Perez Hilton Comes Out as Anti-Mormon

Perez Hilton Comes Out as Anti-Mormon December 11, 2018

Perez Hilton, the popular entertainment blogger, chose to use his platform late last week to lash out at the Church of Jesus Christ.

Kristin Chenoweth, the popular Broadway performer, perhaps best known for originating the character of Glinda in “Wicked,” is set to perform with the Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square for their annual Christmas concert December 13-15.

Chenoweth will join a long list of celebrities that have performed with the Tabernacle Choir including Angela Lansbury, Sting, Yo-Yo Ma, and the Sesame Street Muppets.

Hilton, however, has asked Chenoweth to break her commitment to the choir at the last minute to continue what he calls his “defeat” of Mormons. His reason? The ten-year-old ballot measure the Church supported defining marriage in California—A measure that most Californians agreed with and voted for. Hilton is using his hatred of Latter-day Saint beliefs to try and harm and ancillary activity. And by asking Chenoweth to bow out at such a late date, he is making more than a simple political statement, he is attempting to do real harm to a long-time Latter-day Saint institution.

But Hilton is not merely nursing a long grudge. He has joined forces with Fred Karger in this most recent effort. Karger has long been working to strip away Latter-day Saints religious freedom with little success. He has been on a fruitless quest to find evidence to remove the Church’s tax exempt status. Admitting he had nothing last year when he opened up a tip line asking anyone with anything to contact him. He has picketed people trying to purchase books at Deseret Book. Even former MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts has suggested Karger’s actions are reflective of anti-Mormon bias.

By joining forces with Karger, Hilton makes it clear that he has no tolerance for Latter-day Saints.

No one is expecting Hilton to change his views on same-sex marriage. But attempting to stop Latter-day Saints from even building relationships with people who have good relationships with the LGBT+ community is odd, backward thinking that reveals more bigotry than problem-solving.

I am curious how Hilton’s acolytes, advertisers, and television partners would respond if he showed similar intolerance to any other group?

"Where’d you go brotherman? Am missing your fresh takes"

The God Who Changes His Mind
"It sounds more like Darwinism than Mormonism."

The God Who Changes His Mind
"That's not really an answer to my question..."

The God Who Changes His Mind
""So let us look at ourselves. For the Church, the scriptures suggest both an accelerated ..."

The God Who Changes His Mind

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Latter-day Saint
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • TheAdvocate

    Asking for tolerance of your intolerance is very ironic.

  • Christopher D. Cunningham

    That’s a cute line people often use to justify their hatreds. But it is empty rhetoric.

    This logical fallacy is prevalent enough to warrant its own post. Be on the lookout.

  • CamHoltoe

    It’s their own fault for coming out with such strong homophobia. I mean really.

  • Kiwi57

    “It’s their own fault for coming out with such strong homophobia. I mean really.”

    There’s no such thing as “homophobia.” It’s a meaningless pejorative. I mean really.

    And the “strong homophobia” you imagine was nothing of the sort. It was a principled stand for traditional, conjugal marriage.

    I realise that some people have a hard time understanding that. In my experience, they have a hard time understanding the very concept of principles.

  • Kiwi57

    “Asking for tolerance of your intolerance is very ironic.”

    So-called “liberals” rationalizing their intense, highly censorious bigotry by calling any difference of opinion “intolerance” would be ironic, were it not for the fact that it is your SOP.

  • CamHoltoe

    talk about homophobia.. glad to see mormon bigotry is so ingrained that they don’t even recognize it when they themselves spew it…it’s why they’ll never have control outside of utard…

  • MoNoMoInUT

    You are up in the night. Intolerance of the LGBTQ community is the source of this problem. Not some “liberal” disctraction.

  • Kiwi57

    “talk about homophobia..”

    Of course you must. If you don’t talk about it, nobody will believe that it exists.

  • Kiwi57

    “You are up in the night.”

    Yes, when I’m awake, you’re asleep.

    “Intolerance of the LGBTQ community is the source of this problem.”

    I agree. The intolerance of some in the LGBTQ community is not merely the source of this problem, it’s the entirety of it.

    “Not some ‘liberal’ disctraction.”

