the article wants this practice to stop as well.
In effect, they wish to prevent these people from practicing their religion.
In the past, persons had submitted the names of Holocaust victims or Jews they were not related to for baptismal work. By previous agreement, the Church removed these names from the records.
However, there are members of the Church who are related to these persons and they re-submit the names as part of their genealology. The Jewish group in the article wants this practice to stop as well.
In effect, they wish to prevent these people from practicing their religion.
How does anyone know? | 1:44 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
How does anyone know what the Jews who died in the halocause really want?
If not, how can anyone speak for them?
If not, how can anyone speak for them?
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.
Elder Lance B. Wickman of the First Quorum of the Seventy with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints talks about the 1995 agreement not to submit list of names of Jewish holocaust victims to the practice of baptism for the dead.
Related content
- Renault will stay in Formula 1 9:43 a.m.
- Spain No. 1, US 14th in final rankings 9:43 a.m.
- Angels, Matsui agree to 1-year deal 9:41 a.m.
- Dubai sticking to Tiger golf course 9:37 a.m.
- Hunt on for Tiger post-crash photos 9:36 a.m.
- Wickmayer, Malisse cleared to play 9:35 a.m.
- Doctor charged in doping case 9:12 a.m.
- Blog: Another Texas recruit 9:12 a.m.
- CMU coach to take over at Cincinnati 9:11 a.m.
- Woods voted athlete of the decade 9:11 a.m.
- Josh Powell meets with WVC police
- Cougar seniors see a new Bronco
- Cougs brace for coaching changes
- Boy shot in head during struggle dies
- Will Chambers keep his promise?
- BYU singers compete in 'Sing Off'
- Tethering of pets could spur charges
- Fun games to enliven holiday parties
- Man dies when car goes into river
- Cougars O-line a strength
- Jazz stunned by Timberwolves
112 - BYU to wear royal blue uniforms108
- TV mom gives birth to 19th child103
- Stay the course with our president102
- Sources: Josh Powell hires attorney100
- Choir, guests unwrap musical magic87
- Josh Powell meets with WVC police86
- Letters: Explaining Palin85
- Barkley says Boozer is big problem81
- Letters: 'Liberal conceit'76
These days, more than half of adults actually want gift cards, those...
Some forms of beauty are fleeting, fragile as life itself, gone in a...
David Rankin, one of Utah's youngest and ablest astrophotographers has...
Latest comments
AMY ROCKS! Way to go! I knew I would see you on TV one day! Congrats and good...
they want to increse the tax you pay on food, and then give each other a...
Medicare only pays about $500 for a $2000 MRI. The article is non-sensical....
It's only going to get worse, liberals hate Mormons.
Can the annual hangnail be far off for Loozer? He's not accustomed to...
This state won't give teachers a raise, the legislators will give themselves...
Why all the hysteria over a bonanza that no one else is smart enough to...
Does the book also include chapters on all the divine prophets' concubines...
Let's see... women in the old testament... I could write that, and entitle it...
RE: Angela Best comments I've read yet!
Advertisements