Deseret News | Massacre apparently will never die

Reader comments
Lee Benson: Massacre apparently will never die

108 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Matt | 1:10 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Wrong answer, you halfwit! Think things through really hard before you publish something as heartless as this. I hope this bites you.

Geez | 1:17 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

That's pretty tacky.

Bot | 2:42 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

True Christians are forgiving (even of biased film producers with an Evangelical axe to grind).

Unfortunately, in today's political atmosphere, it is the groups who protest and sue who ususally get public opinion on their side.

If we were all true Christians we wouldn't have MMM or films such as this.

Comments continue below

Richard McFadden | 3:33 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

If anyone should appreciate the importance of truth it is the Mormons. What I find amazing is the way many Mormons view Muslims. And yet they support, like no other people the pre-emptive invasion of another country, resulting in untold misery. There is an obvious disconnect.

We are all afflicted with Cognitive Dissonance. The greater our religious, social or political affiliation, the greater the affliction. We hear what we want to hear. We believe what we want to believe. Truth becomes irrelevant.

BP | 4:16 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

I completely agree-Pres. Young would never have given the order to kill. It wasn't his way. Isn't it time to let go of something no one will ever know any more about. The articles (and now the film) can only speculate on what happened that day. Who ever was responsible will be taken care of. Let's move on!

David | 4:19 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

As much as I like Lee Benson, I have to disagree this time. The bottom line is that over 100 innocent people were killed by members of the LDS Church. That is a much more atrocious act than any mud-slingling that is going on with Brigham Young's good name.

The subject will never die -- nor should it, but this film is already dying a fast death at the box office. Roger Ebert gave it 'zero' stars in his review and it made less than $1 million its opening weekend.

Anonymous | 5:14 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

The reason MMM is "never going to die" in the minds of the victims and their families is that there has never been real closure. Denials and half acceptance of the LDS and their role makes MMM live on in the minds of those victimised. Stop jumping up and down as a church and take responsabilty and you may find that there is nothing to complain about anymore and everyone will move on.

Rick | 6:14 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Matt, can you please provide some evidence or justification before censuring the writer? What was wrong about what he wrote? I have often wondered the same things as Mr. Benson. Why is Mountain Meadows talked about so much when there were multiple massacres against Native Americans during the same time period? And throughout history, there have been similar atrocities against other groups. Why so much talk about Mountain Meadows? It was definitely an awful event, very awful. But it was not at all an isolated event during the 1800s. Unfortunately, things of this nature happened several times, particularly against minority groups, but Mountain Meadows is the one talked about the most. Why is that?

Lynn H | 6:15 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Thank you.

Cris Coleman, rural MO | 6:47 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Well, Lee, you certainly showed your prejudice . . . and mine, too. Remember this, however, as long as there are Mormons, there will be Mormon haters, and therein lies the real reason for September Dawn's being.

Hollywood has a long history of making Christians look foolish. After all, Christianity stands for everything Hollywood does not and vice versa.

Remember PBS's four-hour presentation of "The Mormons"? The Mountain Meadows massacre filled nearly an entire half hour, nearly one-eighth of the entire 177-year history of the Mormons.

Polygamy was another subject the filmmaker spent an inordinate time on. Most of the people who were interviewed were not even Mormons, although they call themselves Fundamentalist Mormons. President Hinckley, I believe it was, said there are no such things.

The filmmaker made a modicum of effort to try and present both sides of the issues, but her prejudices were easily seen by where she spent the most time, and those times were dedicated to all the controversies she could find.

Politics are the same way. Look at the way Mitt Romney has been treated by the media and many Christian leaders, simply because he is a Mormon. The same thing happened when his father, George Romney, ran for President.

So, Lee, don't expect equal and fair treatment regarding Mormons. You're not going to get it.

As far as these other two comments are concerned, they're a lot of hot air with no substance.

Good luck in the future from a former Utahn.

SLaker | 6:46 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Wow--what a bitter article.

Hector | 6:58 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

The fact that calls your conclusion into doubt is this: when, in the entire history of the Mormons, did any Church sanctioned group ever do anything without direction from the top leaders? That never happens. It is only with direction from the Prophet that any serious action is undertaken.

GEOEGE H.HILL III | 6:58 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

The FACT that Brigham Young did NOT order the "incident",did not want it to occur,was angry and heartsick afterward,just doesn't make any difference to the usual suspects.There is plenty of evudence to that affect,NONE to the contrary,yet some just KNOW Brother Brigham was behind it all.Not very intelectually honest.This movie is a great disservice to understanding how these men could have down the deeds they did.That is so sad,really.We needed context,nuance and deep reflection,we got cartoon villians and false portraits.The movie makers were on a mission,but not a holy one.

