Posted on 02/04/2012 6:53:17 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Very, very good e-mail lists — and an internal debate over whether to use them. “I'm getting really tired of the ads for Romney campaign trips coming from this list serve,” writes one young Mormon.
LAS VEGAS, Nevada -- At Mitt Romney’s first rally here earlier this week, there were plenty of hints that the enthusiastic crowd of 1,000 was stacked with Mormons. Kids walked around in BYU sweatshirts, moms chatted about LDS youth groups, and at least one supporter was overheard talking about making phone calls for the candidate as part of "family home evening" -- a weekly family night the church encourages its members to hold.
But while it's no secret that Romney's coreligionists have swelled the ranks at campaign stops from Des Moines to Reno, one question about the Mormon vote has gone largely unanswered this primary season: How, exactly, have they gotten so organized?
"We heard about it from some friends in our [LDS] ward," said one woman standing outside a rally held in a Las Vegas hotel supply warehouse. "We're so glad we could make it." Another Mormon standing nearby chimed in, "Everyone we know is voting for Mitt!"
The secret to the grassroots success lies, in part, in the unique national structure and scrupulous record-keeping of the Utah-headquartered Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While the church itself is politically neutral, it contains the structural groundwork for one of the most organized and effective voting blocs in the country—something Romney is poised to capitalize on.
Here’s how it works
In contrast with most other religions in the country, the Mormon Church is nationally organized in a strict, top-down fashion, like a corporation. Every congregation in the U.S. reports back to church headquarters in Salt Lake. Whenever an individual is baptized -- either as a child or as a convert -- local ministers take down the person’s name, address, phone number, and e-mail address, and feed the information into a national database maintained by officials in Salt Lake (and only accessible to certain church leaders).
From there, the individuals are assigned to geographically-determined congregations -- or “wards” -- of about 200-300, which they attend on Sundays. Their contact information is filtered into a local “ward list,” which is distributed to all local congregants for planning purposes--from coordinating Sunday school, to working out the logistics for church barbeques.
For decades, these ward lists were printed out and distributed after Sunday services, but in recent years the system has migrated online to LDS.org, where Mormons create logins to access the contact information for every fellow believer in the area.
For active Mormons, wards often become the center of their social universe: it’s not uncommon for members to visit their local chapels three or four times a week for various activities and meetings. Additionally, Mormons participate in “home and visiting teaching” programs, which require them to visit certain ward members on a monthly basis. In this context, ward lists become invaluable tools for Mormons’ daily life—inevitably finding their way into Google groups, listservs, and cell phones.
They also frequently become political tools.
Working the wards
The church expressly forbids using these directories for non-religious purposes, but that doesn’t deter many politically active Mormons from working their ward lists to get out the vote. Reports abound of members blasting out congregational e-mails soliciting support for partisan causes and candidates. One Southern California ward received several e-mails urging congregants to vote for an LDS politician running for local office. And in nastier example of the practice, ward lists in Alpine, Utah were used to spread an anonymous smear campaign against a candidate on the eve of a local election.
Several Mormons told BuzzFeed that as the 2012 primaries heated up, they started to see their fellow congregants use ward lists to organize local efforts for Romney.
Here in Nevada, Ryan Erwin, a consultant for the Romney campaign, acknowledged that the candidate has benefitted from grassroots efforts by Latter-day Saints, and said the campaign is proud of their support. But he also thinks the Mormon factor has been overstated.
“Mormons make up seven percent of the population here,” Erwin said. “If you read some of the reports in the media, you’d think it was 90 percent… it’s a little aggravating when you’ve worked for months to build up an organization and then they say, ‘Well, he just won it because he’s a Mormon.’”
That said, exit polls in 2008 showed that about 25 percent of Nevada caucus-goers self-identified as Mormon -- and Romney won that primary handily. This time around, polling indicates that he’s headed for a similarly dominant victory, and if it happens, local Latter-day Saints will no doubt deserve a chunk of the credit.
