Cult of intolerance

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • JohnH Cedar City, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 8:07 a.m.

    As a non-Mormon who has lived happily here in lovely Cedar City for the last six years, I am comfortable in saying that the Mormons are NOT a cult.

    Oct. 13, 2011 5:51 p.m.


    We ARE behaving equally to the rest of society. We are falling in love and joining together with the person we love. How is that any different?

    It isn't. The only thing you don't like is that the person we love happens to be of our own sex - which, by the way is none of your business.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 13, 2011 4:25 p.m.

    'Apparently WMDs were in Iraq, and were found, and had it reported on.' - RedShirt | 4:09 p.m. Oct. 13, 2011

    From the article you cited.
    - US did find Iraq WMD NY Post October 25, 2004

    "Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War.

    There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said."

    And if there were weapons Redshirt, why can't you find any

    No Biological, No Chemical, No Nuclear Weapons found in Iraq.

    And Osama Bin Laden was found in...



    *'U.S. Military deaths in Iraq war at 4,473 - AP - Published by the DSNews - 08/02/2011

    You spit on the memory of every American who has served this country.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Oct. 13, 2011 4:09 p.m.

    To "Pagan | 12:39 p.m." here are 10 sources that show that WMD's were in fact found in Iraq:

    Troops 'foil Iraq nerve gas bid' July 2, 2004
    US did find Iraq WMD NY Post October 25, 2004
    Iraqi Nerve Gas, WMD Find Blows Away Pundits NewsMax, May 17, 2004
    WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq With Surprising Results Wired October 23, 2010
    Iraq mortar shells contain blister agent USA Today January 11, 2004
    Bomb said to hold deadly sarin gas explodes in Iraq MSNBC May 17, 2004
    Sarin, Mustard Gas Discovered Separately in Iraq Fox New May 17, 2004
    Warheads with mustard, sarin gas found by Polish troops in Iraq: Rumsfeld Spacewar July 1, 2004
    Deadly Nerve Agent Sarin Is Found in Roadside Bomb May 18, 2004
    Hundreds of WMDs discovered in Iraq WorldNetDaily June 21, 2006

    Apparently WMDs were in Iraq, and were found, and had it reported on.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Oct. 13, 2011 3:42 p.m.

    To "Pagan | 12:39 p.m." What you say about hospitals denying access to a "partner" is wrong. Hospitals deny girlfriends access to dying boyfriends all the time. There are even cases where a spouse has been denied access. So apparently Gays are being treated equally in this regard.

    So, unfortunately for you, unmarried couples, regardless of sexual preferences are treated the same.

    That study actually doesn't really say anything about descrimination. In actuality it shows that there is no descrimination. Most studies conclude that 10% of the population is gay. So, if you are getting close to 10% of the time getting an interview, that is to be expected.

    Lets see, prior to earlier this year Homosexuality was considered a mental disorder by the DOD. Every year 1% to 2% of the people who apply to the US military are disqualified for mental disorders. With 2 million active military people that means that there are 20,000 to 40,000 people that have been disqualified for revealing any mental disorders. So, the Gay population was given a privelage under DADT because as long as they didn't tell they could serve with their "mental disorder".

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 13, 2011 2:08 p.m.

    @ Redshirt: How are gays not acting equally with the rest of society?

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 13, 2011 12:39 p.m.

    'FYI gays are granted equal treatment.' - Redshirt1701 | 8:13 a.m. Oct. 13, 2011

    Reply fact:

    *'Kept From a Dying Partners Bedside' - By TARA PARKER-POPE - NY Times - 05/18/09

    '...the couples had prepared for a medical emergency, creating living wills, advanced directives and power-of-attorney documents.'

    And yet, even with Living Will, Medical Directive, Power of attorney and emergency contact information...

    Janice Langbehn was kept from the bedside of her dying partner, Lisa Pond.

    They were together for 18 years.

    *Study: Gay Men Offered Fewer Job Interviews By Winston Gieseke The Advocate 10/04/11

    According to a study published today in the American Journal of Sociology, men whose resumes indicate that theyre gay are 40% less likely to be called in for job interviews, especially in the south or Midwest.

