While the reactions by the states and fed gov (Buchanan) were way out of line, the early LDS weren’t exactly playing ball with respect to the Constitution. That’s what I was referring to, and that’s why I used a multiplier of “1000x harder.”
No offense was meant, and I surely wasn’t talking about today’s Mormans.
Sorry. I was anxious about something else. I DO sometimes fly off the handle. Not your fault.
Just curious, in what way to you consider the early LDS not playing ball with respect to the Constitution? If it’s plural marriage, I understand your concern. But, plural marriage was not against the law when it was started. I think it was 1881 when the church stopped practicing it (year may be wrong). Just my understanding. No argument wanted by me.
Thanks.
And as for Sharia Law, I firmly am with you 100%. It is totally against the constitution, and I feel women, especially should be educated about it. I believe bride prices are paid for the exclusive right to the woman’s child bearing organs. They are considered possessions, even less than slaves....
Barbarians .....