Deseret News | Rocky is anti-LDS Church

Reader comments
Readers' forum: Rocky is anti-LDS Church

280 comments | Read story

Page:
< Previous
1
2
3
4
5
6

Glen | 4:19 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

I cannot believe the irrational garbage in many of the previous comments. Let's settle down and find reasonable ways to solve problems.

Why does religion even have to be an issue unless someone makes it so.

Solving problems to make SLC a real Crossroads of the West is what is important! Put your shoulder to the wheel!

Jake | 4:26 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

Personally I would rather see a non-lds mayor of salt lake. It would have that "give and take" between the two diverse views something "down the middle" can be agreed on for the benefit of both sides. sometimes I just didn't see it in Rocky Anderson. I don't remember Coradini being this decisive but then again I don't live in Salt Lake just in the same valley.

NOYB | 4:45 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

Is it really news to say that Rocky in anti-LDS? Isn't this fact rather obvious to anyone who has been in SLC for more than a month?

Comments continue below

Steve Graham | 4:59 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

Amy,

Why does it bother you that Joseph used a seerstone to translate the plates (in addition to the Urim and Thumim)? Is it because you were not taught this in Church before or do you think that one method is more approved than another? If he did translate by looking into a Urim and Thummim or a seerstone, would it matter where the plates were located?

Steve

Doug Barber | 5:32 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

Mark, you make a false opposition between religious faith and rationality. I do believe that religious faith has made Centerville, and Farmington, and Provo, into the delightful places to live, that they have become.

I am not at all convinced that "rationality" is what distinguishes Pittsburgh PA, Denver CO, and Los Angeles CA from Utah's most LDS towns.

Science IS mostly opinion | 5:34 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

Very few of these postings have anything to do with the topic. Notwithstanding, I could not resist laughing at several of the recent posts.

No offense Mark, but if you think that "science" (as in the published works of scientific journals or studies that you seem to put so much stock in) is not full of opinion and data manipulation, then either you are not a scientist, do not understand how the professional science process works, or are intellectually dishonest with yourself. Science is not the god that many want it to be. It was so called "science" (flawed as it was) that Hitler used to justify killing millions of people. I became a scientist (I have a PhD, for what its worth, and have been in the field a number of years) because I was interested in truth. But guess what? I found out very few scientists are actually interested in the truth. No, most are interested in three things- publication, money, and prestige. The same thing can be said of most politicians, historians, or so-called "experts" or scholars". It is absolutely impossible for any person to be completely objective, try as they might, as his/her views are colored by previous experience or views. I have nothing against rational thought or logic. It does make our lives more full in many ways. But what IS rational is debatable. It only takes one so far and then one is ultimately led at some point back to an opinion, informed or otherwise. If you ask two scientists a question you can get three opinions. In the end science doesn't always get to the truth. As Plato discusses in Meno, the only place one can really get the truth is--from God.
Opinion: I don't think Rocky is rational OR particularly logical.

Storchbearer | 7:07 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

I've not really appreciated him. But it's hard to believe that he could be an anti-LDS person when so many of is constituents are LDS.

I think it would be cool | 7:31 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

if Gary Coleman moved up from Utah County and ran for mayor. I would totally vote for him!

firecracker | 9:51 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007

lots of knowledge and information, very little common sense and wisdom. not much truth to be found here, mostly foolishness. your philosophies are founded on weak foundations, no matter how strongly you believe it, unless they are rooted in truth, they will eventually crumble and you will fall

mark | 1:56 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Absolutely, Mr./Mrs. "science is mostly opinion", you proved my point. No offense, but you proved my point beautifully! Thank you. Imagine, a scientist attempting to bring science into disrepute. As a scientist (by the way, you did not mention what field you study) you should look up the definition of science.
You never even addressed my argument, though: that theologies are dangerous and the USA should be prudent and avoid that path.
Also, I never stated what I "put stock" in, but yes scientific journels are a good place to go if you want to start an investigation of the workings of the universe. Where would you go?
Science a God? Please.
Hitler used science to justify killing people? Really? How does that discredit science?
Science does not always get to the truth? Again, how does that discredit science.
You make an assumption that I was talking about scientists, I never mentioned scientists.
One would think that someone that brags about his PhD would be a bit more of a critical reader.
No offense.
And Doug? I have no idea how your comments are referencing my post. I am sure I never mentioned what cities are pleasurable to live in and why. But thanks for responding, and since you brought it up I will say I would not chose, if I had a choice, to live in a city ran as a theology (and I am not implying that any of the cities you mentioned are theologies), as I would assume you would not want to either, sir.