Much like how Iowa’s Christian home-school vote advanced its own grassroots efforts for Mike Huckabee largely independently of his campaign, there’s no evidence that Team Romney is officially coordinating with Mormon congregations. But anecdotal evidence suggests that a highly motivated base of Mormon supporters has effectively taken advantage of the LDS infrastructure to help Romney.
The Colonial First Ward listserv
One of the most illustrative examples is the Colonial First Ward listserv, which consists of more than 3,500 D.C.-area Mormons, many of them young and single.
E-mails obtained by BuzzFeed show the listserv being used frequently as a recruiting tool for Romney supporters -- gathering signatures to get the candidate on the Delaware ballot, requesting volunteers to aid the campaign’s Illinois operation, and organizing a get-out-the-vote trip to South Carolina on the weekend of the primary.
The fruits of that last effort were obvious on the ground in Columbia, S.C., where dozens of young Mormon students from Virginia and D.C. were found rallying for Romney at various campaign stops.
But not everyone on the listserv has looked kindly upon efforts to transform the network into a booster club for Romney, and a number of members have e-mailed complaints.
Matt Larsen, a member of the listserv, wrote last October: “I know I’m probably going to make enemies here, but I’m getting really tired of the ads for Romney campaign trips coming from this list serve. The disclaimer at the bottom of every list serve email states very clearly: ‘Items that will not be posted/that will be removed include: promoting your business, promoting political ideologies, and inflammatory comments and rhetoric.’”
The protests appear to have been ignored though, with members continuing to send out e-mails as recently as last month that requested volunteer help for Romney.
“The Colonial First Ward listserv seems to be a miraculous pro-Romney organizing tool,” grumbled one D.C.-area Mormon, who is a Democrat. “Whenever you get the contact information for 3,540 young Mormons in one place, I guess it has to be.”
most members vote Republican because of conservative principals
___________________________________________
In 2008 95% of Mormons in Utah voted for the liberal Willard Mitt Romney because he is Mormon and not because they are Conservatives...
When was the last time Mormons marched against Roe V Wade or abortion ???
Never mind ...
they dont...
Disagreement about mormonism and pointing out the warts of mormonism does not equal “hate” except in the mind of a liberal or an irrational individual.
Reason trumps emotion. Try it sometime.
SNORT! I was a member for over 40 years. May I remind you of the address by the very political Ezra Taft Benson.
(Excerpt)...Those who would remove prophets from politics would take God out of government. ....
.... let us summarize this grand key, these “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet”, for our salvation hangs on them.
1. The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
2. The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
4. The prophet will never lead the church astray.
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
6. The prophet does not have to say “Thus Saith the Lord,” to give us scripture.
7. The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
8. The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
10. The prophet may be involved in civic matters.
11. The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
13. The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.
14. The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.
I am 85 years old and have been a Mormon for 57 years. I have lived in a dozen wards in California, Arizona, Utah and Idaho. I have never heard a discussion of candidates at Church or any other place where a large group of members were gathered,
___________________________________________
as only a convert who has not stopped long in any one ward you wont get to hear much of anything..
You would have to be a bit higher up in the pecking order to know anything passed the curdled milk you have been swilling for 57 years and since 1955 when David O McKay was the Mormon prophet..
NEVER slaves? Are you just historically ignorant -- or do you out of intelligence prevaricate in order to deceive & distort?
Delacoert posted a thread in 2010 that started out:
Jan 23,1852 - Brigham Young instructs Utah Legislature to legalize slavery because "we must believe in slavery."
• Aug 20,1859 - Brigham Young regarding slavery: "We consider it of divine institution, and not to be abolished until the curse pronounced on Ham shall have been removed from his descendants."
Source: Great Moments in Mormon History
This source mentions how Utah Territory was about the only Western locale to harbor slaves -- and the only place where black slavery & Native American slavery simultaneously existed!
Source: Negro Slavery in the Utah Territory
There's many other sources out there showing that Mormons had slaves in Utah Territory in the 1850s into the 1860s.
About Romney
I know this, he has been taught to love and honor the Constitution and this great country. He will honor The Presidency.
