First of all, Mia, let me warn you up front; Bill Medvecky is a liar and damn proud of it. If you visit his website to post you’ll see a requirement for your email address along with a declaration that email is never published or sold. That’s a bald faced lie. If he doesn’t like what you say on his site he will publish it AND your IP number, which gives out a lot of information as to where you are located. So a little head’s up. Now, for a few of the lies Bill fed you:
“The State claimed that they had 31 girls, all children, all who were pregnant or had already given birth to a child. The youngest girl with a baby was 17. The oldest “Girl” being held was 37 years old. Of the 31 girls, none had a baby or were pregnant before they were 17 while living in Texas.”
More than Teresa Steed had babies at the YFZ ranch while underage as Dr. Barlow’s charges show. Here’s a few of the girls taken in the raid – I don’t know how many of them had babies on the ranch but there were at least three underage births.
Leanne Had Sally at age 16 & Pregnant during removal
Janet Had Spiritual Unity at age 15
Veda Had Serrenna at age 15
Pamela Had Matthew at age 16
Sarah Elizabeth Had Sandra at age 17
Suzanne Had Seth at age 16
Rachel Had Melissa at age 16
Rebecca Had Allan at age 16
Merrilyn Had Robert at age 16
Louanna (Elizabeth Luvern) Had Frederick at age 17
Teresa Had her baby days after the return age 17
So there’s a big fat lie for you. Even if these children weren’t born at the ranch, who cares? – they were young teens and mothers! Most of them were 16 and under and not one of them went to their fathers or Warren and said “Gee, please marry me off to some old guy with several other wives – I think it’s so hot!”
“One girls lawyer, went on the Nancy Grace show and said that her client was pregnant and already had a child who was kidnapped and being kept from the Attorney. The fact was proven that the girl was a virgin.”
Contrary to Bill’s PR report, there is NO evidence that any girl received a SANE examination or even a basic physical. I have heard of no “proof” of any girl’s virginity. Given that at least two of Warren’s underage “brides” gave birth at the age of 15, and based on the dates, were pregnant at age 14, I wouldn’t be terribly willing to believe he left young Merrianne alone. If he did, it was because he wasn’t there, not because he was respecting her need to grow up. And just where is this proof? What is the proof?
“The State held those children for 8 weeks and grilled them constantly about sex. NOT ONE reported anything had happened, and NOT ONE showed any signs of being sexually abused.”
And THAT is absolutely the craziest thing I’ve heard yet. I challenge you to get one smidgen of proof that any child was grilled constantly for 8 weeks, much less the entire 400. It’s a flat out impossibility. No, Bill is indulging in his usual histrionics and counting on you to swallow his vomit without checking your facts. Ask for proof and see what happens.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Just for Chris.
From Brooke's blog:
Sorry for quoting all of Rebeckah’s post, part of which included my earlier post, but there is just so much to comment about. I’ll try not to be as terse as she was in her post.
Um, Chris, "terse" means short and to the point. Perhaps you were thinking of "tetchy" or maybe you just think it's rude to point out the attempted lies of others.
Please see responses below:
Rebeckah says:
January 11, 2010 at 8:30 pm
[Quoting CHansen1118 below]
“The quote leaves many things to be desired.
“It left out that not only men, but also women were on the road to Godhood if they love God with “all their heart, might, and mind”. That women were co-creators with their husbands. That just as a wife should be “obedient” to her husband, so also should the husband be obedient to God. That the man is “pulled through the veil” by another just as the wife is pulled through the veil if found worthy. Thus, both are on the same path, together, if each honors their respective covenants.
“Gods and Goddesses – not just Gods and their wives.”
>Now there’s a facile bit of attempted deception.
Response: “Attempted deception”? As you judge you shall be judged.
Do you EVER pay attention to what you write? You are one of the most judgemental people out there -- and your "judgement" concerning the Christian church in this little dialogue is just the latest evidence of it. Pot, meet kettle -- black much?
>Okay, CHansen, I’ll bite. Who prays to “Heavenly Mother”? Which one would they pray to?
Response: Which God do you pray to, Rebeckah?
None.
The one you have conjured up in your own mind? Like the one that most other people pray to? That which they have likewise imagined up to themselves?
