The Jehovah's Witnesses have settled lawsuits alleging church policies protected pedophile men who sexually abused children for many years.
JW Frederick McLean is one of the most-wanted fugitives in the United States

One Cult-ure is the same as another Cult-ure. Take away the practice of Polygamy, and how are they different from each other?

There is "no such thing as a Fundamentalist Mormon"? Then who are all these pervs that are constantly using the teachings of Joseph Smith to justify their adultry?

If the media can't get this right, I wonder about their accuracy in other issues such as politics, war, immigration, global warming and others?? They are even worse when they have an agenda which is most of the time.

yourselves from them, but now from all their teachings.....they are in plain sight in your scriptures. You can't have it both ways!

There are at least 4 churches in Independence MO that hold sacred the original plot dedicated for a temple there. They are (1.) The Church of Christ (2.) The Community of Christ Church (formerly the Reorganized Church) (3.) The Reformed Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are a recent split off group from the Community of Christ Church. (4.) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This is the group who left Missouri then Nauvoo, Ill. and traveled by handcart, wagon, & foot to Utah beginning in 1846. Their headquarters are now in Salt Lake City.

All can be loosely categorized as 'Mormons' with some being more 'fundamentalist' than others. The SLC Sect has no more claim to being the 'one and only' than do the others.

The FLDS look more Mormon than the LDS, from polygamy to communist living. Dose that make Mainstream Mormons uncomfortable that they practice a lesser form of the fullness of the gospel?

wishful thinking

The defining characteristic of the Restored Fullness of the Gospel (aka the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) is ongoing Priesthood Authority. It is not the Book of Mormon, nor communal living, nor reverence for a temple plot; and it is certainly not polygamy.

The sects you mention have rejected that Priesthood Authority. Regardless of superficial external trappings they have no more to do with the True Church than do the Baptist or Catholics or any other sect you may cite.

Frederick:

It's interesting that you feel more qualified than Church leaders to determine who can and cannot be "loosely categorized as 'Mormons.'" Using the same standard, do I get to decide whether or not you can be loosely categorized as a bigot?

I guess I'd be more concerned if I hadn't seen this same kind of persecution play itself out many times before. I'm convinced we'll convert this latest row into an opportunity to confirm what most who know us already suspect: We are who we say we are -- honest, decent, hardworking, neighbor-loving Christians. As usual, we'll forge ahead, for the most part, leaving bigots to shriek to one another in forums like this.

Them FLDSers believe that the Book of Mormon is another testimony of Jesus Christ. That makes 'em Mormon in anybody's book. That's the way it is, man.

Does that make all protestants pretty much the same since they all broke off from the Catholic church? No. A common foundation is about all they have in common now but a Luthern is not "loosely" a Catholic. The same can be said for the FLDS and LDS. Very different.

Sorry but I think the term "Mormon" is referring to the Book of Mormon, which they believe and use just as the LDS Church does.
Maybe the mainstream church should examine its role and responsiblity in why some of these crazies still exist.

I think those news agencies are not doing a good job, they should contact the Church in the USA for that, thank you!

Some of us are just saying that the fact that the "FLDS" believe the Book of Mormon is going to mean some in the media call them Mormons.
No need to everybody to get all defensive. Most people are going to judge what the religion is about based upon somebody they know, not what the media says.

Lets see they use the Book of Mormon, so we'll call them Mormon. The Catholic Church, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist and all the other confused churches use the Bible, so we will call them all Catholics since that is the oldest of the churches and they all come from that church, now we can call them all Catholics, Ya! Lets see all these churches started from the Bishop of Rome and then splintered off so they are all the same. Re: Karma, when was the last time you sacrificed a lamb like Abraham. Polygamy had its time and place, just like animal sacrifice and both where used by God, read the Bible, but not needed now. You can't have it both ways, you must do animal sacrifice if you believe the Bible, stupid logic. Do you question all previous biblical doctrines? Thank you all for making me feel better about myself and strenghtening my understanding of truth and those that kick against the pricks. You would have ridiculed and killed the biblical prophets had you lived in thier times.

To "Protestants vs. Catholics" I would say the big difference is that the protestant churches, themselves, would say they broke off from the Catholic Church. If you go back to Missouri, however, most folks would say that the Salt Lake Church is a break-off. Just because the SLC church is the biggest, doesn't necessarily mean that it didn't do the breaking off. Same with the priesthood comments earlier in this thread. Back in Missouri, you'll find others who claim they have the priesthood restored through Joseph--not the Salt Lake group. As a missionary, it always bothered me that we glossed over the Missouri era, not giving full disclosure to the splintering that occurred there. Salt Lake Mormons are a splinter group--they just happen to be the most successful one.