BN | 7:02 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

The church - particulary this year - has been far more open to truth telling and openness on this event that has the church's critics. While there is more evidence that Brigham Young had nothing to do with it, the critics do not show the integrity and intellectual honesty to admit it. They can't even go so far as to say they are open to accept it.
The critics agenda is to cause pain and to settle some score.
Are any of the critics descendants? Have any of them anything to gain besides the church's pain? The church is in pain over it already. There's not a person alive today who participated. All those have gone home to a just God who will sort things out. The descendants of the participants are suffering this year, yet they had nothing to do with it.
It's time for the critics and pundits to acknowledge Brigham's innocence and let eveyone rest. If the grandchildren of the murdered need further comfort, I'm sure that only the completely voluntary, genuinely apologetic and momument-building sincerity of the church will help. If you try to force new apologies from people who came along two generations later, I can see no good coming from it at all.

just me | 7:32 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

It is good to know how Mormons view Muslims. I'm sure you have facts to base this on. What a joke.

Howard | 7:45 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Where are the movies about the Haun's Mill Massacre, Far West, the Extermination Order, etc., etc.?

A TV series could be done, with one atrocity against early Mormons shown each week.

Anonymous | 7:46 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Given that little is known about the event, maybe someone could come up with a movie in which the actual killers were renegade Mormons and Indians. Maybe they thought they were killing in self defense. The Church and Brigham Young would be totally blameless. It might even be close to the truth. It would add balance to the story. Somebody should be able to come up with something.

Allegory | 8:11 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

I'm just sick of it all. The person that wrote this article has obviously lived most of his life in the Mormon box. Yes, I'll admit, I was a convert for 6 years. Then I found out old Jo married a 14 year old along with other men's wives. I also found out a group of MORMONS, sanctioned by the church killed 100 innocent people and the church won't apalogize. To do so would admit fault, and the MORG doesn't admit fault. I'll be glad when this church finally destroys itself with the help of the Internet and fades from the anals of American history. People like Benson are an embarrasment to civilized society.

kris | 8:15 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

This story shouldn't die, just as any other atrocity shouldn't die. That's like asking us to forget about 9/11, and, as one comment suggested, "move on."
Some of the facts may be controversial, but the reality of the event is fact. And as far as descendants of Brigham Young suing the filmmaker, does it hold true that the the decendants of those killed should sue the church for everything they've got?

tm | 8:39 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Thanks Lee Benson,
I'm amazed that antagonist to the church don't want to hear differing opionions or consider facts and history.

rehun | 8:49 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

I normally don't comment, but after reading some of the previous dribble, I had to. Juanita Brooks, when visiting Provo, was appaled to find that the local historians, in charge of keeping the pioneer journals, were deleting those references that were not "faith promoting"...that mind set obviously still exists. Regarding MMM, let's get rid of this persecution complex and deal with the facts. The mountain meadows massacre was the largest mass murder of American citizens (non military)on American soil until 9/11 came along. It was committed by local church leaders (Stake President down). Brigham Young's involvement has never been proven (and probably never will be) nor has it been disproven. Haun's Mill, though a terrible tradegy, was nowhere near the magnitude of MMM. If Mormon pioneers had been slaughtered rather than gentiles, there would be a huge monument with an annual pageant at the site. John D. Lee was the only member ever convicted...others just as guilty got off scott free. JDL was excommunicated but later was posthumously reinstated as a member...so essentially no one was punished. Brigham Young was so broke up about MMM that, when later visiting the site, he sanctioned the destuction of a crude monument previously errected by US soldiers who were burying the remains of the victims, that were left scattered by the murderers. This was a henious act performed by fanactical idiots and should never be forgotten.

Morning Glory | 8:50 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Lee Benson is an idiot. This article is ignorant and insensitive. For a group of people that insist on wearing their persecution and martyrdom on their sleeves, it would be highly questionable for them to gloss over their own historical blights. Lee, if you want me to drop my conversation about Meadow Mountains, then I never want to hear you speak of Carthage, Haun's Mill, or even the Willie and Martin Handcart company. For the record, I'm an active LDS member. We as members of the church need to remember the consequences of hate and religious isolation.

wow...mormon haters | 8:49 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Just for the record, the only reason I have been in a church over the last 25 years is for the occasional funeral. If I were to say all jews are (___fill in the blank negative) or all blacks or hispanics are (___ fill in the blank negative) most reasonable people would proclaim those people to be bigots, which in my opinion is an evil (or at least very sheltered and ill informed), and certainly not christian. I have got to stand up here for the all of the great LDS people that quite honestly have better things to do (and more self worth)than try to defend themselves. You Mormon haters coming from an objective viewer really sound bitter and quite frankly...stupid!