Speaking of judgementalism. Yet, I agree with you, Gods are figments of the imagination, yours included. Your arrogant assumption that you alone know the "right" or "real" God is laughable. However, I'm an openminded individual -- show me some proof that your God ISN'T imaginary and I'll concede this discussion.
How many people pray to Christ? Why would they do such when Christ Himself told the people to not pray to Him, but to the Father? Yet, pray to Him they do. Likewise, some MAY pray to a Heavenly Mother (most likely after praying directly to Heavenly Father first).
I don't know how many pray to Christ. I guarantee it's a lot more than pray to a Heavenly Mother. Which Heavenly Mother do you pray to?
Why would a Goddess need people to pray to her if they were not under her jurisdiction?
Which people are under which Goddesses' jurisdiction? That's my point. Elohim's harem DOESN'T HAVE any areas of jurisdiction. That's because they aren't Goddesses, they're wombs.
If they weren’t her children? Does a God or Goddess NEED people to pray to them in order for them to be a God???
Do you get whiplash switching subjects in the middle of a paragraph like that? So, since Gods and Goddesses don't NEED people to pray to them, then why pray to your Heavenly Father? And if you pray to Heavenly Father then why not Heavenly Mother? Because your religion isn't about women becoming Goddesses, it's about men becoming Gods and being just as callous, mysogynistic and cruel as your Elohim is. Personally, I wish there were a few Goddesses, they should be slapping Elohim into Hades for coming up with polygamy as a religious tenet. Mothers -- real, loving Mothers -- protect their children from evil bullies. Alas, your Heavenly Mothers are as much a figment of your imagination as your Heavenly Father.
>Is it, or is it not an excommunicable offense to attempt to discuss, write hymns to, or define any of Elohim’s “wives”?
Response: I have never heard of it being an “excommunicable offense” among Mormon Fundamentalists.
That's not an answer unless you are in a position to know what Mormon Fundamentalists do. Even then, you can only answer for the few sects of which you do know. Try a little honesty now. Either "I don't know." or "This particular group doesn't." would do.
Perhaps it is an offense among the FLDS since they appear to be the most rigid of Mormon Fundamentalist groups. I know it an offense to the current LDS leadership and have heard of excommunications over this specific offense.
Which rather proves my point, doesn't it. Since the Fundamentalist are also the fruit of Joseph's big con then it is very reasonable to assume that they are just as mysogynistic as the mainstream COJOLDS, if not moreso.
>Just what are these Godesses the Goddesses of? What authority do they have? What power? What function — besides giving birth eternally?
Response: Tell us, Rebeckah, regarding your last question above, just what it would feel like to be pregnant with a spiritual child? Would the stomach swell? Would it hurt? Would experiencing spiritual childbirth be excruciatingly painful? Just why did you bring it up above, Rebeckah? A red herring to ridicule believers?
I brought it up because it is the ONLY purpose given for women in your male fantasy of heaven. It is only ridiculing in your mind. It is demeaning and disparaging of women to reduce them as nothing but wombs, Chris. As for the logistics of your heavenly fantasy, I'm sure given your general disgust of women, you'd like it to be painful, so we'll just let your imaginary heaven run the way you imagine it to run.
And just for fun I'll share that I loved being pregnant and giving birth was a piece of cake for me. I would have enjoyed having more children but I'm glad I was selfless enough to stop at two. Then again, I'm not earning eternal brownie points, so maybe it was easier for me.
Just what would a Goddess have authority over, you ask? Perhaps Her own children?
No, I don't think so. If she did there'd be a LOT less pain in the world -- and polygamy wouldn't exist.
All things over which she presides in tandem, in partnership, with Her husband who is a God as well?
Obviously not in the Mormon heaven since there's not a smidge information on even one of them. Apparently only Elohim rules and the little women sit in their harem gestating.
Tell us – over what does a wife in a home preside? Along with her husband?
I realize this is a difficult concept for you, but women don't need a husband to function, achieve and excel. Neither would a Goddess.
The property? Possessions? Children? Teaching? Nurturing? Could it be the same there in Heaven?
Another newsflash, it isn't like that on Earth for the most part, why would it be like that in a heaven? Try for just a LITTLE logic, eh? And try opening your eyes to the rest of the world -- most of which is muddling along quite happily and productively without your mysogynistic patriarchal religion.