_____________________________________
No he hasnt
He not only once but TWICE dodged the draft that would have lead to his serving our country in the US military ...
thats not the actions of a guy who “loves and honors this great country”
No Romney from Willards gg grandfathers down to his FIVE healthy sons have ever served in the US military...
Find any other family outside the Mormon Ropmneys who have not had someone fighting in at least WWI, WWII Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Afghanistan...
Not to mention the Indian Wars and the Civil War during the 1800s..
There arent any or few..
at some time for a family that has been in the US as long as Willards has, there was someone who picked up a gun and fought for the country..
Has anyone ever told you about the Mormon “Oath of Vengence” ???
It went under ground in 1927 but its good to the 3rd and 4th generatio0nj so it includes Willard...
Its a sworn in blood oath of vengence against the governmet of the United States..
George Romney took it as an adult and it was good down to his son Willard, and willards FIVE sons and Willards grandchildren will also have been taught it...
Thats not love and honor of the Constitution..
Willard Mitt Romney was a grown man and didnt protest the racism and bigotry against black men and women and white women and never left the racist Mormon religion..
He agreed with the unConstitutional treatment of other people...
and cried in anger in 1978 when the Mormon religion changed their racist doctrines to passify Jimmy Carter..and politics..
Thats not a guy who loves and honors the Constitution..
In 2002 he vowed he would not do anything to overturn Roe V Wade...
what about the rights of the unborn ???
Thats not a guy who loves and hoonors the Constitutio0n...
and thats certainity not a guy who is a Conservative...
Kid you need to open youre eyes to who and what Willard Mitt Romney really is..
Hes not fit to be the president of the United States..
I believe you will find the answer by looking to the NBA (National Basketball Association).
How ironic that the New Orleans Jazz moved to Salt Lake City in, that's right, 1979.
Last post was "Brigham Young" imported slavery.
Let's next look @ Joseph Smith & slavery:
Joseph Smith’s position on slavery, 1836-1843:
April, 1836: Messenger& Advocate, pp. 299-301: If those who run through the free states, exciting their indignation against our brothers of the South, feel so much sympathy and kindness towards the blacks, were to go to the southern states, where the ,alleged evil exists, and warn those who are guilty of these enormous crimes, to repent and turn from their wickedness, or would purchase the slaves and then set them at liberty, we should have no objections to this provided they would place them upon some other continent than ours… What benefit can the slave derive from the long harangues and discussions held in the north? Certainly the people of the north have no legal right to interfere with the PROPERTY of the south, neither have they a right to say they shall, or shall not, hold slaves (Joseph Smith, Messenger & Advocate, p. 299) .
Tell us, Lawsone, if Smith was speaking as a "prophet" of the Mormon gods...do the Mormon gods regard slaves as mere "property?" Really?
April, 1836: If we dislike slavery we are free from it and are in no danger of being afflicted with it. If they are satisfied with it, it is their right as governments…Where can be the common sense of any wishing to see the slaves of the south set at liberty, is past our comprehension. Such a thing could not take place without corrupting all civil and wholesome society, of both the north and the south! Let the blacks of the south be free, and our community is overrun with paupers, and a reckless mass of human beings, uncultivated, untaught and unaccustomed to provide for themselves the necessaries of life-endangering the chastity of every female who might by chance be found in our streets-our prisons filled with convicts, and the hang-man wearied with executing the functions of his office! This must unavoidably be the case, every rational man must admit, who have ever travelled [traveled] in the slave states, or we must open our houses, unfold our arms, and bid these degraded and degrading sons of Canaan, a hearty welcome and a free admittance to all we possess! (Smith, Messenger & Advocate, p. 300)
Wow! Are these the above "prophetic utterances" as of the Mormon gods? What? If you think so, are you as racist as Joseph Smith clearly shows there?