Cam | 2:00 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Look at the demographics. It is not LDS Salt lake citizens that voted for Rocky, it is the extreme liberals that have converged on Salt Lake City who have also influenced many conservative people to move out to the suburbs. (partly why downtown keeps going down hill and the church had to bail it out to the tune of $1 billion in rebuilding and renovations to keep downtown from becoming a baron, desolate wasteland of run down and boarded up businesses for hoodlams. Anyway, it's the hard core liberals there that rarely elect a Republican to be mayor, not because the LDS people there want to hear an independent voice! Good riddance to Rocky and his extremist speeches that divide the state. He is really only trying to garner more national attention for himself, but making himself a national joke in the process. He has done some good for the city, but has also given it and the whole state a black eye in the process while focusing too much on opposing the church and focusing on his extreme leftist national politics, including his various anti-USA protests to impeach the president and bring all the troops home! Too bad he did not focus more of his time and efforts more on being bi-partisan, working fairly with all groups and just running the city efficiently like his job description entailed! Hopefully the next Mayor will work to help unify the city instead of divide the state down religious and party lines.

Oldpuebloguy | 6:44 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Rocky....see you later. You are not good for Utah and are, frankly, afraid of becoming a Mormon. Living a life, which to others seems strict, scares you. So, until you "catch the spirit" of Utah and it's founding fathers, just go on with your life in another state. Just don't move to Arizona. Move to California and buddy-up with those other San Francisco politians. All you want is to be in the limelight.

SLC | 8:20 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Salt Lake City is thriving because outside investors and technology based industries have relocated there. The population of this great city is no longer a LDS majority, nor is it made up of Mormons who see issues as being only one sided. In the 1990's this is what the states Economic Development Agency was pursuing. Now with outside interest and a diverse population, some want to turn the clock backwards!

While living in Utah 10 years we constantly heard a message of hatred for government agencies because they dictated rules that restricted uncontrolled groth and polution. Had they left, the military included, the 1990's would of seen a recession. Its like we want your tax dollars, but don't value your opinions or equal rights.

Living in Sourthern Utah a retiree mecca filled with "Snowbirds" and Californians, we heard all to often that they liked us spending our money there, but recommended that we shut our mouths and return to wherever we came from, if we did not like how local government was run. Democracy had been pushed out and the thinking was 50 years behind the times. Living in a one sided, one way theocracy took its tole! We took your advice and sold our home and several investment properties and returned to California. Good riddens you say, well if all Calofornian's and non LDS transplants left, along with those dispised government agencies, Utah would need those really wide streets, because your economy might return to the Horse & Buggy days. Some here would like that, but its hardly the message of unity and equal representation Mitt Romney is boasting in his Presidential platform campaign.

Give us your money, invest in Utah, give us your vote, but keep your opinions and desire for equal right to yourself! Is that true?

outside looking in | 8:25 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

I've lived in salt lake county my whole life and for the most part i have not been bothered by Missionary's or any one from the LDS Church , heck I even played ward basketball and was not approached to join their church . I think they have some good values with in what they believe , It's not the church its the people with in the church a small majority give the LDS Church a bad name , I think for a long time the LDS church has kept a lot of riff raff out of our great state but they can only do so much.

shelly | 8:49 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

I grew up in Las Vegas. Despite the fact that there are slot machines in just about every grocery store, 7-11 and restaurant; I chose not to participate. Alcohol was readily available, you could smoke AT SCHOOL, (high school)and you could wear anything to school including halters and the kind. There are nearly nake girls on billboards and taxi's; I chose not to particpate. But, I loved living there. Gambling, sex etc. was a huge part of Vegas. Nearly every aspect of life was touched by it. Still, I lived my life the way I wanted to and non-LDS can do the same in SLC. Looking for the good in life is healthy. We enjoyed the food, no sales tax, the shows and the beautiful hotels. I enjoyed the diversity. I had neighbors from all walks of life and enjoyed learning about their beliefs, except maybe the mafia guy around the corner. Tolerance is a good thing. The LDS and non-LDS all add to the flavor of the city. It's a great place to live. Embrace what it has to offer and put your critism on the back burner. We are all here to stay.

Amy Bjorge (et al) | 9:02 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

To All Posters: I'm sorry about all the not-so-positive posts that I've written. I really do love the LDS church and it's people. I have been filled with disappontment and anger in the past which has caused me to lash out against self-righteous Mormons and church general authorities, but I'm trying to get over it. It's really hard to do because I've been hurt by other people and my own actions haven't really helped me feel better. Sometimes I think that by critisizing others I'll feel better, but after I post and someone replies with a negative response, it just makes me madder than before. Please forgive me and I'll try to do better.