According to God, in the Bible, just who presides over the entire family?
What makes you think I feel that the Bible is any more trustworthy than the Book of Mormon? And actually, the Bible has plenty of examples of women who managed their own families -- Ruth and the widow who fed Elijah spring to mind.
The mother? Both the mother and the father with equal authority? The father of the family, perhaps? In many ways like a partner, but with the husband/father having just a little bit more authority than the wife/wives when views differ. Seeking unity in ALL decisions.
If anyone was seeking "unity" there wouldn't be polygamy. No, women make all the sacrifices in your male fantasy religion. What I don't understand is why women put up with it. It is sad that they are so badly broken that they rarely manage to take a look at the entire lose/lose proposition of the Mormon religion. Then again, maybe they do and just don't see any way out -- that would certainly explain the ridiculously high rates of drug use -- and abuse -- in Utah.
>If a woman was on the road to her own godhood, she’d be pulled through the veil just like the man and regardless of the man’s own salvation.
Response: She will be, regardless of her husband’s own salvation.
Really? Where is that teaching, doctrine or scripture? From what I've seen, if she doesn't have a priesthood man to pull her through the veil she's doomed to the "lower" heavens and separation from her family. Gives the man a rather unfair balance of power, wouldn't you say? "Please me or I won't pull you through the veil, woman!" Ugh!
It is clear to those of us Mormons and Mormon Fundamentalists on Brooke’s blog that you are ignorant of much of our theology and history, Rebeckah.
Feel free to use actual scripture, teaching and doctrines to enlighten me. Otherwise I am forced to assume that I'm absolutely right and you're just trying to mitigate the harsh truth with pleasant lies. Kind of like Joseph Smith did when he lied over and over again about practicing polygamy.
Yet, as an armchair Anti-Mormon Fundamentalist, you continue your tirades and spew forth falsehoods which the like ignorant accept as truth.
I repeat, share the truth then, not slander. If I'm wrong show me where and how -- but you're going to have to prove it. Feel free, I'll even post your response as a blog entry if you actually have evidence to back your claim up. Oh, and I'm not an "anti-Mormon" -- I'm anti lies. Mormonism just happens to be crawling with them, but it's hardly the only religion that is.
>If your faith truly believed in Goddesses, there’d be some information on them, not the resounding silence.
Response: There’s lots of information about them available to those that seek. To those who read more than Time articles and National Enquirer/Staresque publications. From those who actually are believers and not Anti’s and Former’s.
Put up or shut up. I'm willing to read it. Heck, just point me in the right direction and I'll look it up for myself.
>Oh, and here’s a newsflash for you,
Response: For little ‘ol me?
>contrary to oft-spoken Mormon belief, a woman’s sensibilities are not so fragile that someone taking their name in vain is a tragedy. As a mother, I’ve had my name taken in vain by my son’s friends many a time — I told him the same thing I’ll tell you — I can defend my own name; if I think it’s even worth discussing. Any Goddess worth her salt would certainly be able to stand proudly at her God’s side and defend her subjects.
Response: Agreed. Perhaps painting with a broad brush above, stereotyping all Mormons or Mormon Fundamentalists because a few believe that a Goddess’s name shouldn’t ever be allowed to be taken in vain?
That's the explanation I was given for why none of you know your Heavenly Mothers. If you've got another one I'm willing to hear it.
Oh, by the way, just what is God’s name? Fred? George? Henry? Or, are you just speaking of titles?
Elohim is a title like Jehovah? News to me.
>The fact that the Mormon Goddesses are MIA says all that needs to be said about Joseph Smith and Brigham Young’s view of women.
Response: You mean like Christianity’s God today? MIA? It would appear that no one has heard from Him in over 2,000 years.
You're right. Pretty strong evidence that he doesn't exist. Oh, and pretty strong evidence YOUR God is just as non-existant.
Sorry for quoting all of Rebeckah’s post, part of which included my earlier post, but there is just so much to comment about. I’ll try not to be as terse as she was in her post.
Um, Chris, "terse" means short and to the point. Perhaps you were thinking of "tetchy" or maybe you just think it's rude to point out the attempted lies of others.