I have got to say that Hector takes the trophy...I quote, "When in the entire history of the mormons, did any church sanctioned group ever do anything without direction from the top leaders? That never happens. It is only with the direction of the prophet that any serious action is undertaken". Hector, go back to building nuclear reactors and space ships. As I said earlier, I am not defending my religion, and certainly not trying to convert anyone to my side, just calling it like I see it.

Jay | 8:52 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Brigham Young's descendants should sue the movie's producers? Great idea, except that the law for about the past 500 years has been that family members cannot sue for alleged defamation to a dead person's reputation. Today's column seems more of an emotional outlet than a reasoned analysis.

KC | 8:52 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

To Hector--Your logic is inescapable, bro. "Church-sanctioned"? Where is this "fact" coming from? A fact requires irrefutable evidence. What have you got that leads to BY? Yeah, that's what I figured. Ya got nothin', bro.

DBLV | 8:57 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Allegory, Allegory, Allegory--Why are you so hateful and mean-spirited? Let it go. Take some prozac. Your bitterness will continue to eat away at only you, and have no impact on the LDS church in the slightest. So, bottom line, you lose.

Hollywood Again | 8:57 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Having seen it, I can say September Dawn is a melodrama, complete with Dudley Do-Right and Snidley Whiplash, and as a melodrama it worked pretty well, even if it took great liberties with the truth and history. It truly borders on the comical in its inaccuracies. Most glaringly absent from the melodrama is the Arkasnsas murder of Apostle Pratt, which is most surely the cause of the bloodlust that consumed the perpetrators.

For me the question is not whether Brigham ordered the slaughter. The question is how the Melchizedek Order, in whose dominion this atrocity occurred, could fail so miserably to prevent it or to hold its members accountable.

It was that systematic failure of the priesthood, which left completely unaddressed and unexplained lo these 150 years, that causes all to wonder what grim consequences other failures within this Order might bring in the future. That is why this atrocity still stirs the imagination.

Anon | 9:00 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Well, other than THAT little hiccup, Mrs Francher, you have to admit those Utah Settlers were just about the most hospitable, God-fearin' folks you'd ever hope to meet.

SFC RET DENNIS | 9:02 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

What happened at MMM is horrible & all involved should have paid the price for their crimes at MMM, how ever, I ask this question? how many non-Mormons paid the price for the thousands of SAINTS who were murdered, tortured, raped, robed, beaten by there so called God fearing people? none ever paid the price for their crimes agent the early saints. To be called a MORMON was a death sentences. So if you wish to condemn this church then condemn all churches who participated in the slater of early saints, yet no one cries for them our tells their story. Also it is "The Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints" not "Mormon" it is Christ church not Mormons. During by 21 years in the Army I asked a lot of questions of by troops and learned a lot about other faiths & have learned that the biggest difference is we believe in a modern day profit, eternal marriage & that we can be like our father in heaven, this part is taught in the Bible yet people reject it. I have found some people will only except things that suites there own needs & not that of GOD. May we all find the peace & love of God to forgive all, for we have been commanded to forgive all. I don't believe Brother Bringem know of the MMM & if you wish me to "prove it",however, it changes noting GOD IS LOVE AND FORGIVES ALL & so must we, remember "GOD IS PERFECT MAN IS NOT"

Bill | 9:04 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Folks, like any emotionally charged conflict there are two sides to this story. The Mormons had been persecuted for years, driven from state to state, and the U.S. army was on its way to Utah potentially to provide more of the same. Mormons lived in a constant atmosphere of persecution and uncertainty. But, Brigham Young responded to this environment with rhetoric and leadership that only helped fuel the "us against the world" mentality. Polygamy and earlier LDS actions such as burning the Nauvoo printing press only fueld non-mormon suspicions, perceptions, and anger. A quick glance at any number of Brigham Young and other leader talks from that time make it clear that the church's retoric toward outsiders and the U.S. government was VERY different then than it is today. And that's the bottom line - things were very different then than today. Circumstances had been created on both sides for years that lead to this very sad and unfortunate event. Forgiveness, understanding, perspective, and sympathy is in order all around.

TJ | 9:05 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Just as in too many cases the LDS church glazes over huge incidents (read up on Kinderhook plates, Book of Abraham). The LDS church leaves a feeling that it doesn't want members to look to non-LDS references to find answers to these major problems.