Kevin B | 9:05 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Gee, all these posts could come from members of my LDS ward! Okay you guys, come clean. Are all of you really members of the Copper Ridge 10th Ward?

better than original | 9:09 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Hey everyone, all your posts are actually better than the original newspaper article. Good fodder for somekind of a soap opera. It would be interesting to see the comments eminating from a really important article. My two bits would be something like "He who is without sin.......(you fill in the blank).

BJ | 9:26 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Amy

Did you say you learned about somethings about the Church on South Park? Good source.

Science is a "god", not "God" | 10:35 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007

The Hitler argument I gave didn't intend to discredit science, but illustrates that trust in "science" or what is called "science" can be every bit as dangerous as your so-called religious fundamentalists. As for my Ph.D., I didn't (and don't) brag. As I pointed out, it means little with regards to my search for truth. I merely mentioned it to show that in the eyes of many people, I might be considered rational or educated by others. However, just because I have a Ph.D. from a well-known university doesn't make me rational, so who decides whether I am rational? You? Please. People who are truly "rational" realize the limits of their own intellect, experience, and education, as well as those around them. People who don't recognize this are the dangerous ones, whether they are religious fundamentalists, scientists, or ignorant sloths.
You didn't use the word "scientist" did you? Just mentioned the word science three times. Maybe you should look up the definition of "scientist", or are you expecting science to be done by some mystical force other than a human being who uses the scientific method? Sloths maybe?
By the way the words are "fundamental" or "journals", or are you not enough of a "critical reader" to even read what you wrote. Apparently not, since you failed to read all of my last comments carefully. Let me clarify: When I search for fact, I turn to science, keeping in mind its inherent weakness, and that "facts" can be manipulated. When I search for truth, I turn to God. When making decisions about my life and my country, I feel truth and fact are both important. Theologies are dangerous? Maybe sometimes. But so are arrogant people that disregard people of faith, and put all their trust in so-called "rational thought".

Joe | 12:51 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Hey Mark,
what was the point that Mr./Mrs. scientist person proved for you? That a liberal hack such as yourself that only reads Al Gore's books has no business discussing logic with an real-live scholar who has actually studied for years instead of spouting off a few liberal catch-phrases he heard somewhere? That liberals can't understand the logic notion that 6 million Jews were murdered because of their religious and social beliefs under the guise of science or logic, and the same thing could happen again from a non-secular government. I think the point that your argument with Mr./Mrs. scientist has proved is that liberals only think something is rational if it agrees with their socialist agenda.The same goes with free speech. They only like it when what is said pleases them. As soon as someone mentions religion they are off the the ACLU lawyers.

Actually, Mark, I happen to agree with you in one thing, religious fundamentalists pose the greatest risk that our country has seen in years. But an inconvenient truth: They're the ones that we're fighting in the middle east, the ones that your liberal friends in congress and elsewhere, including Rocky Anderson, are doing everything in the world to stop fighting. The worst thing the Mormons would do is bombard you with a casserole or jello salad.

To Mr./Mrs. scientist/ A.K.A. "Science is opinion"/"Science is a god": You forgot to address your comments to Mark or anybody in your post. Also, what's with the sloth thing?

mark | 2:39 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Hello Mr./Mrs. Scientist. Yes, you are right, I did misspell fundamental and journal. For what it is worth I did pick up on journal, but only after I posted, but I totally missed fundamental, how embarassing. Thank you for the spelling lesson.
The reason I said I had not mentioned scientists, though I talk about science, even, apparently, mentioning the word three times (thanks for counting), was because you said that scientists can manipulate data and will give differing opinions. I am sure they can, but how long will a scientist be getting that money and prestige you talk about when it is shown he is manipulating data. And I would like to know the differing opinions when it comes to splitting the atom, or orbital science, or hydraulics, etc.
Yes I recognize that scientists are human, but we did not go to the moon on opinion, we went on hard science. And of course funding.
I recognize that in your personal quest for truth you may turn to your God, I honestly applaud you, we find meaning where we can.
If I was critisizing your personal believes I sincerely apologize. That was not my intent.
My intent, again, was merely to point out my opposition to combining religion and government.
And, of course, arrogant people can be dangerous, many things can be dangerous.
I, like you, put weight in fact and rational thought. I, like you, believe that opinion can and should be based on logic.
Oh, by the way, for someone who does not brag, you now have told us that you have both a PhD, and attended a prestigious university. :-)

Joan | 3:49 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

So sad to have so much friction among everyone. Life is much too short to be so angry with one another. Let's make up and be friends - everyone.