More Joseph Smith: …we are not accountable for their conduct-they have long since fled to be here no more: and why disgrace ourselves by contending about that that we cannot better by contention, at the same time involving ourselves in everlasting ruin? In this matter we consider we have spoken in behalf of the slave, as well as the slave holder. It has not been a thing of hasty conclusion; but deliberately and carefully examined, and we are sensible, if there are any who believe the gospel as we, and differ from us in point of national government, and would take the pains to inform themselves, not only by searching the holy scriptures, but by visiting the south, they would soon commend us for the course we have now taken. (Smith, Messenger & Advocate, p. 301)
May 6 or 7, 1838: "Are the Mormons abolitionists?" No...we do not believe in setting the negroes free." (Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 120, published 1938)
Jan. 2, 1843: Later in the same book, pp. 269-270 under the sub-heading "Status of the Negro": "Elder Hyde inquired the situation of the negro. I replied, they came into the world slaves, mentally and physically." (p. 269) p. 270: "Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization."
Smith not only supported slavery, but the above quotes show the Lds founder and precious "prophet" was racist to the core.
How shameful of you, Lawsone, to defend such a racist on these very grounds!
The Johnson presidency was late 1963 on thru 1968.
You may have an overall point re: what Southerners let go on; but no need to exaggerate the truth -- when the truth as is makes the South look bad enough...actually, as stated, what you say here is a falsehood. Ever hear of the Emmett Till case in Money, Mississippi (1955)?
You, Lawsone, said NO white men were "accused of a crime against a black man in the entire south"...two white men were arrested for Till's murder: "To the surprise of many people in the South, less than a day after Emmett's disappearance, authorities from Tallahatchie County and nearby Leflore County arrested Roy Bryant and J. W. Milam and charged them with kidnapping. Both men admitted they had taken the boy from his great-uncle's home but claimed they had turned him loose, unharmed, that same night. Three days later, a fisherman found Emmett Till's naked, battered body in the Tallahatchie River, and law enforcement officials then added murder to the charges against Bryant and Milam. A week after the two men's arrest, an all-white Sumner County grand jury surprised southerners when it ordered Bryant and Milam to stand trial for the murder of Emmett Till. Since 1880, more than 500 people had been lynched in Mississippi, and only rarely was any legal action taken against whites who committed violence against blacks."
Source: The Lynching of Emmett Till
I found this just spending 10 minutes searching. The computer -- and Google -- is your friend...So before you launch your next off-base claim, try doing some research...It's readily possible other similar cases existed even before the Till case.
For your repeated claims here, time for you to retract them & revise them...lest you shoot your entire credibility to hell.
or would purchase the slaves and then set them at liberty,
_______________________________________
Joey Smith ran for president of the United States in 1844
One of the things he said he wanted to do as president was for the United States to buy all the slaves and then set them free...
I guess he didnt want “our brothers of the South” to be out their “prime stock” without compensation..
also it was a good campaign move..
Smith was after the Democrat vote..
and that was in the South...
Heres a question that no Mormon would want asked nor would like to answer...
Why was Joey Smith not prepared to just let the black slaves go free as Lincoln did later ???
Of course there was racism in southern churches, northern ones too. Racist people that is. I don’t know of any church that had racism as its official policy except L.D.S.
Note carefully, that I said “I don’t know of any” if you do, please point it out to me and we can dig into its history to see if it took them until 1976 to recognize their sin.
Mitt was a grown man before 1976. Is there a record anywhere in existence showing him speaking out against official church racist policy, pre 1976? It’s a rhetorical question because I know no such documentation exists or it would have been trotted out long before now by the scum bag Romney, “scum bag” because of his politics, just a poor lost soul because of his cultism.
It’s not too late for Romney, he could change immediately and I hope that he does. I still would never vote for him though.
You are insane, that is the only explanation for such a stupid statement. My best friend's father, was drug out their house when she was four and hung on a tree until he was dead, in the front yard. (1953) KKK were caught went to jail for the murder.
I'll tell you where Christians were, running the underground railroad.
Based on these statements you actually probably believe it was Indians who killed all those settlers at the Mountain Meadow Massacre, instead of mormons and Smith was innocent of child rape and burning down newspapers.
There are an alleged 14 mill world wide.
7 mil probably in the US, with half of those under 18.
My uncle was a former bishop, they talked about candidates often.
My lds family believes that Romney is the fulfillment of prophesy.