I view polygamy as started by God in the Old Testament. It is not a Principle of Salvation but a Practice which God turns on and off as the need arises. We all honor the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. These great men did not have just one wife. In New Testament and Book of Mormon times people were taught to have just one wife.

I agree, I thought it was very poor of the Morning Deseret News to use FLDS in a headline on the front page. They should have used Fundamentalist Sect.

Easy! The Book of Mormon addressed at least one policy behind the practice of polygamy. In Jacob 2:30 the Lord gave a clear explanation. He said, "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up a seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things." This statement was in the context of the Lord condemning a group the Book of Mormon people for seeking to justify their own adultery based on the ancient practice of polygamy when the Book of Mormon people had been directly commanded not to engage in the practice. For those skeptical of the prophetic mission of Joseph Smith they must concede the incredible foresight that Smith had in inserting that verse. It set him up years before he engaged in the practice a way to be both critical of the practice and to later condone it and ultimately to abolish it when its purpose had been served. For those of us who know better, we simply marvel at the wisdom of the Lord who spoke those words to one of his prophets.

Wilford Woodruff and Lorenzo Snow both called those who continued to practice polygamy after it was ended "fundamentalists." Very interesting to hear that current leaders are so paranoid and ashamed of their own history of the "great leaders" that went before, that they want to try to deny the designation "fundamentalists".

Whichever way the wind blows, that is the way the current Church leaders will steer the LDS Church! Whatever it takes to do good Public Relations and appear mainstream so they can grow the numbers and the tithing revenues. Just like a business. Just what we would expect from having Monson and Eyring (one of whom has a Harvard MBA doesn't he?) in the leadership!

Yes, some journalists & editors & media outlets are only too happy for any opportunity to subtly defame the mainstream LDS with the polygamy-tag. Calling the FLDS "Mormons", knowing that will create confusion, serves their shady designs.

However, if the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints wanted to be the Mormons, they should have spelled the name different, when they filled out the paper-work.

The Catholics, the Lutherans, the Baptists ... they are all "Christians". The many Protestant denomination are all "Protestants", sharing the common group-name. Same with all the branches that derive from the revelation of Joseph Smith: they are all "Mormon Christians", just as scads of Catholic splinters are all "Protestant Christians".

Some media presentations do appear to be trying to use the confusion to damage the SLC LDS, though ... or perhaps it is a potential Vice Presidential candidate they are aiming at.

Shi'ites / Sunni Moslems hold the Quran as "sacred".
Christians / Jewish beleivers, Orthodox and others share the Old Testament.

RE: Distanced 10:25 /Chrysler 3:34 --
Hey, if we all read "Calvin and Hobbes" does that make us all believers of the same religous tenents of Watterson? Apparently we read the DMN. What, according to you "Theories" and POV, does that make us.

FLDS, LDS, Reorganized LDS are all different churches.

It's should be something that you can deal with without telling people who "they are and what they believe".

If you can accept that, I'll accept that you can believe what you wnt without being labeled as ignorant.

A lot of angst here with some of the LDS.
Glad you feel better after your tirade Rob.
Is that what it takes for you?
This isn't a doctrinal discussion here.
Believe whatever you want.
This is an abuse of power and child abuse.
Period.
And the LDS candidate said publicly that he thought polygamy was a mistake by the Church.
I heard him say that. Guess that means he's entitled but others aren't?

For some of us, it's not so easy to accept that our church embraced polygamy for a time.
Call me ignorant or not faithful enough, but I've never been comfortable with that part of church history. Just being honest. As far as the media, well, they get lots of stuff wrong. No surprises there.

It's not a religious or doctrinal issue.
What about those poor kids and women who have been brainwashed into believing that the outside world is totally evil? Who receive no education and now will have to adapt to a new environment? Who do not trust their own judgment because of being emotionally or physically beaten up? Who have never experienced independent thought?
That's the real and sad story.

To Cool it 8:08--

Interesting the statement of not a religious or doctrinal issue, then you go into another issue which in my opinion was not the topic of the article either (while both my have merits)

I thought the article was that the media in some cases is not making a good destinction between the Salt Lake LDS "Mormon" Church and the RLDS Church.

I am sure the Southern Baptists & this "Baptist" Church in Kansas have similar problem or even the Greek Orthodix & the Roman Catholic Churches, not to mention the many sound-alike business names (which do so so decieve & cash in on the goo name of someone else) SO we should always check our facts to see who is being talked about.

Next Coolit It refers to all of the RLDS as emotionally deprived. While it has been a number of years ago,I had several young FLDS men working for me, they were good workers, in college, proud of their heritage and didn't follow the description of Cool it. By the way, I have had some Amish fellows work for me & I would give them the same high marks based on my experince!

