NOW WE'VE GOT MORMONS FALLING FOR THE CORRUPT REGIME!!! JUDAS F'N PRIEST!!!

The Democratic Party: where Christians should go to feel welcome!!! (Inset a giant serving of sarcasm here)

Not surprised a bunch of democrats, led by elected democrats, are voting for Harris. It’s too bad they feel they have to insert religion into it.

You notice how the Harris campaign has gone completely away from talking about policy all of the sudden? They are only focus on broad, general, mostly meaningless talking points rather than actual policy ideas?
 
There is a fine and easily confused line between loving all people and the compulsory and required compliance, “for their own good” and therefore the betterment of society.

Free agency is love, required compliance is hate and a superiority complex of the powerful.
 
You guys realize Uchtdorf donated to the Biden campaign, right? The LDS Church isn't a Republican-only organization, even some of the highest leaders lean left.
 
grizzly said:
You guys realize Uchtdorf donated to the Biden campaign, right? The LDS Church isn't a Republican-only organization, even some of the highest leaders lean left.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about the LDS church or it's leaders?

Pres Faust was a registered democrat. I know that from personal knowledge, not hearsay. I'm well aware of the church's stance on party politics. But then again, who besides you is making it about the leaders of the church or what they believe or don't believe?

I am only seeing one person using the fallacy of false appeal to authority here.
 
Been awhile since I was in church.

Has abortion on demand, and Weiner chopping surgery for minors now part of the doctrine?

I was told, that it's unimaginable a man who bangs pornstars should be embraced by the Mormons. But I guess banging married men for career advancement now is?



The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in the sanctity of human life. Therefore, the Church opposes elective abortion for personal or social convenience, and counsels its members not to submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions.

The Church allows for possible exceptions for its members when:

  • Pregnancy results from rape or incest, or
  • A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy, or
  • A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.
Even these exceptions do not automatically justify abortion. Abortion is a most serious matter. It should be considered only after the persons responsible have received confirmation through prayer. Members may counsel with their bishops as part of this process.

The Church’s position on this matter remains unchanged. As states work to enact laws related to abortion, Church members may appropriately choose to participate in efforts to protect life and to preserve religious liberty
 
Vanilla said:
Who said anything about the LDS church or it's leaders?
Click to expand...

😂 This has to be a joke, right?

The thread title is, "NOW WE'VE GOT MORMONS FALLING FOR THE CORRUPT REGIME!!!" and the link is to a story (on the LDS-church owned website) titled, "Latter-day Saints for Harris"

It is 100% about LDS & Mormons. It's in the thread title and the headline of the linked article. What are you drinking? Because you should stop if you're on the clock.

Vanilla said:
I am only seeing one person using the fallacy of false appeal to authority here.
Click to expand...
The entire structure of religion is "appeal to authority." It's literally impossible to a "member in good standing" without committing to follow the leaders of the Church. You MUST acknowledge their authority. It's a requirement.

Elkass is all upset that "We Are Getting Out-Numbered By That Other Type" and I pointed out that even leaders of the church he references have differing politics than many of the members. It's not homogeneous, even if that makes him uncomfortable.

You're attempting to be a contrarian again (still), but your argument here is just ridiculous. It's like sitting at a baseball game and saying, "Who said anything about baseball?" You literally showed up on a thread about Mormons (again, it's in the title) and said, "Who said anything about the LDS church or it's leaders?" 😂😂😂
 
Here ya go @elkassassin you should be familiar with soaking

Screenshot_20240807_112036_Snapchat.jpg
 
Grizz, elkass posted about some members of the church that are going out and starting an organization utilizing an entity’s name they don’t have authority to use, and one that is on the record saying vote your conscience but the church is neutral, and you come back and cite one of the top leaders privately donating to Biden campaign and you think these two things are one in the same? You’re a sharp guy, don’t try to BS me.


grizzly said:
😂 This has to be a joke, right?

The thread title is, "NOW WE'VE GOT MORMONS FALLING FOR THE CORRUPT REGIME!!!" and the link is to a story (on the LDS-church owned website) titled, "Latter-day Saints for Harris"

It is 100% about LDS & Mormons. It's in the thread title and the headline of the linked article. What are you drinking? Because you should stop if you're on the clock.


The entire structure of religion is "appeal to authority." It's literally impossible to a "member in good standing" without committing to follow the leaders of the Church. You MUST acknowledge their authority. It's a requirement.

Elkass is all upset that "We Are Getting Out-Numbered By That Other Type" and I pointed out that even leaders of the church he references have differing politics than many of the members. It's not homogeneous, even if that makes him uncomfortable.

You're attempting to be a contrarian again (still), but your argument here is just ridiculous. It's like sitting at a baseball game and saying, "Who said anything about baseball?" You literally showed up on a thread about Mormons (again, it's in the title) and said, "Who said anything about the LDS church or it's leaders?" 😂😂😂
Click to expand...