Please see responses below:
Rebeckah says:
January 11, 2010 at 8:30 pm
[Quoting CHansen1118 below]
“The quote leaves many things to be desired.
“It left out that not only men, but also women were on the road to Godhood if they love God with “all their heart, might, and mind”. That women were co-creators with their husbands. That just as a wife should be “obedient” to her husband, so also should the husband be obedient to God. That the man is “pulled through the veil” by another just as the wife is pulled through the veil if found worthy. Thus, both are on the same path, together, if each honors their respective covenants.
“Gods and Goddesses – not just Gods and their wives.”
>Now there’s a facile bit of attempted deception.
Response: “Attempted deception”? As you judge you shall be judged.
Do you EVER pay attention to what you write? You are one of the most judgemental people out there -- and your "judgement" concerning the Christian church in this little dialogue is just the latest evidence of it. Pot, meet kettle -- black much?
>Okay, CHansen, I’ll bite. Who prays to “Heavenly Mother”? Which one would they pray to?
Response: Which God do you pray to, Rebeckah?
None.
The one you have conjured up in your own mind? Like the one that most other people pray to? That which they have likewise imagined up to themselves?
Speaking of judgementalism. Yet, I agree with you, Gods are figments of the imagination, yours included. Your arrogant assumption that you alone know the "right" or "real" God is laughable. However, I'm an openminded individual -- show me some proof that your God ISN'T imaginary and I'll concede this discussion.
How many people pray to Christ? Why would they do such when Christ Himself told the people to not pray to Him, but to the Father? Yet, pray to Him they do. Likewise, some MAY pray to a Heavenly Mother (most likely after praying directly to Heavenly Father first).
I don't know how many pray to Christ. I guarantee it's a lot more than pray to a Heavenly Mother. Which Heavenly Mother do you pray to?
Why would a Goddess need people to pray to her if they were not under her jurisdiction?
Which people are under which Goddesses' jurisdiction? That's my point. Elohim's harem DOESN'T HAVE any areas of jurisdiction. That's because they aren't Goddesses, they're wombs.
If they weren’t her children? Does a God or Goddess NEED people to pray to them in order for them to be a God???
Do you get whiplash switching subjects in the middle of a paragraph like that? So, since Gods and Goddesses don't NEED people to pray to them, then why pray to your Heavenly Father? And if you pray to Heavenly Father then why not Heavenly Mother? Because your religion isn't about women becoming Goddesses, it's about men becoming Gods and being just as callous, mysogynistic and cruel as your Elohim is. Personally, I wish there were a few Goddesses, they should be slapping Elohim into Hades for coming up with polygamy as a religious tenet. Mothers -- real, loving Mothers -- protect their children from evil bullies. Alas, your Heavenly Mothers are as much a figment of your imagination as your Heavenly Father.
>Is it, or is it not an excommunicable offense to attempt to discuss, write hymns to, or define any of Elohim’s “wives”?
Response: I have never heard of it being an “excommunicable offense” among Mormon Fundamentalists.
That's not an answer unless you are in a position to know what Mormon Fundamentalists do. Even then, you can only answer for the few sects of which you do know. Try a little honesty now. Either "I don't know." or "This particular group doesn't." would do.
Perhaps it is an offense among the FLDS since they appear to be the most rigid of Mormon Fundamentalist groups. I know it an offense to the current LDS leadership and have heard of excommunications over this specific offense.
Which rather proves my point, doesn't it. Since the Fundamentalist are also the fruit of Joseph's big con then it is very reasonable to assume that they are just as mysogynistic as the mainstream COJOLDS, if not moreso.
>Just what are these Godesses the Goddesses of? What authority do they have? What power? What function — besides giving birth eternally?
Response: Tell us, Rebeckah, regarding your last question above, just what it would feel like to be pregnant with a spiritual child? Would the stomach swell? Would it hurt? Would experiencing spiritual childbirth be excruciatingly painful? Just why did you bring it up above, Rebeckah? A red herring to ridicule believers?
I brought it up because it is the ONLY purpose given for women in your male fantasy of heaven. It is only ridiculing in your mind. It is demeaning and disparaging of women to reduce them as nothing but wombs, Chris. As for the logistics of your heavenly fantasy, I'm sure given your general disgust of women, you'd like it to be painful, so we'll just let your imaginary heaven run the way you imagine it to run.