    And last:

    14,000 men & women discharged from the US military over 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'

    Source? Service Memebers Legal Defense.

    Redshirt, you are also the person that continually makes the claim that Iraq had 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'.

    It's 2011.


    Where are they?

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Oct. 13, 2011 9:27 a.m.

    To "Ranch | 8:21 a.m" again, you are wrong. Until GLBT people behave equally with the rest of society, they can never be treated equally.

    Oct. 13, 2011 8:21 a.m.


    When GLBT couples can marry and have their marriages recognized by the government, THEN we will be treated equally. You will be able to marry a GLBT person yourself.

    Your analogy is like saying that The ONLY religion you can worship is Catholic, but since EVERYONE gets to worship as a Catholic, you're all treated equally.

    I'm sure you don't see the false criteria of your analogy, but it is an epic fail.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Oct. 13, 2011 8:13 a.m.

    To "Ranch | 10:07 p.m." but by voting for gay marriage, you are forcing your values on others. Granted you are not imposing all of your values, but you are imposing some.

    So, how do you resolve the issue when people have opposing values so that you do not impose one person's values on the other?

    FYI gays are granted equal treatment. There is nothing preventing a gay man from marrying a woman, or a gay woman marrying a man. It is equal. Any unmaried woman may marry any unmarried man, there is no discrimination and it is 100% equal.

    Oct. 12, 2011 10:07 p.m.

    DSB says:

    "Regarding your votes, if you vote to uphold abortion rights, or to give homosexuals the right to marriage, you are in fact voting to impose your values over those who don't want their society to legalize such things."


    You are incorrect, DSB.

    I am not voting to force my values on you. If that were the case, you would be required to have a GLBT marriage or denied a heterosexual one. THAT would be imposing my values on you. When GLBT marriage is legal, you will be able to enter into a heterosexual marriage. Nothing imposed on you. You aren't required to like it, but as I said, no imposition occurs.

    On the other hand, voting to deny us marriage imposes your ideals upon us. That IS an imposition.

    This country is based on freedom and equal treatment by the government of all American Citizens. You do not have the right to "don't want their society to legalize such things" when those things discrminate against us. You see, it is OUR society every bit as much as it is yours. Equally. We DESERVE to be treated equally by our government - even if you don't like it.

    Oct. 12, 2011 6:43 p.m.

    Mitt is a big boy and all this railing on his (and my) religion will not diminish his leadership abilities, his zeal for helping this nation, nor his patriotism. Campaigns are usually ugly, mudslinging times, and if people really want the truth they need to go to the right sources for it. Look to the candidate's political record, not their pearly whites.

    Bill Maher is a self-promoting-by-belittling-others disgrace. Who listens to him? If The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints were a cult, I submit there would be many millions less members. Cults, historically, are less successful.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 5:50 p.m.

    Can't I just practice my religion without having to compare my church's level of persecution to everyone else's?

  • Hemlock Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 5:23 p.m.

    In the middle ages the Jefferies-mentality would be gathering bundles of wood to place around heretics feet.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 4:55 p.m.

    DSB: But, I suspect that debating someone who defends drunk drivers is probably rather pointless.

    So if a person through negligent behavior, kills someone while making the decision to txt, or talk on a cell phone while driving, that's OK with you, because they weren't being negligent by drinking?

    Someone who doesn't understand that the victim is no less dead by the drinker then the cell phone user, cannot understand the point ranch is making, and can't because Religion tells them the drinker is guilty before he got in the car.

    DSB: just because your belief system includes negating the consequences of sexual promiscuity through legalized abortions of convenience.
    More right wing nonsence, when you say "sexual promiscuity" does it include married couples or just dirty, nasty people with whom you would never associate? You might be surprised.

  • DSB Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 2:42 p.m.

    To Ranch - you are Exhibit #1 in the concept that your votes seek to impose your beliefs on everyone else, just as you accuse the religious of doing. You just feel that your beliefs are more enlightened and valid than those of a more religious bent. EVERY vote cast is from someone who seeks to impose their belief system on the machinations of our society. You believe the unborn should not be considered humans. I believe otherwise. We engage in the debate, cast our votes, and one of us wins and the other loses. Sometimes the loser engages the court system to impose their beliefs on everyone else, because they can't win at the polls.