I'm not surprised that the Church is critical of media reports. The problem we have in the modern world is that the media is more interested in sensationalism than it is in accuracy.

The Mormon Church does nothing to support the bizarre teachings of any other church, with the exception of the rights of all people to worship who, what or where they want to.

Tying the RLDS Church's activities in regard to these abuses of children and then tying that to the modern Mormon Church is illegitimate on it's face.

No, I did not say all RLDS? are deprived. RLDS. Okay.
You did not read what I said.
I am talking about this specific group of young kids and women who cannot function outside of their own society. The social workers and others helping them now have said that. Don't put words into others' mouths. You are talking about your own experiences, great. That's not the same as what has been referred to. Yeah, and the commments about other religions.. okay. Everybody has their perverts is what you are saying.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would just as soon not be known as the "Mormon Church." But the fact is that most people aren't aware of the various different groups descending from the LDS tradition. Anything reported about "Mormons" will be associated with the mainstream LDS church. If you describe the FLDS church as "Mormons" or "Mormon fundamentalists," you will confuse people. They will think you're talking about the only "Mormon" church they're aware of. When the guys in the black name tags show up, they'll think they're from the polygamist church. The LDS Church has enough trouble as is asserting that it no longer practices polygamy. Calling any other group "Mormon" only adds to the confusion.

The LDS Church is the "Mormon" church because that's what "Mormon" means in the public mind.

I think what some people are pointing out is, what they perceive to be hypocrisy on the part of the church, for complaining about media coverage; but not renouncing what some high profile LDS members have said about the original doctrine itself being wrong.

And "L", actually what was said by the "cool it" poster is related in that that person was expressing the opinion that maybe there was a bigger issue than image here.

I can see why the leaders would be disappointed with some of the coverage. But most people still do not know that much about the Mormons. I know that is hard for some in Utah to believe, but it's true.
Some people for sure will sensationalize but for others it's just ignorance.
Look at what they did with Romney. He gave a great speech about faith in general, but almost every critique I heard in the media was that he did not answer enough specifics about his Mormonism.
There are some bigots out there who would never give acceptance, but there are a lot of people who still just don't know that much about the LDS church and that includes some media. Not excusing the blatantly biased, but just saying. Book of Mormon is advertised like crazy and yeah it shows the full name of the Church, but "Mormon" is what people remember.

Weren't there prophets after the policy was ended who said those who continued to practice polygamy were fundamentalist mormons?

As far as the media, they live for this type stuff.
The leaders don't like it and I agree with that, but to those who think they're just picking on LDS, not so. They'll go after anybody and trash anybody.

I am so sick of hearing "Mormon" all over the news media in relation to this sick story. Satan is alive and well spreading his lies to the world about the one true church. We don't have anything to do with this evil cult so keep our name out of it!

Re: Anonymous - Yes the LDS Church allowed the practice of plural marriage (polygamy) for several years after the 1890 Manifesto was issued until President Joseph F. Smith ended it in 1904. The manifesto at first was applied only to the church in the United States, with plural marriages allowed elsewhere, particularly in Mexico and Canada, but was banned finally and completely, everywhere in the world, by the Second Manifesto fourteen years later in 1904. The practice of plural marriage remains an official tenet of LDS Church doctrine as prescribed in Doctrine & Covenants 132.

Regardless of the media hype, there are women and children that are being abused by the FLDS. People are sequestered, brainwashed and abused sexually, emotionaly and physically, I think we all agree on that. Main stream Salt Lake Mormons don't like to be associated with that kind of abuse. BUT... the LDS church must accept some scrutiny everytime a "splinter" group perverts one of it's teachings. Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. Embarrasing or not the LDS church practiced Polygyny for some time before it was banned (i.e. you get excommunicated for practicing it). I am sorry, but the LDS church will have to live with the consequences of practicing polygamy forever.

Even Deseret News refer them as "Fundamentalist LDS", why wouldn't other, especially those foreign, media mix up "LDS" and "Fundamentalist LDS".

Who created the term "Fundamentalist LDS", Deseret News editors?

My head is spinning. What is so darn tough about distinguishing between two totally different religions? Catholics, Protestants, and Mormons all believe in the bible and that makes them Christians, but it certainly doesn't make them members of the same faith. The wackos in Texas are NOT, I repeat are NOT, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They're basically a group of men who like to control others, especially women and young girls, while doing it in the name of religion. It's about POWER and SEX. Religion is only the vehicle to obtain those two objectives. By tacking on the name of the LDS Church these people try to legitimize what they're doing to each other and their children. Between the news media and the bigots out there who think anyone who reads a Book of Mormon or co-habitates with more than one woman is a "Mormon," what's the world to believe? CNN actually had a photo of the Salt Lake LDS Temple as a backdrop while discussing the story. How credible does that make the other stories they report?