And just for fun I'll share that I loved being pregnant and giving birth was a piece of cake for me. I would have enjoyed having more children but I'm glad I was selfless enough to stop at two. Then again, I'm not earning eternal brownie points, so maybe it was easier for me.
Just what would a Goddess have authority over, you ask? Perhaps Her own children?
No, I don't think so. If she did there'd be a LOT less pain in the world -- and polygamy wouldn't exist.
All things over which she presides in tandem, in partnership, with Her husband who is a God as well?
Obviously not in the Mormon heaven since there's not a smidge information on even one of them. Apparently only Elohim rules and the little women sit in their harem gestating.
Tell us – over what does a wife in a home preside? Along with her husband?
I realize this is a difficult concept for you, but women don't need a husband to function, achieve and excel. Neither would a Goddess.
The property? Possessions? Children? Teaching? Nurturing? Could it be the same there in Heaven?
Another newsflash, it isn't like that on Earth for the most part, why would it be like that in a heaven? Try for just a LITTLE logic, eh? And try opening your eyes to the rest of the world -- most of which is muddling along quite happily and productively without your mysogynistic patriarchal religion.
According to God, in the Bible, just who presides over the entire family?
What makes you think I feel that the Bible is any more trustworthy than the Book of Mormon? And actually, the Bible has plenty of examples of women who managed their own families -- Ruth and the widow who fed Elijah spring to mind.
The mother? Both the mother and the father with equal authority? The father of the family, perhaps? In many ways like a partner, but with the husband/father having just a little bit more authority than the wife/wives when views differ. Seeking unity in ALL decisions.
If anyone was seeking "unity" there wouldn't be polygamy. No, women make all the sacrifices in your male fantasy religion. What I don't understand is why women put up with it. It is sad that they are so badly broken that they rarely manage to take a look at the entire lose/lose proposition of the Mormon religion. Then again, maybe they do and just don't see any way out -- that would certainly explain the ridiculously high rates of drug use -- and abuse -- in Utah.
>If a woman was on the road to her own godhood, she’d be pulled through the veil just like the man and regardless of the man’s own salvation.
Response: She will be, regardless of her husband’s own salvation.
Really? Where is that teaching, doctrine or scripture? From what I've seen, if she doesn't have a priesthood man to pull her through the veil she's doomed to the "lower" heavens and separation from her family. Gives the man a rather unfair balance of power, wouldn't you say? "Please me or I won't pull you through the veil, woman!" Ugh!
It is clear to those of us Mormons and Mormon Fundamentalists on Brooke’s blog that you are ignorant of much of our theology and history, Rebeckah.
Feel free to use actual scripture, teaching and doctrines to enlighten me. Otherwise I am forced to assume that I'm absolutely right and you're just trying to mitigate the harsh truth with pleasant lies. Kind of like Joseph Smith did when he lied over and over again about practicing polygamy.
Yet, as an armchair Anti-Mormon Fundamentalist, you continue your tirades and spew forth falsehoods which the like ignorant accept as truth.
I repeat, share the truth then, not slander. If I'm wrong show me where and how -- but you're going to have to prove it. Feel free, I'll even post your response as a blog entry if you actually have evidence to back your claim up. Oh, and I'm not an "anti-Mormon" -- I'm anti lies. Mormonism just happens to be crawling with them, but it's hardly the only religion that is.
>If your faith truly believed in Goddesses, there’d be some information on them, not the resounding silence.
Response: There’s lots of information about them available to those that seek. To those who read more than Time articles and National Enquirer/Staresque publications. From those who actually are believers and not Anti’s and Former’s.
Put up or shut up. I'm willing to read it. Heck, just point me in the right direction and I'll look it up for myself.
>Oh, and here’s a newsflash for you,
Response: For little ‘ol me?
>contrary to oft-spoken Mormon belief, a woman’s sensibilities are not so fragile that someone taking their name in vain is a tragedy. As a mother, I’ve had my name taken in vain by my son’s friends many a time — I told him the same thing I’ll tell you — I can defend my own name; if I think it’s even worth discussing. Any Goddess worth her salt would certainly be able to stand proudly at her God’s side and defend her subjects.