For someone that recently whined that someone “attacked” them instead of debating policy, this is a rather odd attacking post. So do you want to debate policy or attack? I’m well equipped to do both, but I want to check your feelings first to ensure you don’t whine again about being attacked.
 
All I Was Trying to Say Is She/Kamala Is Dipping Any & Every Where She Can For Votes!

I Don't Care What Religion You Are!

You Can Be What Ever Religion You Wanna Be!

I Won't Judge You By Religion!

I'm JACK-MORMON!
 
grizzly said:
The entire structure of religion is "appeal to authority." It's literally impossible to a "member in good standing" without committing to follow the leaders of the Church. You MUST acknowledge their authority. It's a requirement.

😂😂😂
Click to expand...

So what are you saying grizzly, that I need to support Kamala because "President Uchtdorf" supported Biden?
That seems to be a little "brash".
 
So, is previously elected Dem, Ben McAdams being faithful to the Dems, or the church he claims as his religion?

I enjoyed a cold drink, I enjoyed the challenge of a double hook bra, tried desperately to learn to chew, and use F*** as a noun, verb, adjective.

So, I don't call myself a Mormon, because I obviously didnt/don't adhere to their strongly held beliefs.

It would be completely disingenuous for me to claim "Mormons for........ "

If you are pro abortion, which Dems 100% are, it's Harris biggest talking points, you obviously have a pretty big personal conflict.
 
hossblur said:
So, is previously elected Dem, Ben McAdams being faithful to the Dems, or the church he claims as his religion?
Click to expand...

This is why I said above it was unfortunate that they are invoking the religion into it. Believe whatever you want. Vote however you want. However, when you label your little fun organization the way they did, they are absolutely trying to sway peoples' opinions by citing the name of the religion.

It's a false citation to authority, just like Grizzly did above. It's wrong, it's a fallacy, and I think it is unethical. I'm 100% certain they did not receive permission from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to utilize the name of the church in their little political action movement. It would be equally wrong for someone to start a "Mormons for Trump" organization in my mind.

Be whatever you want to be in the political world. Leave religion out of it. The church itself does, and people ought to take note of that.
 
I Think That'd Be A GREAT Idea Niller!

Since They Started The BS!

MORMONS FOR TRUMP!

Oh And:

JACK-MORMONS FOR TRUMP,TOO!

Vanilla said:
This is why I said above it was unfortunate that they are invoking the religion into it. Believe whatever you want. Vote however you want. However, when you label your little fun organization the way they did, they are absolutely trying to sway peoples' opinions by citing the name of the religion.

It's a false citation to authority, just like Grizzly did above. It's wrong, it's a fallacy, and I think it is unethical. I'm 100% certain they did not receive permission from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to utilize the name of the church in their little political action movement. It would be equally wrong for someone to start a "Mormons for Trump" organization in my mind.

Be whatever you want to be in the political world. Leave religion out of it. The church itself does, and people ought to take note of that.
Click to expand...
 
Vanilla said:
Grizz, elkass posted about some members of the church that are going out and starting an organization utilizing an entity’s name they don’t have authority to use, and one that is on the record saying vote your conscience but the church is neutral, and you come back and cite one of the top leaders privately donating to Biden campaign and you think these two things are one in the same? You’re a sharp guy, don’t try to BS me.




For someone that recently whined that someone “attacked” them instead of debating policy, this is a rather odd attacking post. So do you want to debate policy or attack? I’m well equipped to do both, but I want to check your feelings first to ensure you don’t whine again about being attacked.
Click to expand...
Haha, another attempt to suck people down to your level with attacks. Every time.

PS. Uchtdorf donated as a private person, not an entity. It was as unauthorized as the name usage. But they're both still real and prove the variety of political beliefs within the church. It's officially neutral, but not exclusively conservative. It's not homogeneous, even at the highest levels. That's my point and I made it succinctly and with an example at the highest level. That apparently makes you (and some others) uncomfortable. There's nothing I can do about that.

PPS. You know you weren't attacked, you were called out for trying to play contrarian lawyer and argue a losing position. You'll get your 👍 from a certain group, but that's all it is.

PPPS. The "attacked" post you're referencing wasn't even referring to me. Somebody had called city dwellers "suburban elites" twice and called GOP Delegates "idiots" twice, which I called out in posts #44 & 56 and pointed out he was the only one using that term. What I literally said in reply was, "If you want to attack people, you'll do it into the wind because I don't care enough to respond. But, maybe that's my 'suburban elitism' talking."

I stand by that. If somebody gets into name calling or personal attacks, I'm done. There are some people here who think they have to have the last word, I'm not one of them. If I find somebody's posts annoying or personal, I simply don't respond. Don't believe me? Go look at the thread you referenced and see for yourself. Crickets from me.