    There’s no distraction. When so-called “liberals” throw their allegedly “liberal” principles out of the window in order to justify going after their ideological enemies, that’s just what’s going on.

  • CamHoltoe

    yup.. done wasting time with someone who hates because Space Jesus says so.. you go on with insanity… and please.. since it’s clear you are also unable to shut up…please spew an insane, bigoted, small-minded, conspiracy laden last word. it won’t make you any less hateful, crazy or brainwashed

  • Kiwi57

    I don’t “hate” anybody. You appear to be projecting.

    And when it comes to “insane, bigoted, small-minded, conspiracy laden,” I think you have me confused with someone else. Fred Karger, perhaps.

  • Kiwi57

    Chris, don’t worry about Perez. He’s just mad because someone dropped a house on his sister.

  • TheAdvocate

    Funny, because I’m actually an agnostic conservative. But whatever.

  • Kiwi57

    How you label yourself is irrelevant. Retaining the traditional definition of marriage as one man and one woman is a principled conservative position that entails no “intolerance.” The only “intolerance” in view is found in those who assume that it is merely “intolerant” to hold that position.

  • The Last Danite

    Is your outrage given in equal measure to the black and latino communities of California since they were the largest swaying vote for Prop 8? Every Latter-Day Saint could of voted against Prop 8 and still would of passed.

  • The Last Danite

    Are you unironically calling someone bigoted? Do you read what you post?

  • The Last Danite

    That’s what tolerance means. No tolerance is required if you agree with something.

  • TheAdvocate

    Tolerance means that I can tolerate people who decide not to drink. Or tolerate them taking a day off on Ash Wednesday, or a week off for Ramadan. It DOES NOT mean I tolerate their INTOLERANCE of people who even they admit didn’t choose their sexuality and cause thousands of these people to self-harm every year, get shunned by their families or ultimately kill themselves.

    Disgusting, really.

  • The Last Danite

    > It DOES NOT mean I tolerate their INTOLERANCE

    It actually does. I despise what the Westboro Baptist Church does and what they stand for but I tolerate them because we live in a free society where the most vile speech must be defended.
    From Oxford:
    [noun] The ability or willingness to tolerate the existence of opinions or behaviour that one dislikes or disagrees with.

    >thousands of these people to self-harm every year, get shunned by their families or ultimately kill themselves.

    Do you have a source for “thousands”? The Church itself has said not to shun gay children and don’t even try to blame suicide on the Church. Suicide is a very complex issue and the suicide rate of gays is higher than the national average across the board (trans is even higher). Feel free to spit on their graves if it helps you own the Church.

  • SneakyJimmy

    it’s truly ironic that a so-called “church” calls themselves after the name of the Saviour yet there hearts are far, far away from Him.

  • Kiwi57

    As all non-bigots readily and frankly acknowledge, the Church of Jesus Christ is not “a so-called ‘church’,” it’s just a church, and nothing else.

    For the rest, I’d love to see your evidence that the hearts of the Church are far from Him. In particular, what reason do you have for supposing that Jesus would be in favour of “same sex marriage” or anything like it?

  • Kiwi57

    I agree. It is really disgusting that those who advocate for immoral activities first fabricate completely bogus claims of “self-harm” or suicide, and then exploit them for political purposes.

    That’s what you were saying, isn’t it?

  • SneakyJimmy

    The blame and the blood lies squarely on the Church. an apostle teaches that parents should tell their LGBT children that they aren’t welcome in their home and they cant be seen with them in public. No shunning? There is also a strong link between mormon culture and LGBT teen suicide.

  • The Last Danite

    >an apostle teaches that parents should tell their LGBT children that they aren’t welcome in their home and they cant be seen with them in public

    A twisted retelling of what Oaks said but can’t say I’m shocked you did that.

    >There is also a strong link between mormon culture and LGBT teen suicide.

    Can you provide some peer reviewed evidence this is the case? LGBT teen suicide rates are among the highest of any population across the entire nation. This is not a Utah county only issue and to blame the Church is just bigotry.

    Post-op trans adults have an attempted suicide rate over 20x the national average. You want to tell me this is squarely the fault of the Church?