Rather, one should look at the problem / answer from ALL viewpoints to determine the truth.

Ronnie | 9:05 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Allegory, Wow! What bitterness over your x relegion. The anti Mormon stuff you stated must have been just what you were looking for. I got caught up in all that junk too years ago, but through much prayer, and reading realized that Satan is alive and well, and targeting truth is his #1 priority. The church and many members are far from perfect. We are human. However The Book of Mormon is a book sent from God, and for most who read it with true intent, and pray for confirmation of it's truth as told in Moroni 10:3-5, come to KNOW of it's truth through the power of the Holy Ghost. (That very important 3rd member of the Godhead.) You apparently never had the Holy Ghost speak to you, or you would realize that if the BOM is true, With this knowledge one has to accept that "Jo Smith", Pologmy, Mountain Meadows, and all other things in Mormon history do not take away from that truth. But, as was said earlier, there will always be attackers of truth. Just read the Bible & New Testament to learn how successful the adversary has been and is. In the end truth will prevail. All the scriptures tell us that. I happen to think truth is in the Mormon church. You are, of course, free to think whatever you will. That's why we are here on Earth. I hope one day your bitterness will turn to love for all your fellow men, and your energies will be spent in serving God and your Savior in the church of your choice instead of wasting time knocking others relegion. Have a great day brother. I love you.

stephencpace | 9:14 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Who says we don't know how to treat tourists?

angel youngblood-chick | 9:18 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Lets see MMM 150 yrs ago, now all victims and criminals Dead. So why are we still moaning and groaning about this? Could be we don't want to see the needs of todays population?. Instead of questioning the deeds of the past maybe we should question is anyone in need of help today? Lets put our energy into trying to help others and let the past remain as a lesson to help others and not be so out of touch with our neighbors Mormon or not. As to the decendents well get over it and move on you will be judged on your works not those of 150 yrs ago. I for one pray for those in the MMM both sides and then turn to see if there is something I need to do to keep that type of thing from occuring again. I know that I have little to offer as I am just a old lady who has MS and only has time for prayers as I sit alone but that is something others should take time for. Peace and Love and God's Blessings to you all.

(TJ) RE: angle youngblood-chick | 9:26 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

You're doing exactly as I was writing about. This incident should NOT be glazed over.

The truth is NEVER found by letting the past fade to dust.

N. Dan Bishop | 9:55 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Truth seems to be the last victim of this situation. From personal experience communicating with the representatives of the Fancher's descendants, I feel that they are much less interested in the truth than they are in villifying the LDS Church. While researching this history, I did find that my anscestor, Jehu Blackburn, who originally camped at Pinto Creek, had difficulties with John D. Lee some time before. We don't pick our ancestors, but one thing I am sure of, is that the pioneers of southern Utah were tired of being threatened and mobed and as a whole they were good people who lived in a totally different world than we do now.

weak | 9:56 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Funny how history repeats itself. Mountain Meadow. Kennedy Assassination. Idaho Senator bathroom sex.

People become suspicious of a weak "official explanation". The issue gets more attention, instead of going away.

BCA | 9:58 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Angel youngblood-chick is right. Why keep beating the drum about the MMM? You weren't there. I wasn't there. Gordon B. Hinckley wasn't there. I am not responsible for it and neither are you. Neither is the modern-day institutional LDS church. If Brigham Young authorized it, he will have to account for it. Those who participated in it will have to account for it before their Divine Maker. What do we have to do with it today, and what great "truth" can we learn by continuing to debate it?

Those were wild and wooley times. Abuses were perpetrated by all sides. In no way can this incident or those who brought it about be excused. But what does it have to do with us today? We can regret the past, we can resolve not to repeat it, but we can't be held accountable for it, nor can the current church leadership.

Why don't we spend our effort in something useful and meaningful?

92Landcruiser | 9:59 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Brigham may not have ordered it, but his behavior after the fact was atrosious and simply unacceptable for a man in his position. His behavior after the fact indicates that he did not regret what happened, so it's not a stretch to imagine that he did in fact order it. John D. Lee, his adopted son, said Brigham was lying about what happened, which must be considered.
Either way, the LDS Church needs to address the issue and stop attempting to sweep it under the rug and (like they ignore polygamy and the blacks/priesthood issues) pretend it never happened.
The whitewashed, revisionist history will just cause their members problems once they begin an honest search of Church history.

JT | 10:05 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

In an effort to be more historically accurate, let's note that this was not the only violent act perpetrated by the LDS. Mainstream Mormon behavior toward the Morrisites was also atrocious and bloody. And, as in the case of other religious fanatics from the Reformation to Al Queda, it was done in the name of God. Real serious trouble arises when anyone is foolish enough to think that they KNOW that God is on his/her side. It excuses all sorts of barbaric behavior from suicide bombers to blasting innocent poor Arabs to pieces from 30,000 feet.