Response: Agreed. Perhaps painting with a broad brush above, stereotyping all Mormons or Mormon Fundamentalists because a few believe that a Goddess’s name shouldn’t ever be allowed to be taken in vain?
That's the explanation I was given for why none of you know your Heavenly Mothers. If you've got another one I'm willing to hear it.
Oh, by the way, just what is God’s name? Fred? George? Henry? Or, are you just speaking of titles?
Elohim is a title like Jehovah? News to me.
>The fact that the Mormon Goddesses are MIA says all that needs to be said about Joseph Smith and Brigham Young’s view of women.
Response: You mean like Christianity’s God today? MIA? It would appear that no one has heard from Him in over 2,000 years.
You're right. Pretty strong evidence that he doesn't exist. Oh, and pretty strong evidence YOUR God is just as non-existant.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
My First Banning
Well, I got banned from Bill Medvecky's cesspool. I'm not whining about it, after all it is a cesspool. Seems a bit hypocritical to me, as they're going bananas attacking me specifically and Bill claims to be all for personal freedoms and liberties. I'd think the right to defend yourself verbally would be sacrosanct, but then reason and Bill have never been real friends or anything.
One post of mine he deleted (Yeah, I kept copies of all of 'em in the order they were posted) was puzzling, though. I thought this was quite tame and even kind of me:
By the way, Dazzle, thank you for being willing to admit to the possibility you might have misjudged me — I see such self honesty very rarely here. I admire people who can admit to mistakes — or even the possibility of a mistake.
Rebeckah on January 19th, 2010 at 2:40 am
Oh well, this is the man who calls everyone he dislikes the nastiest names he can come up with (gimp, dyke, half breed, just to list a few) and LOVES to bully and threaten -- sorry Bill, not intimidated by you, your FLDS bully friends (and I'll bet you good money that the decent members of the FLDS avoid him like the plague) OR your supposed "outing" of my information. Funny how a man who whimpers continually about the abuse of power in government thinks NOTHING of gathering private information from others (like email addresses for instance) and then publishes it in spite of a written assurance that will never happen.
Folks, a news flash for you -- he'll do it to ANYONE who pisses him off. He's a liar and this wasn't his first lie by a long shot. More basic information; people who lie can't be trusted. Bill's lied about the CPS stories he's told (which is weird because there are enough TRUE horror stories about CPS that there's no NEED to lie, but I rather suspect that Bill likes to see how much you'll swallow and believe), he regularly lies about the people involved with this case, his lies have been PROVEN many times, and yet his sycophantic followers eat it up without pause.
I'll continue to address the attacks by his nazi followers here -- since Bill doesn't believe in telling whole story or allowing the whole story to be told.
One post of mine he deleted (Yeah, I kept copies of all of 'em in the order they were posted) was puzzling, though. I thought this was quite tame and even kind of me:
By the way, Dazzle, thank you for being willing to admit to the possibility you might have misjudged me — I see such self honesty very rarely here. I admire people who can admit to mistakes — or even the possibility of a mistake.
Rebeckah on January 19th, 2010 at 2:40 am
Oh well, this is the man who calls everyone he dislikes the nastiest names he can come up with (gimp, dyke, half breed, just to list a few) and LOVES to bully and threaten -- sorry Bill, not intimidated by you, your FLDS bully friends (and I'll bet you good money that the decent members of the FLDS avoid him like the plague) OR your supposed "outing" of my information. Funny how a man who whimpers continually about the abuse of power in government thinks NOTHING of gathering private information from others (like email addresses for instance) and then publishes it in spite of a written assurance that will never happen.
Folks, a news flash for you -- he'll do it to ANYONE who pisses him off. He's a liar and this wasn't his first lie by a long shot. More basic information; people who lie can't be trusted. Bill's lied about the CPS stories he's told (which is weird because there are enough TRUE horror stories about CPS that there's no NEED to lie, but I rather suspect that Bill likes to see how much you'll swallow and believe), he regularly lies about the people involved with this case, his lies have been PROVEN many times, and yet his sycophantic followers eat it up without pause.
I'll continue to address the attacks by his nazi followers here -- since Bill doesn't believe in telling whole story or allowing the whole story to be told.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Wow, Liars just can't help lying, can they?