    Source: https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf

  • The Last Danite

    When Christ comes back and tells you to repent of your sins and to forsake all will you do it?

  • SneakyJimmy

    I come in peace. Ask yourself this: would Jesus be in favour of marriage? In the past, majorities lacking in empathy added prefixes
    to “marriage” such as “inter-racial”, “mixed race, “mongrel”, “inter-faith” “same sex” and other terms designed to demean and delegitimize the marriages of others they felt superior to.

  • SneakyJimmy

    Oaks practices what he teaches, he refuses to speak to his gay grandson. How would you interpret “don’t expect to stay overnight”, I would be ashamed to even think about insulting my children like that.
    think about this:
    “More than 5,000 youth are estimated to experience homelessness in
    Utah per year. Of these, at least 40 percent are LGBT and the majority
    are from religious and socially conservative families, with 60 percent
    from Mormon homes.”
    Check this out ” https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V49N02_101.pdf

  • Kiwi57

    I’m certain Jesus would be in favour of marriage, because, as the union of a man and a woman, it provides the best mechanism to enable a child to be raised by her biological parents.

    SJ: “In the past, majorities lacking in empathy added prefixes to ‘marriage'”

    Like you added “so-called” to “church?”

    Ignoring the temptation to engage your attempt at mind-reading the dead, please tell me: What does the scriptural record actually say that gives you the impression that Jesus would be enthusiastically in favour of any arrangement that anyone might choose to call a “marriage?”

    I don’t think he would be that easily taken in by Orwellian Newspeak myself; but maybe that’s just me.

  • SneakyJimmy

    Inflammatory HEADLINE. It should read, Perez calls out Chenoweth as false ally.

  • Kiwi57

    SJ: “The blame and the blood lies squarely on the Church.”

    Demagoguery at its finest.

    SJ: “an apostle teaches that parents should tell their LGBT children that they aren’t welcome in their home and they cant be seen with them in public.”

    Source?

    I went googling, and found this: https://mormonandgay.lds.org/articles/church-teachings

    Needless to say, it doesn’t support your claim.

    SJ: “No shunning?”

    That’s right. No shunning.

    There are places where claims that the Church practices “shunning” won’t be met with informed rebuttal. This is not one of those places.

    SJ: “There is also a strong link between mormon culture and LGBT teen suicide.”

    Again, source?

    A while ago I saw some astonishing numbers put out by a notorious pressure group. Investigation showed that the number of “teen suicides” claimed by the Mama Dragons actually exceeded the total number of teen deaths for that period. IOW, if we believe them, the number of suicides was greater than the total number of deaths. That’s terrible!

    And given that “gays” represent 2-3% of the population, how many of those suicides are really “gay” youth? Even if we correct the number of claimed suicides down to the total number of teen deaths, we would have to believe (1) that no teenager in Utah dies except by suicide, which would indicate that it’s a remarkably safe place, and (2) no heterosexual kids commit suicide at all.

    Is that what the numbers tell you?

  • The Last Danite

    >Oaks practices what he teaches, he refuses to speak to his gay grandson.

    Do you have a source for that?

    Your second point is proven shaky by looking at the footnotes of the link. The paper links Peggy Fletcher Stack as the source for the stats and openly admits that “Of course, correlation does not prove causation”

    It concludes with:”We need to accept that the data we have so far do not allow us to precisely estimate the number of youth suicides driven by the Church’s positions and rhetoric on LGBTQ issues, but we also need to recognize that the evidence points to a serious problem.”

    So in other words: we don’t have the data to come to a conclusion on this issue. No mention of how youth suicides are rising across the board. The existence of such events does not prove a link between the church’s teaching and suicide, especially considering the church’s efforts to put in place exactly the factors that have been shown to prevent suicide.

    Utah doesn’t include sexual orientation in their suicide statistics. We legitimately have no idea how many of them were LGBT+ or not. Claiming that all teen suicides are related to their orientation is absurd. Claiming that the entire reason for it is because of one single potential issue is even more absurd

  • Kiwi57

    SJ: “Oaks practices what he teaches, he refuses to speak to his gay grandson.”

    Source?