There is a 98% chance that you will vote for Romney, based on current election results.
When you say jesus are you talking about the once was man and worked his way to an exalted position or the Biblical Christ who is eternal.
Sure, I see the difference.
One was wholesale corporately and collectively exclusive using their God, Prophets, Revelations and scripture to deny fellowship and condescendingly demonstrate just how inferior another person was/is spiritually, physically, mentally and by nature as a group.
How is that God is a bigot or ever was?
How is that original sin was cleansed by Jesus Christ and that didn’t extend to those of color?
Because they are Lamanites? Says who? And just who are these Laminites? Polynesians? Blacks? Darker skinned people of the Americas?
As you accuse others, you yourself are, and that is clueless beyond belief. Of course being LDS it may well be purposful deception. The movement for desegregating the south was born out of many of her Churches as well as by Christians from elsewhere. And while there were more than a few churches that preached a racist tome, none codified it and canonized it like the Mormons did from day one of their existence. And by the time the Mormon "god" told a "prophet" "hey this seed of cane thing is no longer fashionable, maybe we need to fix it, it could be bad for business" many Churches oin the south had been well on the way to reconciliation. So sorry, no sale.
Aww, come on lawsone, don’t pull into your shell (turtle) on us here. Keep reading the facts, research them and come to reasonable and rational conclusions.
That the mormon church, from its inception, codified that blacks were inferior in everyway shape and form. The mormon god then showed how fickle he was and how he lacked the foresight to see that he would have to issue a “revelation” a hundred or so years later to reverse his position towards blacks.
Christians NEVER codified as part of their doctrine and scripture that blacks were cursed or inferior. Mormons did.
“Sure, I see the difference.
One was wholesale corporately and collectively exclusive using their God, Prophets, Revelations and scripture to deny fellowship and condescendingly demonstrate just how inferior another person was/is spiritually, physically, mentally and by nature as a group.
How is that God is a bigot or ever was?
How is that original sin was cleansed by Jesus Christ and that didn’t extend to those of color?
Because they are Lamanites? Says who? And just who are these Laminites? Polynesians? Blacks? Darker skinned people of the Americas?”
_____________________________
while the mormons tout just how well they treated their human livestock
they never mention the mass genocide they committed against the Ute Indians in order to steal Utah from them in the first place...
excerpt from Phillip Gottfredson’s ‘The Blackhawk War’:
There is no mystery or a plethora of complex reasons why the Black Hawk War happened, it’s very simple really, the Native Ute Indians of Utah were being set-upon and victimized by the United States Government and, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints-—the Mormons. The truth regarding the history of the war has since been cloaked in brilliantly managed rhetoric by the victors who blame and demonize the Ute Nation in every conceivable way, and understanding this aspect of the accounts between the Government, Church and the Native peoples is when the story becomes woefully strange, and convoluted.
There are always two sides to any war. People say, “that’s all in the past we just need to get over it.” Like their forefathers before them, the descendents of the predominate culture of Utah refuse to acknowledge the cruel mistreatment of Utah’s American Indian peoples. That demoralization and racism have become institutionalized. Utahan’s say it’s the Indian people who are to blame, “we gave them every opportunity to succeed... it’s their own damn fault.” And so remember, racism has to be taught. Children learn racism from their families, teachers and community.
What is the Ute Indians’ side of the story? And, why has their history, their account, their interpretation, their version been purposely ignored and long omitted from school curricula and historical accounts?
When people are denied access to their own true history by educators and institutions as both American Indians and non-Indians of Utah have been, when Indian students are forced to accept solely the victors point of view, when cultural traditions and customs of the American Indian are systematically replaced by western beliefs; when they are denied their right to speak their own language and denied their religious freedom, when they are repeatedly denied equal access to justice and protection under the law, when these things happen it then becomes cultural genocide, assimilation, a fulfillment of the Doctrine of Discovery.