Yep, I'm gonna rant about everyone's least favorite sleazeball, Medvecky.
I check out his site, from time to time, mostly to remind myself what true delusion looks like. Well one of his groupies, a flake who now goes by the handle "Cupcake" posted this sanctimonious tripe:
"Jam inn,
Do you have a problem with Catholicism as well? Are you concerned that Catholics might put the Pope before the American president?
I am not an atheist. I believe in God and in Jesus. The God I worship tells me to live and let live."
And I, being the sweet, non-confrontational person I am, felt impelled to point out that she was the person who also posted on that site that the Fort Hood Shooter should have gone to the courtroom where Raymond was being sentenced for sexually assaulting his 16 year old bride. I pointed out that it appeared the God she worshipped actually tells her to "live and let die". Naturally Bile deleted my comment -- which is certainly his privilege on his own board.
THEN, he posted my email address (required for posting on his blog but his blog guarantees it will never be published) AND posted my IP address:
“Rebecca”
GFYS (As the VP would say.
You are simply not welcome here, but thank you for your address so we can cross reference it to LE and the dykes.
Rebeckah
rianya@hotmail.com | 67.185.232.46
Bill on January 18th, 2010 at 10:21 am
Yes, folks, proof in Bill's own words on his own blog that he's a filthy, dirty, abusive lying sack of excrement. He complains about abuse of power only because he's angry he isn't in a position to do so himself. My advice, don't trust anything that comes from his mouth -- liars lie just like scorpions sting. It's their nature and you just can't trust a word they say -- or blog.
I check out his site, from time to time, mostly to remind myself what true delusion looks like. Well one of his groupies, a flake who now goes by the handle "Cupcake" posted this sanctimonious tripe:
"Jam inn,
Do you have a problem with Catholicism as well? Are you concerned that Catholics might put the Pope before the American president?
I am not an atheist. I believe in God and in Jesus. The God I worship tells me to live and let live."
And I, being the sweet, non-confrontational person I am, felt impelled to point out that she was the person who also posted on that site that the Fort Hood Shooter should have gone to the courtroom where Raymond was being sentenced for sexually assaulting his 16 year old bride. I pointed out that it appeared the God she worshipped actually tells her to "live and let die". Naturally Bile deleted my comment -- which is certainly his privilege on his own board.
THEN, he posted my email address (required for posting on his blog but his blog guarantees it will never be published) AND posted my IP address:
“Rebecca”
GFYS (As the VP would say.
You are simply not welcome here, but thank you for your address so we can cross reference it to LE and the dykes.
Rebeckah
rianya@hotmail.com | 67.185.232.46
Bill on January 18th, 2010 at 10:21 am
Yes, folks, proof in Bill's own words on his own blog that he's a filthy, dirty, abusive lying sack of excrement. He complains about abuse of power only because he's angry he isn't in a position to do so himself. My advice, don't trust anything that comes from his mouth -- liars lie just like scorpions sting. It's their nature and you just can't trust a word they say -- or blog.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
A Little Logic Applied to God and Goddess Theology
A poster on The Plural Life posted this little bit of Mormon theology for the edification of others:
"The quote leaves many things to be desired.
It left out that not only men, but also women were on the road to Godhood if they love God with “all their heart, might, and mind”."
Of course he leaves out the part where, for women, that means bowing down before any Mormon male who has managed to convince others he's a "priesthood holder" regardless of the pain he causes to those around him.
"That women were co-creators with their husbands."
Really? It's odd that the Book of Mormon has no information at all about what Elohim's wives (and supposed Goddesses) have created. Just what did these Goddesses create? Who created what?
"That just as a wife should be “obedient” to her husband, so also should the husband be obedient to God."
Be "obedient" ladies. Just like the men who slaughtered innocent men, women and children in the Mountain Meadows Massacre, you too will be "blessed" by your unthinking "obedience" to men. Pay no attention to the fact that one of the leaders was sacrificed by his obedience so that Brigham Young (and isn't he a FINE example of someone to be obedient to?) could sweep the matter under the rug and pretend he had nothing to do with the looting and bloodshed.
"That the man is “pulled through the veil” by another just as the wife is pulled through the veil if found worthy. Thus, both are on the same path, together, if each honors their respective covenants."