    SJ: “How would you interpret ‘don’t expect to stay overnight’, I would be ashamed to even think about insulting my children like that.”

    Who said that, and to whom did they say it?

    Is it something President Oaks said to the “gay” grandson to whom he allegedly refuses to speak?

    ETA: I’ve found the actual source. It goes like this:

    Question: “At what point does showing that love cross the line into inadvertently endorsing behavior? If the son says, ‘Well, if you love me, can I bring my partner to our home to visit? Can we come for holidays?’ How do you balance that against, for example, concern for other children in the home?”

    Partial answer to that question: “I can also imagine some circumstances in which it might be possible to say, ‘Yes, come, but don’t expect to stay overnight. Don’t expect to be a lengthy house guest. Don’t expect us to take you out and introduce you to our friends, or to deal with you in a public situation that would imply our approval of your “partnership.”’

    There are so many different circumstances, it’s impossible to give one answer that fits all.”

    Now I can see where an absolutely unprincipled liar might be willing to claim that Elder Oaks said “don’t expect to stay overnight” to a child, hoping that someone might assume that it was a matter of “rejecting” someone who was “gay,” when in fact he’s saying something quite different.

    See here: https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/interview-oaks-wickman-same-gender-attraction

    It’s not about “rejecting” a “gay” son or daughter, it’s about having standards of behaviour in the home.

    That was really quite sneaky, Jimmy.

  • The Last Danite

    It should be added that the Peggy Fletcher Stack article that provides the numbers also says:

    In the month of November 2015 youth suicides were 33 percent lower than in the month of November 2014 (Utah Department of Health IBIS). The year after the policy’s release saw a 21 percent decrease in youth suicides. Utah suicides for those ages 18-64 also decreased (though minimally) from 2015 to 2016. Sadly, suicides of those 65 and over increased by 30 percent during this time. The overall suicide rate in Utah slightly declined from 2015 to 2016.

    Misapplying these data to the overly simplistic narrative that Utah’s suicide rates are the result of the policies of the Church of Jesus Christ could lead to the questionable conclusion that the November policy: 1) decreased youth suicides, 2) had no impact on adult suicides, and 3) increased senior citizen suicides. Such tenuous conclusions remind us of serious concerns with one-dimensional narratives.

    Indeed, professionals have cautioned against simplistic narratives. Utah’s suicide prevention research coordinator, Michael Staley, stated: “Anybody who reduces suicide or an explanation for our rate of suicide in any population to one or two things is sadly mistaken. I think that mentality is an impediment to us moving forward.”

    The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention cautioned us to avoid claiming “that a specific anti-LGBT law or policy will ‘cause’ suicide. Suicide deaths are almost always the result of multiple overlapping causes.”

  • Kiwi57

    The headline is accurate. Someone whose rhetoric relies upon a manipulation of labels really can’t complain when someone uses a label he doesn’t like. Especially when the label tells it like it is.

    “Anti-Mormon” is an objectively determined category, and Hilton quite unashamedly fits into it. “False ally,” on the other hand, is an ideologically driven attempt to marginalise someone. Why should the blogger support such manipulation?

  • CamHoltoe

    I’m sorry.. Did widdle motard get upset because I mocked his cult and stated the fact of how y’all treat gentiles in utah? whatever, Mary

  • TheAdvocate

    You’re a real piece of sh*%, you know that? God forbid you ever have a gay child. You’d throw him off a building. You and your church are a fraud.

  • SneakyJimmy

    We don’t allow fornicators, Jews, Negroes, hispanics, , Maoris, drinkers, gays or other sinners in our home, said the good christian. We have our standards to maintain.
    I’d also be ashamed to say i associated with any parent that would tell their child “don’t expect to stay overnight in our home”. I get sick thinking about it because so many young married LGBT mormons have been told exactly that by their parents. But families are forever I guess, unless your gay.

  • Kiwi57

    Now now, TE. Whatever happened to that smug superiority wherein you are supposed to nod your head and tell us how much safer we are in the dark?

    The only “fraud” I can see is found in the completely fabricated “suicide” claims. You see, instead of merely accepting them at face value, I was mean enough to look into some of them.

    They don’t stack up.

    Sorry.