“The Time has come when Indian people need to stop being victimized. They need to tell their story and demand that it be told accurately.” - Forrest S. Cuch Former Director of Indian Affairs/Member of the Ute Tribe
A Brief Synopsis of How the Black Hawk War Began
“There was a time when our people were happy and content living in the majestic mountains and fertile green valleys of Utah. Then the Mormons came, and our people were killed—the old, the young, the children, women—and many taken to reservations where many more would die.” - Member of the Ute Tribe
Christian crusaders attempted to reason with the Indian people saying they had the right to take possession of their land because the Indians were heathens, non-Christians, who didn’t believe in the bible or Jesus, the Messiah. And this is the basis for the denial of Indian rights in federal Indian law today, based upon the metaphor that the American Indians are the Canaanites or pagans in the promised land. “Consequently, the current situation of Indigenous Peoples around the world is the result of a linear program of “legal” precedent, originating with the Doctrine of Discovery and codified in contemporary national laws and policies. The Doctrine mandated Christian European countries to attack, enslave and kill the Indigenous Peoples they encountered and to acquire all of their assets” - Steven T. Newcomb Indigenous Law Institute and author of “Pagans in the Promised Land.” Also quotes from WCC Executive Committee 14-17 February 2012 Bossey, Switzerland (see also Doctrine of Discovery)
The early settlers are portrayed by the victor’s accounts as people who were fair-minded and of good intentions when they came to Utah. And upon arriving they were confronted by Indians whom they described as “friendly toward the Mormons” but later they were inaccurately and unfairly judged as barbaric wild savages who terrorized them.
In 1853 Ute leader Walkara (Black Hawk’s uncle) told interpreter M. S. Martenas, “He (Walkara) said that he had always been opposed to the whites set[t]ling on the Indian lands, particularly that portion which he claims; and on which his band resides and on which they have resided since his childhood, and his parents before him—that the Mormons when they first commenced the settlement of Salt Lake Valley, was friendly, and promised them many comforts, and lasting friendship—that they continued friendly for a short time, until they became strong in numbers, then their conduct and treatment towards the Indians changed—they were not only treated unkindly, but many were much abused and this course has been pursued up to the present—sometimes they have been treated with much severity—they have been driven by this population from place to place—settlements have been made on all their hunting grounds in the valleys, and the graves of their fathers have been torn up by the whites.” - STATEMENT, M. S. MARTENAS, INTERPRETER Great Salt Lake City, July 6 1853 Brigham Young Papers, MS 1234, Box 58, Folder 14
LDS Archives - Will Bagley Transcription
The truth is Utah Indian people were a vibrant productive culture, and didn’t have any particular animosity toward early Mormon pioneers, only that they were trespassing on their land, whereas, according to the Book of Mormon, the church believed they had a divine right to the land and an obligation to convert Utah’s American Indians to Mormonism, according to church doctrine, and in so doing the so-called “loathsome” Indians would become a “white and delightsome people” and would be forgiven of the sins of their forefathers. (Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 5:21-23) According to church doctrine, the nature of the dark skin was a curse, the cause was the Lord, the reason was because the Lamanites “had hardened their hearts against him, (God)” and the punishment was to make them “loathsome” unto God’s people who had white skins.
“When the Ute failed to assimilate into Mormon culture, the answer was to exterminate them.” - Historian Robert Carter
“It Was Question Of Supremacy Between the White Man and the Indian”
It was in 1850 when Mormon apostle George A. Smith, cousin to Church founder Joseph Smith, declared that the Indian people “have no right to their land” and he instructed the all-Mormon legislature to “extinguish all titles” and get them out of the way and onto reservations. This set the stage for the infamous Black Hawk War that would follow. Smith was 33 years of age when making decisions affecting the lives of thousands of Native peoples.
At the age of 49 Church President Brigham Young’s victory was perhaps a hollow one for, in order to fulfill his dream, he had to destroy a civilization. He complained it was “cheaper to feed them than to fight them,” as he was spending millions in church funds equipping his private army to war against them. Brigham paid his Generals as much as $300 a month while soldiers were being paid some $16.00 a month to rid the land of it’s Indian inhabitants. Then in 1866 the United States government reimbursed Brigham some 1.5 million for military expenses. (See Memorial of the Legislative Assembly of Utah)
Brigham Young was quoted by the Denver Rocky Mountain Newspaper as saying, “You can get rid of more Indians with a sack of flour, than a keg of powder.” Just how many of the some 70,000 Indians did he get rid of? By 1909 the U.S. Census reported that the Indian population had decreased to just 2300.