The town heathan | 3:53 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

The way I see religion is this way...particularly when the religion (Catholic, Babtist, LDS...etc)claims to be the only "True" church, is that their doctrin if it is truly from God and God is perfect, then their doctrin must be perfect. To have any fallacy is to say that God made a mistake. So throwing out the gauntlet here to all you religionists...which religion is "Perfect"?

Be careful though...because you know I'm settin you up!!!

As for Rocky....At least he had the courage to do something the rest of us (me included) didn't do...and that's to run for public office where everything he does is criticized by someone. Kind of like all of us here!!! :-)

A word about science | 4:25 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Science in the abstract involves two stages. The first stage is "coming up with a hypothesis." That stage is art, not science, and the vast majority of hypotheses that are put to the test in any given era will be hypotheses that confirm the era's prejudices.

The second stage is "putting the hypothesis to the test." That's where science earns its credibility, when the testing is done honestly. Unfortunately, science has not been able to overcome the human proclivity for the "fudge factor", but it's still the best truth-seeking antenna we've got.

There's a third thing at work in science - I know I said there were only two, but I lied. The third thing is "Can you get funding so that you can test your hypothesis?" And here, political correctness really comes into its own, and deforms "science in the abstract."

I offer these comments in support of the person who posted the comments, "Science IS mostly opinion" and "Science is a "god", not "God"", who makes very good sense to me.

mark | 5:36 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Hello Joe, did you read my original posting?
I don't know where you are getting your information on my reading list, I know I did not mention it. And you know my politics?
I have no business discussing logic with an honest to gooodness scholar who has studied for years? Oh my, I'll have to go crawl back under my rock.
What liberal catch phrases have I been "spouting off"?
Are you saying that I think something is rational only if it agrees with my socialist agenda? I'm a socialist? Really? Again, you know my politics? How? I have not discussed them.
You are saying I only think things are rational if I agree with them? What in the world are you basing that on?
And are you saying I don't like free speech when someone says something that does not please me? Who have I asked not to talk?
Have I asked The Scientist to keep his/her opinions to him/herself? Of course not. And, actually, I have been enjoying my conversation with The Scientist (except when he/she makes fun of my spelling :-)) The Scientist makes a very good and fun argument. I am just trying to keep up.
You though, Joe, seem to be just making ad hominem attacks on me. For what end? And insults, I'm a hack?
The one point you do make, that we are fighting religious fundamentalist in the Middle East. Yes, I do recognize that. In fact I said something about Middle East religious fundamentalists in my original post. But all I am saying is lets not go down the same road as those theocracies.
Joe, I'm liberal because I do not like theocracies? Good Heavens.

Mr. Scientist | 5:46 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Mark,
I am sorry if I misconstrued your thoughts about science. If you truly respect people of faith and can acknowledge the limitations of science, and yes, even rational thought, then perhaps it is I who should apologize. I just get so sick of hearing people in the media who use science, statistics, and "facts", in a way that is one sided and manipulative without acknowledging that there are often errors or even fallacies in reports, studies, journal articles (you'd be surprised at how often data is ignored), etc, which purport to be the truth. This is what I meant by "Science is a god" to some people. They don't realize what they worship.
Joe, I appreciate your support, but you should realize that both sides of the political aisle manipulate data to suit their needs. Politics in science is mostly what is wrong with it.

Slade | 6:29 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Well now, there ain't no honkeytonk in Salt Lake City yet, so I reckon Mr. Anderson better stay on as mayor.

The thread is fascinating...probably a dissertation could come of the study of the underpinnings of this discussion.

bookaholic | 11:17 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007

Raymond Takashi Swenson--finally someone commenting factually and compellingly on the article. Well done! Science guy--you're spot on and an interesting read! Mormons--keep on keeping on trying to do the right thing! We're not perfect by any stretch, but we give it our best shot and never give up. Anti-religious bigots--back under the rock!

mark | 12:30 a.m. Sept. 8, 2007

Mr. Scientist I do think that we agree on far more then we would ever disagree on. I do think that we could very easily find common ground.
Believe me I do not "worship" science. I do see it, though, when used correctly, as a powerful tool.
I also am in a profession where I get to see first hand how the media can get the story wrong in the particulars. That is not to demonize the media, the media, after all, is just made up of people that are, of course, only human. And, yes, humans that are very opinionated.
I do very much respect your personal faith, whatever denomination it may be.
It has been very interesting and fun to converse with you, I have enjoyed it. Thanks for a strong argument.

Page:
< Previous
1
2
3
4
5
6

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.