    You're no better than me, just because your belief system includes negating the consequences of sexual promiscuity through legalized abortions of convenience. And, you've already won that battle by and large, because abortions are indeed legal. I'm not crying about being disenfranchised because people like you voted to impose their beliefs on the society in which I live. I wasn't disenfranchised - I had my vote, and I lost.

    But, I suspect that debating someone who defends drunk drivers is probably rather pointless.

    Oct. 12, 2011 2:11 p.m.


    Re: abortion. A fetus is not a person and what gives that group of cells (parasitic cells at that) the right to use a woman's body if she doesn't want to host them?

    Re: drunk driving. Are you also willing to make certain of your own vices illegal that are equally dangerous? Talking on the cell phone/texting while driving - studies have shown these users are every bit as dangerous as drunk drivers; perhaps more so. At least the drunks are trying to watch the road.

    It could also be said that religion has "social consequences". Hate is a very religious value; honest, just look around and you can see that (the cause of this article in fact).

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 1:09 p.m.

    About intolerance:

    I don't care what the religious believe or disbelieve. It doesn't matter and is none of my business - until you push your views onto me. If you want to worship Ra, Jesus, Odin, Hecate or any other fine.

    When you start to enact laws that dictate how I am to live (as long as I don't harm others), then you go too far.

    Live and let live. You worship as you see fit - allow me the same. If you don't like alcohol, don't drink. If you don't like gays/gay-marriage, don't get involved in a gay relationship or marry someone of your own sex. You don't believe in abortion, don't get one.

    It really IS that simple - live and let live. But you won't do that. You insist that your views are the only valid views and that everyone else must abide by your rules. This is where we have a problem and where we become intolerant of your actions. But, legislating your beliefs/views is a form of intolerance itself - you demonstrate your intolerance of the lifestyles of others.

    Live your own life and allow others to live theirs.

  • DSB Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 1:09 p.m.

    To RanchHand - many, many areas of the country have bizarre liquor laws, many more perplexing than our own. The repetitive citation of this in our culture, as if we are somehow unique in having idiosyncratic liquor laws, speaks much more to your own provincialism than it does to the culture of our peculiar laws.

    Regarding your votes, if you vote to uphold abortion rights, or to give homosexuals the right to marriage, you are in fact voting to impose your values over those who don't want their society to legalize such things. I didn't say anything about anyone being disenfranchised, because everyone has a vote. We just don't all get our way, but every vote you or I cast is a vote to impose our beliefs on people who vote otherwise.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 12:51 p.m.

    @Mountainman & DSB;


    (1) Utah's liquor laws.
    (2) Utah's Amendment 3.
    (3) DOMA
    (4) California's Prop-8.
    (5) North Dakotas new Anti-abortion laws.
    (6) Utah's new ultrasound pre-abortion laws.
    (7) Was it Alabama trying to pass anti-Sharia/Muslim just laws this last year?

    Just to name a few.


    I do vote, but I NEVER vote to disenfranchise anyone. My beliefs do not include forcing others to live the way I want them to.


    The Jews wiped out an entire nation if you believe the bible to be true, and at God's command. They were obviously not athiests. How many do you think the "body count" was for that religious pogrom?

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 11:38 a.m.

    Nevertheless, at his famous talk at BYU, Ezra Taft Benson stated full out that the Church can tell members how to think politically. Is this the general view in this culture, and if so how should it affect voters considering Romney's (and to a lesser extent) Huntsman's candidacy?

  • DSB Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 11:20 a.m.

    To Timj - I've seen the media, including Fox News, defend and allow mockery of Mormons. On Fox, Ann Coulter said how "lovely" Mormons are, then listed several out-of-context and blatantly untrue beliefs we supposedly have, clearly attempting to make our belief system look lunatic. We're apparently lovely, just like mindless Stepford wives. On MSNBC, Rachel Maddow allowed Bill Maher to rant at length in the most despicable manner about things we hold most sacred, as well as half-truths and outright lies about us.