The gruesome be headings of some 40 Ute corpses in 1850, heads stacked in boxes, and hung by their long hair from the eves of buildings at Fort Utah, has long been ignored, “You didn’t see the Indians beheading the Mormons.” - Historian Robert Carter
What was the motivation behind such barbarianism? Money? You guessed it, the severed heads were shipped to Washington and sold for “scientific examination.” Some heads would fetch as much as a $100 each, a small fortune in those times.
In 1863, 593 Shoshone men women and children were brutally massacred at Bear River. “As the Indians tried desperate measures to fight off the U.S. Army *(led by Patrick Edward Connor and supported by Brigham Young), including the use of tomahawks and archery, the soldiers seemed to lose all sense of control and discipline. Hundreds of corpses were left to be eaten by animals and the bones remained uncovered for years to follow”. - Rod Miller Author of Massacre at Bear River - *Words parenthesized are of my own.
“The Bear River Massacre has been ignored. It was not in the interest of key players—the military and the Mormons—to remember..” - Salt Lake Tribune
On the night of April 21, 1866 another heinous crime was committed in Circleville, Utah, led by LDS Bishop William Jackson Allred and his son James T. S.. While being held captive in a below ground shelter, one by one , 24 in all, women, men, and children, their throats were cut . Two young boys and one girl, seven or eight years of age were told by their mother to run for their lives, and when the door was opened for the next victim to be killed the three made a break and forced their way past the guards and ran. The guards fired several shots at the three but were unable to hit them. One was shot in the side but the bullet barely grazed his rib, not enough to stop him. All of the Paiute males, five women, and two older children were murdered. The only crime that history accounts accuses these innocent victims of is that they were Indian. - (As told to me by living descendents of one of the boys who survived.)
“In those early days it was, at times, imperative that harsh measures should be used. We had to do these things, or be run over by them. It was a question of supremacy between the white man and the Indian.” - John Lowry 1894
A Few Interesting Facts To Ponder
The names “Black Hawk” and “Antonga” are they Ute Indian names? The name “Black Hawk” is not a Ute name. It was a name Brigham Young, in jest, called the Ute’s leader. So it became that Brigham Young’s supercilious term, ‘Black Hawk,’ is the name by which he is now most commonly known. In fact there were some three or more Indians the whites referred to as Black Hawk in Utah history. It was a sarcastic joke, a mockery referring to the Sauk and Fox Indian tribes (Mesquaki) under the leadership of the real Chief Black Hawk and the tragic Black Hawk War of 1832 in Illinois, where the Mormons migrated from. It was, perhaps, a sinister message to the Utes that a similar destiny awaited them.
To the Mexicans he was known as “Antonga”, also not a Ute name. Utah’s Black Hawk was born into family of legendary leaders and known to the Utes as Nuch, he was so named in honor of his people the Nuchu, a sacred name the Utes call themselves.
So, why is it called “The Black Hawk War” when there were never any black hawk Indians in Utah, or elsewhere for that matter, when none of the Indians in Utah called themselves Black Hawk? For to do so only serves to perpetuate the dark cynicism that helped to demoralize the Native peoples of Utah. You see, the story gets a lot more interesting when you talk to the Utes.
Before Chief Nuch died in 1870, deathly ill from a bullet wound he received over a year earlier at Gravelly Ford while attempting to rescue a fallen comrade, he traveled 180 miles by horse and visited every Mormon village to apologize for the pain and suffering he and his warriors had caused. He said to them, “you broken your promises, stolen our land, killed our children, men and women, and spread disease among my people.” He then asked for forgiveness and pleaded with the settlers to do the same, and end the bloodshed. “You didn’t see that happening on the part of the settlers”, said Forrest Cuch, “So it took a greater man to do such a thing. And that’s what is overlooked in the victors’ accounts.”