T | 10:10 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

This is not a perfect comparison, but a comparison nun the less: Moses lead the Jews out of Egyptian persecution, Brigham lead the latter day Christians out of American persecution. Without email, telephones, and other communications devices, Moses couldn't stop the building of the golden calf. And Brigham could not have started or stopped the massacre. It should not be forgotton. We shouldn't judge good and evil according to Hollywood. We should pray for guidance from God.

Brad | 10:14 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Having a relative participate in the actual MMM, I believe we have to look at truth, and it is this: there has to opposition in all things. While there is good, there has to be evil. That is the "allegory" behind MMM. Our prophet was innocent and the Church isn't going to continue debating a topic that is closed. There were Saints who made choices, those Saints will have to live with those choices. Hopefully, we have learned from those choices.

Mother's Against Violence | 10:18 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

I suspect too much violence on television, movies and video games played a huge role in the MMM.

frozen chosen | 10:31 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Hollywood made this movie because their producers and directors are cowards. They will only attack groups who will not fight back like the LDS church. They refuse to make any movies about an issue which is much more relevant to today, like Islomofacism, because they are afraid that radical muslims will attack them.

I wouldn't have a problem with this movie is Hollywood also produced one on the Haun's Mill massacre or the extermination order or the sham trial of Joseph Smith's murderers. I'm not holding my breath.

So, while the modern world faces a very real threat from living, breathing fanatics, Hollywood will continue to make movies and ignorant people will continue to rant about those nasty, evil Christians in general and mormons in particular.

observer | 10:42 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

Whatever your opinion may be - if you must post it for the public to see - correct spelling and grammar go a long way in making your opinion at least readable if not credible. Buy a dictionary and then use it.

Ken | 10:44 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

As a U.S. History teacher, I believe that history needs to be taught; even with all of its' speculative theories combined with factual information. All atrocities have opinionated responses. The Boston Massacre has never been settled as to who prompted that event. Kent State, Wounded Knee, Trail of Tears, Black Hawk Illinois War, even our own Civil War, are subject to interpretation. Yet, it is the very nature of history that teaches generations that cooperative coexistence can work and that occassionally, radical factions allow passions to replace patience. Wars between peoples based on relgion, color, race, socio-economics, land need, and greed have and will continue to occur. Our responsibility is to teach fact, allow others to draw conclusions, learn from those obvious mistakes, and make a better place for those who will come later. Additionally, living in a society, where one would be forced to only entertain one viewpoint, would be like killing those who refuse to believe the way the conqueror wants you to believe: and history is replete with those instances. Fortunately, we have the ability to choose.

A Convert | 11:05 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

I SEE THIS AS JUST ANOTHER PLOY BY HOLLYWOOD TO TRY TO DISCREDIT A PARTY AND THE GAINING POPULARITY OF MITT ROMNEY. IT DID HAPPEN AND THE CHURCH DOES NOT TRY TO HIDE THE FACT BUT FOR THEM TO BLAME BRIGHAM YOUNG IS OUTRAGEOUS JUST LIKE THEY TRY TO BLAME THE PRESIDENT FOR EVERYTHING. HOW STUPID DO THEY THINK THE AMERICAN PUBLIC IS.

doris | 11:11 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

It won't die untill the media finds something else to grind into the dirt. Isn't there something good that the media can find. As long as you harp on something, it will never go away. History is History.
It is a sad thing that happened, but until some another gorry thing comes along, you will harp on this.

M. in Utah | 11:23 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

This article has no point. Boo hoo mormons feel as though they are the most mistreated people in history. They still are mean nasty people who are willing to destroy "unbelievers". Since we moved to Utah as "non-mormon" we have been discriminated, vandalized and poked fun at. But we are told "mormons would never do those things". Hey guys get over it. Stop being a victim and live life and deal with the consequences of the past. Mr. Hinkley admit B.Y. gave the orders and be done with it.

jfb | 11:24 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

JT, you might want to check your facts on the Morrisites. True, it was an unfortunate incident but don't forget that the Morrisites kidnapped three people and held them against ther will. They then refused a legal writ demanding the release of the kidnapees. The violence was between a legally organized posse to enforce the writ and free the prisoners and the captors. The church had nothing to do with it as far as I can tell.
As to the MMM, I think that if the church had opened its archives to historians and quit trying to whitewash history this would have been over a long time ago.

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

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.