    The overall tone seems to be "Sure, LDS beliefs are laughably ridiculous to any rational person, but they have every constitutional right to believe them, so don't let their foolishness influence your vote!" Thanks, I guess. Their defense of us often seems more like passive-aggressive marginalization.

    For example, as an LDS member for over 50 years, holding various teaching and leadership positions in the church, this campaign season is the very first time in my life that I heard "Mormons get their own planet when they die." I suppose it's better entertainment for Maher and Coulter to offer up this misleading caricature, rather than engage in an honest discussion of eternal progression.

  • OHBU Columbus, OH
    Oct. 12, 2011 11:19 a.m.

    @CounterIntelligence: While I agree with your point that religion is too often scapegoated, your original statement was clearly intended to give the impression that there is some inherent link between atheism (not fundamentalist atheism...that statement is nonsensical) and oppression. I also take exception to your categorization of oppression. Number of dead does not indicate the level of oppression. Stalin killed roughly 20 million people (though exact numbers are impossible. That's almost 2% of the population. In Rwanda almost 20% were killed. Also note, Stalin didn't primarily kill for religious purposes, but political. In fact, the Orthodox Church survived throughout his reign with many priests openly practicing their religion. Stalin's hero was Ivan Orthodox Saint. He even commissioned major movies from Sergei Eisenstein glorifying both Ivan Grozny and Alexander Nevsky. Both are saints and both movies openly portrayed religion.

    PS - It's "opiate" not "opium."

  • isrred Logan, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 10:53 a.m.

    "but we ask that this courtesy extend to all expressions of heartfelt belief"

    Does that include defending Muslims when they want to build a Mosque?

    Does that include Atheists when they want to live their lives free of organized religion?

    Does that include gays and lesbians when they want to marry the person they love?

    What the DNews continually denies is that other people have "heartfelt beliefs" that directly contradict their own heartfelt beliefs, but I have not seen the DNews editorial board stand up for the heart-felt beliefs of those they disagree with.

    Stand on principle at all times or you have nothing to stand on at all, Dnews.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Oct. 12, 2011 10:45 a.m.

    To "LDS Liberal | 9:38 a.m." actually you are 100% wrong.

    Yes the constitution states that there cannot be a religious test for Federal office.

    Some have interpreted what is going on in the GOP as a religious test.

    The problem is that the GOP can impose whatever test they want for their canidate because a canidate is NOT a Federal Office. Or was there a change, and just being a canidate was a Federal Office?

  • Timj South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 10:36 a.m.

    I never thought I'd see the DN criticize someone for defending the LDS church.

    As a member of the church, I'm grateful for MSNBC, CNN, Slate, and other mainstream media outlets that criticize Jeffress for his bigotry and defend the LDS church. I just wish Fox News would join in, but I guess they're too worried about what much of their base (conservatives in the South) would think of that.

  • DSB Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 9:49 a.m.

    To RanchHand - I'm wondering, do you ever vote? I ask, because every time you do, you are making a political choice that puts your beliefs over the beliefs of others.

    And, I'm with Mountanman in calling you out about how religion has been forced on you. Also, how would you correct any societal norms that may be founded on a faith-based worldview of the majority, without "forcing your beliefs" on the rest of us?

    Furthermore, Jesus called and set apart 12 Apostles, as well as 70's that he sent out as missionaries to spread his own religious construct based on the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law and salvation through his teachings and atonement. He called Peter to lead that group of believers after his resurrection. They were certainly not called to spread the traditional and established Jewish religion.

    Maybe you know better than the Apostle Paul, who clearly believed Jesus established a religion when he taught to the Ephesians that Jesus gave some apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers to perfect the Saints and for the work of the ministry.

    I don't know - sounds like a religion to me.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 9:38 a.m.

    Let's use some deductive reasoning.....

    1. The U.S. Constitution article VI states: "no religious Test shall ever be required as Qualification for federal office"

    2. The Republicans are making a huge religous test against Mitt Romney for his Mormonism.

    3. Therefore, Republicans are trampling the U.S. Constitution.

    Boo the umpire, but I call 'em as I sees 'em.
    I think for myself.