“It was white history that wrote it—that he surrendered. And no, a man like that don’t surrender. He’ll come to terms with reality. I’m done, we’re done, we, we did what we could, we’re done. But it gets written differently... And like any of us, I think you get to a point where it’s like any war, you get in and you do what you’ve got to do. And maybe there’s a family there, and you killed, killed their kids—you, as a human, that thing we all are, is going to at least make you say I’m sorry.” - Larry Cesspooch/Member of the Ute Tribe
Shocking Post War Relations
Was the Black Hawk war over in 1873 as scholars say? The Mormons got their Indian land and the Transcontinental Railroad had come through. Black Hawk died in 1870. Ninety percent of the Indian population had died since the Mormons arrived in 1847. Fifteen hundred Utes were forced to walk to the reservation in the Uintah Basin where they were abandoned, and 500 more died from starvation in the first year. Were the whites satisfied? No, not yet.
On September 20, 1919, an article appeared on the front page of the Deseret News with the headline, “Bones of Black Hawk on Exhibition L.D.S. Museum.” Within the article, the writer explains that first, the remains of Black Hawk had been on public display in the window of a hardware store in downtown Spanish Fork, Utah. Then Benjamin Guarded, the man in charge of the L.D.S. Museum, acquired the remains for public display on Temple Square. For decades, the remains of Black Hawk, and those of an Indian woman and a child, were on display in the church museum on Temple Square in downtown Salt Lake City.
Just 49 years had passed since Chief Black Hawk had been laid to rest in 1870 at Spring Lake, Utah, when members of the LDS Church plotted the robbery of his grave. Accompanying the article is a photo of William E. Croff standing in the open grave, grinning ear to ear, while holding the skull of Nuch (Black Hawk). While the living descendents of Nuch were outraged, their voices fell on deaf ears. Seemingly without conscience or remorse church leaders condoned the practice, in spite of a federal law passed in 1906 called the Graves Protection Act. Descendents of Nuch had no real legal recourse until the enactment of the National American Graves Protection Reparation Act, or NAGPRA, passed in 1994.
Chief Nuch was again reburied in the year 1996. It took an act of Congress, the help of National Forest Service archeologist Charmain Thomson, and the humanitarian efforts of a boy scout Shane Armstrong to find and rebury the remains of Nuch (Black Hawk). This raises the question why a Christian religious institution and its leaders would have no compassion or respect for the family of Chief Nuch who were members of the church. Was the reason simply amusement for others? Was grave robbing for art, pleasure, punishment, a morbid fascination of death, divine obligation, or, most importantly, was it a question of supremacy between the white man and the Indian?
Yet youy SLC MORMONs fail to obey your own god's law: found in D&C 132.
Don't try to preach to ANYONE; Hypocrit!!
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;
and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,
and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.
Brigham Young - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)
Of COURSE you are!
It sure is NOT approved by Headquarters in SLC!
That you would openly sanction this action with a fringe group of your friends is something for which you all should be held to task.
- - - - -
First, we are not fringe - take a look around there are many more on here who realize Mitt’s religion IS an issue. Second my views are not wrong. I am a Christian before I am a Republican and as a Christian I cannot sanction voting for someone who lacks basic spiritual discernment and insults my Savior. I will not vote for a cultist.
I have never said they don’t have a right to practice Mormonism, but I have the SAME right to speak out against it. Freedom of religion works both ways. Yet you want to silence us because you don’t like what we are saying. How liberal of you.
Also, you seem to forget that the Constitution states that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (not even the states) cannot impose a religious test, individuals can and many states had a religious test for decades after the Constitution was ratified.
Point out where I said that candidates should be judged SOLELY on their religion. I don’t care if Mitt came out and left Mormonism and became a Baptist, I STILL wouldn’t vote for him because he would still be a lying scumbag.
Your views are anti-Christian and anti-American since you seem to want to silence my right to freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom of speech. Not conservative at all.
Mitt WILL destroy this country if he gets the nomination, either by handing it over to Obama or through his liberalism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.