  • The Last Danite

    >Intolerance and bigotry is bad!
    >Unless I do it!

  • Kiwi57

    SJ: “We don’t allow fornicators, Jews, Negroes, hispanics, , Maoris, drinkers, gays or other sinners in our home, said the good christian. We have our standards to maintain. ”

    Again, that’s pretty sneaky, Jimmy.

    As you perfectly well know, you are consciously, deliberately, and with malice aforethought, misrepresenting, distorting and otherwise outright lying about what Elder Oaks said.

    Your screed above is quite deliberately and significantly different to what Elder Oaks said, isn’t it?

    I’ve never met a Latter-day Saint who wouldn’t allow “Jews, Negroes, hispanics, , Maoris” in his or her house.

    Never.

    And I flatly don’t believe that you have, either.

    Ever.

    So let’s dispose of that. It’s an outright lie. I won’t embarrass you by making a big deal about it – unless you do.

    Now let’s come back to the slightly more subtle lie. We’ll take the first item:

    “We don’t allow fornicators….”

    Yes, you made that up, too.

    You wouldn’t know this, because the way decent people think is entirely foreign to you. But when decent people say “This is our home, and we won’t allow it to be used for fornication,” that’s not the same as saying anything like “We don’t allow fornicators.” All it’s saying is, “You don’t get to fornicate while you are here.”

    Now if you can’t keep it zipped – for a whole afternoon! – then maybe you’ve got a problem. But I earnestly suggest that you stop lying about what is being said.

    Okay?

  • Kiwi57

    In the meantime, Jimmy, we’re still waiting for you to support your claims, to wit:

    (1) The existence of President Oaks’ “gay grandson”; and
    (2) President Oaks’ refusal to speak to his “gay grandson.”

    Ze crickets, zey are chirping.

  • Kiwi57

    “Motard?”
    “Cult?”
    And “Space Jesus?”

    And you really think that you, of all people, have got any standing to criticise us, of all people, when it comes to “bigotry?”

  • SneakyJimmy

    Last night, a mother of a son currently attending BYU gave us an update of some of her challenges. This family would probably be classified as “other than white” in Utah. Her son is dating a girl of African decent, also attending BYU. Her bishop told her that she should only date “her own kind”. If this is decent behaviour, you are welcome to it. I would hope that you would never tell someone you love that they aren’t welcome in your home because of who they love, as Oaks councils. If you believe that LGBT people are defective or “like kleptomaniacs”, as Oaks has also taught, then you should do a reality check. By the way, I think you are a decent human being, probably honest, productive and caring but that’s going to get you into trouble one day.

  • SneakyJimmy

    Kiwi,
    It’s common knowledge with many “outcasts” around SLC that Oaks shuns his grandson. Just take a minute and read this thread from reddit. No way to verify anything, but it has a ring of truth and will give you a sense of the common knowledge ” https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/9m3qb3/til_oaks_has_a_gay_grandson_what_an_ass/

  • The Last Danite

    He asked for evidence and you are posting a reddit thread? How embarrassing.

    >No way to verify anything

    So you are lying then.

  • The Last Danite

    That story in no way sounds believable. I am a white male in an interracial marriage and we have never received flak from any member or leader in the church. Not when we were dating, not when we were being interviewed by our priesthood leadership, not when we got married in the temple. I live in Utah county of all places and have never had a single instance of racism towards our marriage. It seems you think this is an epidemic because you want it to be.

  • Christopher D. Cunningham

    Fair enough.

  • Kiwi57

    Oh, so you’re appealing to gossip. That’s what “common knowledge” is, you know, when it applies to private family matters. Just gossip.

    And when a gossip says that something has “the ring of truth,” all it means is that the gossip wants to believe it.

    For future reference: decent people don’t spread gossip. And intelligent people know it has no evidentiary value.

  • Kiwi57

    Let’s see: according to a BYU coed, according to her boyfriend, according to the boyfriend’s mother, according to you, the coed’s bishop told her to date “her own kind” – but according to her boyfriend, according to the boyfriend’s mother, according to you, she’s already dating someone “other than white,” so why the alleged advice?

    Thank you for that valuable first-hand testimony, but frankly I don’t believe it.

