Erey:

"Technicaly speaking by law Obama was born a muslim if his father was a muslim.  We all know he was not raised a muslim and was raised sort of secular/multicultural."

Erey, I'm curious, what law is that? I couldn't find it in any U S statute......

Jun 22, 2012 -- 8:46PM, Ironhold wrote:

Jun 22, 2012 -- 8:11PM, mecdukebec wrote:

Yet, LDS iconography presents the gods the LDS worship as having two bodies:

 

Behold, ladies and gentleman, an anti-Mormon going about his business.

As we can see, a key tactic used by anti-Mormons is to take even the most innocent of matters and spin them into whatever sinister allegations they can come up with.

In this case, our simple little anti-Mormon is attempting to argue that "Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ being physically seperate" somehow equates to raw paganism.

Isn't it cute how the wheels struggle to turn but don't quite make it all the way?

Do LDS deny that two gods appeared to JS?   The gods you worship are presented, strictly, from your own iconography. 

jesuschrist.lds.org/josephsmith/v/index....

I know that the Greeks and the Romans worshiped the gods. 

It's really not complicated; unless, one is hiding something. 

P.S.  JS claims to have seen two gods, spoken with them, and that same were made of flesh, bone and not separate from the creation, as same (again) were children of the God who made the gods; and JS said that this was revelation.  Have I misunderstood, or misrepresented, the claims of JS in re: your gods, their physical nature, and how and why LDS iconography presents them so?    Hardly an "innocent" matter; unless, as pointed out, you are hiding something, i.e. the gods whom LDS worship. 

Jun 22, 2012 -- 7:31PM, Ironhold wrote:

Obama was educated, in part, at a madrassa in another country; the Obama administration tried to hail that as evidence Obama was properly multicultural, but a lot of people responded by noting that madrassas were often hotbeds for extremism and that since it was in a foreign country there was no way to know just what was and wasn't being taught there.

Debunked, it was a normal public school. articles.cnn.com/2007-01-22/politics/oba...

Snopes have it as false as well.

Jun 23, 2012 -- 12:35AM, teilhard wrote:

The perceived "Anti-Mormon Bias" is REAL ...

Unfortunately for LDS Adherents, it arises in PART from the perceived "Separateness" of "Mormons" from the REST of us ("Gentiles") ...

LDS Christians haven't YET come-on-Board The Ecumenical Movement, and THAT has greatly hampered their full legitimate Inclusion in American Society ... It will be MUCH easier for "us" to fully accept "them" when "they" also fully accept "us" ...

Actually, in the past the church has tried - at all levels, mind you - to open up dialogue with other Christian groups.

We've made inroads with the Seventh-Day Adventists, such that our welfare and humanitarian aid systems are virtually one and the same in several regards.

But everyone else?

It typically ends quite horribly.

For example, one of the local Mormon congregations used to host a chapter of Newborns in Need, a charity that produced baby blankets and infant-care baskets that hospitals could distribute to the parents of premature infants; this way, the parents had the items needed to help care for the infant, helping them to deal with the increased costs and stresses involved with such a situation.

So few non-Mormons wanted anything to do with us that they refused to participate in such an effort. The woman in charge was even literally told "I'd be OK if this were at another church, but I won't set foot in a Mormon building."

She ultimately had to shutter the chapter because of it; there just weren't enough of us Mormons with the time on our hands to get things done, and she wasn't able to get any non-Mormons interested in helping out.

Jun 23, 2012 -- 7:01AM, Ironhold wrote:

Jun 23, 2012 -- 12:35AM, teilhard wrote:

The perceived "Anti-Mormon Bias" is REAL ...

Unfortunately for LDS Adherents, it arises in PART from the perceived "Separateness" of "Mormons" from the REST of us ("Gentiles") ...

LDS Christians haven't YET come-on-Board The Ecumenical Movement, and THAT has greatly hampered their full legitimate Inclusion in American Society ... It will be MUCH easier for "us" to fully accept "them" when "they" also fully accept "us" ...

Actually, in the past the church has tried - at all levels, mind you - to open up dialogue with other Christian groups.

We've made inroads with the Seventh-Day Adventists, such that our welfare and humanitarian aid systems are virtually one and the same in several regards.

But everyone else?

It typically ends quite horribly.

For example, one of the local Mormon congregations used to host a chapter of Newborns in Need, a charity that produced baby blankets and infant-care baskets that hospitals could distribute to the parents of premature infants; this way, the parents had the items needed to help care for the infant, helping them to deal with the increased costs and stresses involved with such a situation.

So few non-Mormons wanted anything to do with us that they refused to participate in such an effort. The woman in charge was even literally told "I'd be OK if this were at another church, but I won't set foot in a Mormon building."

She ultimately had to shutter the chapter because of it; there just weren't enough of us Mormons with the time on our hands to get things done, and she wasn't able to get any non-Mormons interested in helping out.

Well, the LDS church does have, as its scripture, that it is the one, true church, TM, all others are apostate.  Source:  D  & C. 1.30:  "the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth."   www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/1...

The LDS church believes that it is the only "authorized" church, with the "correct" knowledge and worship of the gods, etc.; ergo, it would be hard for LDS to participate with other Christian churches, as the LDS do teach that the LDS church is the only one directed by the gods and the Prophet.