Hoss and I go way back, we have our banters and then send PMs about new insider info or stuff that shouldn't be posted in public. I know I don't take anything personally and I doubt he does either. I'm pretty sure he can stand for himself and I would happily share a campfire with him. I suspect he feels the same, but I may be wrong. Thanks for trying to interject though 🫡
 
grizzly said:
Haha, another attempt to suck people down to your level with attacks. Every time.

PS. Uchtdorf donated as a private person, not an entity. It was as unauthorized as the name usage. But they're both still real and prove the variety of political beliefs within the church. It's officially neutral, but not exclusively conservative. It's not homogeneous, even at the highest levels. That's my point and I made it succinctly and with an example at the highest level. That apparently makes you (and some others) uncomfortable. There's nothing I can do about that.

PPS. You know you weren't attacked, you were called out for trying to play contrarian lawyer and argue a losing position. You'll get your 👍 from a certain group, but that's all it is.

PPPS. The "attacked" post you're referencing wasn't even referring to me. Somebody had called city dwellers "suburban elites" twice and called GOP Delegates "idiots" twice, which I called out in posts #44 & 56 and pointed out he was the only one using that term. What I literally said in reply was, "If you want to attack people, you'll do it into the wind because I don't care enough to respond. But, maybe that's my 'suburban elitism' talking."

I stand by that. If somebody gets into name calling or personal attacks, I'm done. There are some people here who think they have to have the last word, I'm not one of them. If I find somebody's posts annoying or personal, I simply don't respond. Don't believe me? Go look at the thread you referenced and see for yourself. Crickets from me.

Hoss and I go way back, we have our banters and then send PMs about new insider info or stuff that shouldn't be posted in public. I know I don't take anything personally and I doubt he does either. I'm pretty sure he can stand for himself and I would happily share a campfire with him. I suspect he feels the same, but I may be wrong. Thanks for trying to interject though 🫡
Click to expand...
Urchtdorf contributing, and you knowing, kinda means it wasn't a personal? Unless he's a close friend, or relative, that being public kinda, sorta, means it wasn't personal?


I've always been amazed, Biden, Pelosi, etc could claim Catholic beliefs, then not follow Catholic doctrine.

One of my main hits on Romney, was his acceptance of abortion policy in Mass, to get votes, then in Utah suddenly he remembers his Mormon roots.



Hell of a thing for me and Bess, jack Mormons, to be defensive of the faith we don't practice
 
Hey Grizz, wrote another 7 page brief telling me you don’t care!

And I’m certainly the one playing contrarian lawyer right now.

You poor, poor attacked soul.
 

hossblur said:
Urchtdorf contributing, and you knowing, kinda means it wasn't a personal? Unless he's a close friend, or relative, that being public kinda, sorta, means it wasn't personal?


I've always been amazed, Biden, Pelosi, etc could claim Catholic beliefs, then not follow Catholic doctrine.

One of my main hits on Romney, was his acceptance of abortion policy in Mass, to get votes, then in Utah suddenly he remembers his Mormon roots.



Hell of a thing for me and Bess, jack Mormons, to be defensive of the faith we don't practice
Click to expand...
 
One More Thing Hossy?

Have The Missionaries Been Over Your Way Recently?

And If So Did You Offer Them A Drink?:D
 
I Know You Are!

Just Gotta RAZZ You A Little!:D

I Heard If You Offer Them A Drink They Don't Come Back!

But It Just Might Be RUMOR?

hossblur said:
Same kid from Texas, new companion from Brazil.

I didn't. Offered them soda/water.

I'm a pretty friendly dude, despite rumors
Click to expand...
 
What rules are we breaking with Dew?

And I’m too old for the full leaded sugar stuff these days.
 
HINT Niller:

This Is DEW Like You've Never Drank!

I Think With hawky Driving On The Ride & Me Helping Baby Sit You On THE RIDE You're Gonna Like The DEW I'm Bringing!

At Least For A Little While!:D:D:D



Vanilla said:
What rules are we breaking with Dew?

And I’m too old for the full leaded sugar stuff these days.
Click to expand...
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

3373E545-736F-4EB9-A046-436A1A8260C5.jpeg
IMG_0164.JPG
FB_IMG_1647229308285.jpg
2018-09-02 21.02.52.jpg
1999_MD_Archery.jpg
72634431-1328-4CBA-AAF9-9C8F7B8CAD9A.jpeg
Screenshot_20220907_151545.jpg
20200307_165756.jpg
IMG_9628.jpeg
elk 5.jpg
IMG_5428.MOV
621BC62C-B1B5-49C0-B9C2-B001F2A7EAFF.png
Back
Top Bottom