Interesting comments - lots of misunderstandings, some gloating, plenty of misconceptions and a few good points. In my opinion, polygamy is a most difficult teaching to understand and accept - at certain times in history - by those of us who are active members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in 2008. Nevertheless, many of these comments just reflect the writer's bias and certainly the influence of you know who. It's too bad the "press" - and I use the term loosely - can't see the differences and publish true and accurate stories. Like one writer stated - if they can't get a simple distinction correct in this story how can they be trusted to correctly tell other more complicated "stories". The simple fact remains - much of the press is just lazy or ignorant or are intentionally biased. It is hard to believe much of anything reported in the newspapers - especially nationally or internationally. Thank goodness for the sports pages!

Get a life!

The truth hurts. Give it up mormons. The fact they say that there is no such thing as a "fundamental" mormon speaks volumes. Give it up, everyone knows but you, Just read a little, you dont want to end up like them do you?

So, inquiring minds want to know, what else does the good old media get wrong? I suspect a very lot.

The "mainstream" LDS church certainly is in a pickle whenever these reports of abuse emerge. One would have thought that the previous LDS leader, having spent his professional career in public relations, could have anticipated and worked to remove the confusion in names and branding.

Truth in a newspaper is a death knell.

Rumor, innuendo, gossip and such sell newspapers.

Truth dies a hard death, lies live forever.

The media on this dropped the ball over and over and over and too many people picked it up and ran with it.

You can call yourselves whatever you want. Doesn't make you one.

What religion was David Koresh? Oh, you don't know or care. But....you say these are Mormons. Go back to not knowing or caring, please.

This is disgusting in the extreme.

to user sspmsaun

What is wrong with the newspaper calling them FLDS? That is the name they call themselves. Also they should be free to even call them self "Mormon Fundamentalist" if the want to. Why should only the LDS Church based in Salt Lake City be able to use the term "Mormon"?

Some LDS get really upset if people don't want them to use the title "Christian" but at the same time they get upset when others want to use the term "FLDS" or "Mormon" that are other sects of Mormonism.

First of all, lets get one thing straight. Polygamy has NEVER been commanded, endorsed, allowed, tolerated, or approved by God. Never. Never. Never.

Those who practiced it in the Old Testament were condemned for it. Every time. Without exception. You cannot find ANY scriptural approval of polygamy anywhere in the Bible. Nowhere. In any translation. Period.

Second fact. What is now the LDS faith was started by men who practiced polygamy. If you LDS are going to claim Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, and the rest as YOUR "prophets, seers and revelators," then you MUST accept the fact that THEY STARTED AMERICAN POLYGAMY! The ONLY way you can distance yourselves from polygamy is by denying or denouncing those original "prophets"!

I mean the "Declaration" that announces the end of polygamy isn't even considered to be a REVELATION in your Church! What? Are you all secretly holding onto the doctrine of polygamy and just biding your time by giving the appearance of monogamy? Does the LDS Church actually secretly endorse the FLDS polygamy? Is that why the FLDS weren't prosecuted in Utah?

Makes the media suspicious. The confusion is the fault of the LDS Church.

Saying the FLDS are Mormon is like saying the Lutherans are Roman Catholic.

Ditto, just love the last comment by The NIT! the only thing that the media can get right, are the sport scores!!!

Anyone with a brain will know the difference. Or is that too hard to understand.

The two religions (FLDS and The Church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints) are as different as night and day.

So what these FLDS hold on to the Book of Mormon. It is the only thing they have going for them. They have lost the spirit of the true message and proper priesthood authority..and living the law of the land.

What was practiced over a century ago under the direction of the Lord himself, is now no longer practiced and taken from the earth by the Lord himself as well.

People mince words and forget to hold those who do such horrible things in the name of religion.

Educated people and those who follow the spirit know exactly what is happening here.

Why wasted your breath having a cat fight over things that people just like argue about?

Give it up folks you share a common book, common practices and a common past. Sounds like a pretty close relationship to me. The term 'two lungs of the same body' come to mind in describing the relationship of the two LDS sects.

Why you ask? Because the Salt Lake based church owns the trademark "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints", having established that from first (and continuous) use in commerce, and also because under the common law the term Mormon has acquired secondary meaning to designate the Salt Lake based church, which makes that a protected trademark also.

That is why the LDS church should be able to control the term. The reason we have such laws is to avoide public confusion, which is exactly what we have right now.