    Sorry.

    SJ: “I would hope that you would never tell someone you love that they aren’t welcome in your home because of who they love, as Oaks councils.”

    I’m sorry, that is not what President Oaks counsels. Do you really not know that?

  • Rodney Hartshorn

    Hey, didn’t President Nelson come out as Anti-Mormon this year too? This title seems ironic if not meaningless if the Church isn’t Mormon anymore.

  • CamHoltoe

    Sorry bippy.. being an ex motard myself deeply in the cult.. I am WELL versed on what it does to an individual.. You, on the other hand, are still deep in the idiot kool-aid..

  • Kiwi57

    “Ex mortard?” Were you always this ignorant, or are angling to be the poster boy for Novak’s Law?

  • CamHoltoe

    So says the current motard… cesletter.org

  • Kiwi57

    So not only do you have an obscene screen name, you’re also a shill for a discredited bit of anti-Mormon hate propaganda.

    Fun fact: the so-called “CES Letter” does not represent Mister Runnells’ “honest questions” about the Church of Jesus Christ. It’s actually a crowd-sourced collection of standard anti-Mormon talking points.

    Did you know that already?

    And if you did, would it stop you exploiting it anyway?

  • CamHoltoe

    Discredited? That is what people who refuse to read it say.. TRUE fact.. The questions in the letter have yet to be answered with fact by the LDS cult.. your little cult hasn’t been able to provide one shred of archaeological(i.e., not one artifact or site) or DNA evidence (It’s been proven again and again through DNA testing that Native Americans are not “jews” as your book says) that can lend truth to Joseph Smith’s badly written piece of fiction.. but he managed to make others bow to his will and he got plenty of girls as young as 14 for his trouble.. and that is also a fun fact.. old Joe Smith did have 14 year old brides.. a lot like Warren Jeffs.. and you being upset at my screen name? that is just more of the fun.. you people are so ridiculously sensitive

  • Kiwi57

    “Discredited? That is what people who refuse to read it say..”

    No, it’s what people who know the score say.

    “TRUE fact.. The questions in the letter have yet to be answered with fact by the LDS cult..”

    You should try reading for a change. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Criticism_of_Mormonism/Online_documents/Letter_to_a_CES_Director

    “and you being upset at my screen name? that is just more of the fun.. you people are so ridiculously sensitive”

    Upset? No, the fact that you are a crass, low-minded vulgarian doesn’t upset me in the slightest. It merely makes it hard for me to respect anything you have to say. Much like the fact that you are a hate-spouting bigot who relies upon empty pejoratives.

    Like”cult.”

  • CamHoltoe

    Yup.. keep on the offensive when you have no factual answers for legitimate questions.. oh boo hoo… truth about the LDS cult is considered bigotry.. well.. only by cult members.. Keep on doubting those doubts.. they need your 10%

  • CamHoltoe

    Still waiting for you to correct me about the COMPLETE lack of DNA and Archaeological evidence for your cult’s book.. Or to say that Ol’ Joe Smith didn’t marry girls as young as 14.. or how about the racist history of your cult.. You know, the one where they said that black people could only enter the Celestial as servants.. You can’t rebut the homophobia, there are too many quotes from Dallin Oaks to prove that.. I suppose this is where you will shut your trap because there is nothing to say, but in your mind, you will say you are taking the “high road” because of my “vulgar” screen name.. Typical of weak-minded cult sheep.. you need to cling to it..

  • Kiwi57

    Ah, the old “throw as much mud as possible and see what sticks” routine. All the most unprincipled smear merchants use it, so you’re a natural at it.

    Come to think of it, that’s all the discredited and dishonest “CES Letter” does.

    All of those scatter-gun points have been answered. Try reading, for a change.

  • Kiwi57

    Okay, here’s a legitimate question: are your parents married?