  • OHBU Columbus, OH
    Oct. 12, 2011 9:13 a.m.

    Why do you find it so surprising that the mainstream media defended the church against being called a "cult." They've been very respectful of the church for many years (btw, Slate isn't exactly a very popular mainstream source). It seems every time a major show on Mormonism is going to be done (like the interview with Hinkley, etc), Mormons are always "surprised" it was respectful. The world is not out to get you.

    @Mountainman: I think Ranchhand might be referencing the way religiously-motivated public policy affects non-religious people (such as the liquor laws in Utah, the Hays productions code for film that lasted much of the century, etc).

    @Counter Intelligence: Most oppressive regimes: Communists (atheists), Nazis (professed Christians, protestant primarily), Iran, Saudi Arabia, Taliban (religious fundamentalist Islam), Milosevic (Orthodox Christian). Many others, such as Rwanda, Sudan, etc. were carried out by religious people, though not for religious reasons. In short, your characterization of "most" oppressive regimes being atheist is patently false and absurd.

  • Shimlau SAINT GEORGE, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 8:36 a.m.

    @RanchHand, Jesus did organize a church, it was after his resurrection, that he sent his apostles into all the world. Peter saw in a vision (read Acts) that the "gentiles" (read this as not Jews) were to be welcomed into the church and was sent to preach the gospel to them. I hardly think that Peter was "many years after Christ's death." and might I add, resurrection.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 12, 2011 7:44 a.m.

    @ RanchHand. How and where has religion been forced on you? Details please! Or is it just your silly rebellion temper tantrum?

  • a bit of reality Shawnee Mission, KS
    Oct. 12, 2011 7:40 a.m.

    In summary, the mainstream (liberal) media is good because it defended the LDS Church against a baseless attack, but it's bad because it has an "aggressive posture toward religion in general." And Pastor Jeffress is bad because he thinks Mormonism is a cult, but hes good to say and think its a cult because this is "a genuine and deeply-held religious viewpoint" which deserves deference for the mere fact that it is a religious viewpoint rather than a secular one.

    Id suggest that Pastor Jeffress' bigotry is rooted in his religious convictions--the genuineness, depth, and religiousness of those convictions notwithstanding. That being the case, why should the root of his bigotry deserve a pass merely because it is "religious"?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 7:30 a.m.

    Rifleman | 5:53 a.m. Oct. 12, 2011
    Salt Lake City, Utah

    If Jesus walked the earth today many Christians would reject His message.



    That's because He and his entire message clearly prove he was a bleeding heart Liberal.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 7:02 a.m.


    Jesus NEVER established a church. Never.

    "Christians" were simply another sect of Judaism - they attended synagog not "church".

    It wasn't until many, many years after Christs death, when Christians abandoned the dietary laws and other religious requirements (circumcision, for example) that the Jews finally said "beat it, you're not Jews"!

    Read up on it, there are some very good (and well respected) books on the subject.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 6:59 a.m.

    "...deep suspicion of religion and religiously motivated people."

    --- With very good reason!

    "To religious people, religion matters."

    --- Why can't they just practice it then? By forcing their views on others, they are really taking away the religious freedom of those who believe differently.

    "Americans have every right to base their political choices on their religious views, and any suggestion otherwise is an affront to the First Amendment guarantee of religious freedom."

    --- Again, when your political choice puts your beliefs over the beliefs of others, you are taking away the religious freedom of others. What about the guarantee of religious freedom for them?

  • fanUVU Orem, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 6:43 a.m.

    Excellent, well reasoned editorial. All religions should be extended the courtesy of tolerance, absent malicious actions and intents to harm others.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 12, 2011 5:53 a.m.

    When Jesus walked the earth He organized a church. The Jews said it was a cult. 2,000 years later we still call it Christianity.

    If Jesus walked the earth today many Christians would reject His message. And yes, Jesus would agree with the teachings of the Catholic Church regarding elective abortions.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 12, 2011 12:20 a.m.

    We'll see how religious leaders react when faced with the first Islamic candidate, or the first Hindu candidate. Would an atheist candidate be supported in his attempt to express his own personal religious beliefs.