Yes, because Protestants and Catholics are so good an conservative too.
Just look at Jim Bakker, Ted Haggard, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Mark Pryor, Roland Burris...Yeah, lets judge the participants in a religion by how a couple of famous practitioners act, thats rational.
HEY !!!
Kid you left out a few of the “good mormon conservatives”
Harry Reid, Orrin Hatch, Mitt Romney, Brigham Young, Joseph Smith Jr...
Except for Orrin hatch the rest have pushed abortion...or been a direct party to the murderous practice...
and lets not forget Bill Bennett of Utah and whats the name of that guy who had sex in the hot tub with his 15 year old student and got a standing O from his friends at the Utah legislature for his cleverness at covering up his felony for all those years so sucessfully aided and abetted by the mormon hierarchy and the mormon owned Deseret News newspaper ???
You know that so clean cut MARRIED with children child rapist who just happened to have a laedership position in the mormon organiztion that he never lost...
While his victim got excommunicated...
HEY !!!
Kid now lets name all those mormon profits who disobeyed the mormon god/lords new directive and kept on with their polygamy (thats ADULTERY, hardly a clean living conservative lifestyle) long after 1890...
“As the United States government continued to press the church to give up the practice, new laws were enacted to force compliance. In 1887 the Edmunds-Tucker Bill was passed which, among other things, “declared that marriages not publicly recorded were felonies . . . The most serious stipulation of the bill, however, was the threat to dissolve the legal entity of the church corporation and to confiscate all church property in excess of $50,000.” (Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History, p. 133)
Lets start with the hypocrite who caved in to the US laws on “unlawful habitation” IOW bigamy, polygamy, adultery...
Wilford Woodruff...He wrote the 1890 proclamation but never adhered to it for himself he continued with his “extra wives” for the rest of his life...He allowed many other mormons to continue also but excommunicated others for the same practice...
LDS Church President John Taylor, husband of at least 15 wives, had to go into hiding. During this time he recorded, but did not publish, a revelation that plural marriage should never be relinquished. President Taylor’s 1886 revelation: Mormon polygamists who today rationalize plural marriage on the grounds that polygamy can be rightly maintained by a special dispensation of priesthood authority independent from the church organization usually refer to themselves as Fundamentalists. Most Fundamentalists trace their authority to President John Taylor, who, on the underground at the John W. Woolley home in Centerville, Utah, in September 1886, allegedly “asked the Lord if it would not be right under the circumstances to discontinue plural marriages.” Taylor’s son, John W., claimed he found among his father’s papers after his death the response to this question— “a revelation given him of the Lord, and which is now in my possession, in which the Lord told him that the principle of plural marriage would never be overcome” (Abraham H. Cannon Journal, 29 March 1892). . . . (Mormon Polygamy, p. 183)
When examining just the time period from 1902 to April 1904 Richard Van Wagoner observed “at least sixty-three plural marriages were sealed throughout the church.” (Mormon Polygamy, p. 159)
B. Carmon Hardy lists the names of 220 LDS men, including bishops, stake presidents and apostles, who continued to take plural wives after the Manifesto. (B. Carmon Hardy, Solemn Covenant: The Mormon Polygamous Passage, Appendix II.)
Two apostles, John W. Taylor, son of President John Taylor, and Matthias F. Cowley, were dropped from the quorum for their continued practice of the principle (see Solemn Covenant, chapter 7).
Since LDS Church leaders had continued to enter into plural marriages long after the 1890 Manifesto some rank and file members felt that they also should continue the practice. When the church started to excommunicate those who entered the practice after the second manifesto, some started to feel the brethren had gone into apostasy.
But HEY !!!
Mormons are such conservatives with the “right” idea about marriage...
LOL
And Joey Smiths D&C commanding polygamy as necessary to “salvation” in mormonism is STILL a tenet of mormonism...
And the sex deviant Joseph Smith junior is STILL the reverred “prophet” of the mormons..
and everything that Joey Smith every did, said or wrote is gospel to all the mormons no matter hoow sick or unconservative or unAmerican it really was...
(You do know that Joey Smith had himself crowned “king of the world” (that would include the US) eh ??? and then Briggie Young did too)
Speak against Joey Smith and you speak against the mormons “heartfelt beliefs”
But go ahead list some guys you think will help you in youre AD compaign for the clean up on aisle mormon..
Funnt that how mormons will dig to find so called Christian men with sin in their lives to prove for weak point but never name a sin free mormon guy with no ghosts in his closet...
are there any ???
Yeah, lets judge the participants in a religion by how a couple of famous practitioners act, thats rational.
______________________________________________
Well I personal “judge” a religion on the tenets of that religion...
Now Judaism and Christianity have the 10 Commandments...
Mormonism on the other hand through out the 10 Commandments and Joey Smith who had been excommunicated from the Presbyterian church fir cause, rejected the 10 commandments and deszigns his own religion with unBiblical anti-10 Commandments contents and doctrines and covenants...
The 10 commandments are still around...
Joey Smiths anti-10 commandments are still around...
Where were you with these types of lines when the scandals about the above people broke? (Well, Teddy's "drink" in the bay was a wee bit before FR, I know)...as well as Jim Bakker's...but take Ted Haggard...when stories about Ted H broke on FR, did you come on then and defend him by pointing out all the other religious notables who, too, had suffered scandals?)
And when these scandals continue to be reported about various religious notables, are you going to continue to point out all the other religious notables' scandals? Or do you only offer up this apologetic for Mormon scandals?
And if you're thereby inconsistent, and only come rushing to defend Mormons-in-scandals, why the parceled-out treatment? Why the special segmentation? Why not come to the aid of them all?
Can we count on you, say the next time some RC priest gets accused of molestation or something similar, to come to a FR-posted article and remind everyone how sex scandals have hit the headlines for other denominational leaders?