  • CamHoltoe

    and yet.. you can’t even seem to find those “answers” to copy and paste… it’s become sad … but you are weak minded enough to buy into a cult created by a pedophile con man.. your fear is why you can’t even find a rebuttal.. oh how weak your faith in your cult is.. can you even explain something simple like your cult’s blatant racism until 1978.. black members unable to receive the priesthood or doing temple work? #SUCHaCult

  • CamHoltoe

    I’m adopted. so I don’t know the answer to that.. however, I DO know that your mom swallows…

  • John Pack Lambert

    Sexual relations with 14 year olds is not pedophilia since that implies pre-pubes CD ant and 14 year olds are post pubescent. You also falsely equate marriage and sex when clear evidence shows that Joseph Smith did not.

    DNA evidence does not contradict the Book of Mormon. In fact DNA evidence that supported a simplistic reading of the Book of Mormon which is what you insist we produce would contradict an anthropologically sensitive reading of the Book that makes any sense out of men in the Book like Sharen.

  • CamHoltoe

    sorry.. the cult’s book.clearly states that the Nephites and Lamanites hail from Israel.. and that has been debunked via DNA testing.. even BYU “scientists” can’t dispute that.. I do salute you for defending a thirty something man who preyed on girls as young as 14 with a semantic argument.. you basically said “if there’s grass on the field; play ball”

    Fanny Alger, child bride who admitted to sexual relations.. Helen Mar Kimball.. and lest we forget his marrying women who were ALREADY MARRIED TO OTHER MEN.. this was such a stand up guy..

    some of you people are worse than scientologists or branch davidians

  • Kiwi57

    Guttersnipe: “and yet.. you can’t even seem to find those ‘answers’ to copy and paste…”

    Another of your incessant lies. Reality doesn’t get summed up in sound bites. As you know, you and your malicious ilk throw out these snippets knowing that they take a lot more time and bandwidth to answer than to assert.

    Anyone who genuinely wants to find answers, unlike you and your claque, can start with the links I’ve posted. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Criticism_of_Mormonism/Online_documents/Letter_to_a_CES_Director

    Guttersnipe: “but you are weak minded enough to buy into a cult created by a pedophile con man..”

    Oh, have you started a cult for the weak minded? Since you are the only sexual pervert con man I know. Because I assure you I won’t be signing up to it.

  • CamHoltoe

    You really are just so hurt by words that you need to constantly attack. there, there, puddin’.. It’s all right… you can live by your cult .. you just end up in the dirt, like the rest of us.. but nothing on apologist websites like fairmormon meets the requirements of peer review or bring up scientific data.. even the Smithsonian institution has declared that to date, there is zero archaeological evidence of any kind to prove any of the event in Joe Smith’s plagiarized book to have ever happened.. unlike you, if such proof ever was brought to light, I’d reevaluate and retract my statements.. it is weakness of mind like yours that settles for absolute certainty without proof, mental gymnastics and insults.. and it is OK.. you like homophobia, racism and misogyny, and have found a place where they are part of doctrine.. good for you.. you should just not be so indignant when that and the false beginnings of the mormon cult are brought up.. another fun fact.. Joseph Smith related seven VERY different versions of the first vision before the cult decided on the one you are gullible enough to believe and talk about during fast Sunday… you can keep insulting…you can keep dismissing..but you are still failing to bring anything to the table other than insults and denials.. a little research would help you seem to be more than a butthurt cult member

  • Jack McMillan

    That’s how the Left operates – they believe in “tolerance”, so long as you agree with them. But if you hold a dissenting view, they say you’re a bigot, a racist, and
    everything else. Their name-calling exposes the shallowness of their arguments because hollering “Nazi!” is easier than actually defending their position honestly. I’ve never met a liberal who was intellectually honest.

  • Jam

    Jesus never once addressed the issue. Nada. Zero. Zip. But he continually condemned divorce and listed it as hell bound. Had he been against homosexuality, we can assume he had all the power and opportunity to say so. But no. That’s proof enough for any thoughtful Christian to grasp.

  • Jam

    “Don’t expect to stay overnight, or stay long, or be seen in public with us” is not love, not family, and not Christian. It’s outright rejection with a self-righteous smile on its face. No child of ANY parent would mistake your position as even a simblance of love. Because it’s not.

  • CamHoltoe

    You’re already part of a cult that worships a sexual pervert con man.. that man is Joseph “I marry 14 year olds and other men’s wives” Smith.. your mind is weak enough..