Gods and Goddesses – not just Gods and their wives."
Who prays to "Heavenly Mother"? Which one would they pray to? Is it, or is it not an excommunicable offense to attempt to discuss, write hymns to, or define any of Elohim's "wives"? Just what are these Godesses the Goddesses of? What authority do they have? What power? What function -- besides giving birth eternally?
These sorts of blatant, false bits of propaganda irk me to no end. I've had other Mormons (men, each and every one) try to make the same claim. Sorry guys, but it doesn't fly. Granted, it probably makes YOU feel better about your patriarchal religion which relegates women to second (no make that third-class since now even black men can have the "priesthood") status, but it's a lie. And it's not even a GOOD lie. Let's look at it with just a tiny bit of logic.
If a woman was on the road to her own godhood, she'd be pulled through the veil by either her God or her Goddess directly just like the man is and regardless of any man's own salvation. If your faith truly believed in Goddesses, there'd be some information on them, not the resounding silence. Oh, and here's a newsflash for you, contrary to oft-spoken Mormon belief, a woman's sensibilities are not so fragile that someone taking their name in vain is a tragedy. As a mother, I've had my name taken in vain by my son's friends many a time -- I told him the same thing I'll tell you -- I can defend my own name; if I think it's even worth discussing. Any Goddess worth her salt would certainly be able to stand proudly at her God's side and defend her subjects. The fact that the Mormon Goddesses are MIA says all that needs to be said about Joseph Smith and Brigham Young's view of women. To be even more clear, Elohim doesn't have co-creator Goddesses with him -- he simply has a huge harem.
Why women submit to the misery and pain of the Mormon belief system has always baffled me. Of course, they aren't the only ones to be betrayed by a patriarchal religious belief. Ladies, of ALL faiths, take your power back. There is NO reason to sacrifice your own just wants and needs because some man tells you that a male god says so. Use your brains, use some critical thinking, allow yourself to LIVE!
"The quote leaves many things to be desired.
It left out that not only men, but also women were on the road to Godhood if they love God with “all their heart, might, and mind”."
Of course he leaves out the part where, for women, that means bowing down before any Mormon male who has managed to convince others he's a "priesthood holder" regardless of the pain he causes to those around him.
"That women were co-creators with their husbands."
Really? It's odd that the Book of Mormon has no information at all about what Elohim's wives (and supposed Goddesses) have created. Just what did these Goddesses create? Who created what?
"That just as a wife should be “obedient” to her husband, so also should the husband be obedient to God."
Be "obedient" ladies. Just like the men who slaughtered innocent men, women and children in the Mountain Meadows Massacre, you too will be "blessed" by your unthinking "obedience" to men. Pay no attention to the fact that one of the leaders was sacrificed by his obedience so that Brigham Young (and isn't he a FINE example of someone to be obedient to?) could sweep the matter under the rug and pretend he had nothing to do with the looting and bloodshed.
"That the man is “pulled through the veil” by another just as the wife is pulled through the veil if found worthy. Thus, both are on the same path, together, if each honors their respective covenants."
Gods and Goddesses – not just Gods and their wives."
Who prays to "Heavenly Mother"? Which one would they pray to? Is it, or is it not an excommunicable offense to attempt to discuss, write hymns to, or define any of Elohim's "wives"? Just what are these Godesses the Goddesses of? What authority do they have? What power? What function -- besides giving birth eternally?
These sorts of blatant, false bits of propaganda irk me to no end. I've had other Mormons (men, each and every one) try to make the same claim. Sorry guys, but it doesn't fly. Granted, it probably makes YOU feel better about your patriarchal religion which relegates women to second (no make that third-class since now even black men can have the "priesthood") status, but it's a lie. And it's not even a GOOD lie. Let's look at it with just a tiny bit of logic.
If a woman was on the road to her own godhood, she'd be pulled through the veil by either her God or her Goddess directly just like the man is and regardless of any man's own salvation. If your faith truly believed in Goddesses, there'd be some information on them, not the resounding silence. Oh, and here's a newsflash for you, contrary to oft-spoken Mormon belief, a woman's sensibilities are not so fragile that someone taking their name in vain is a tragedy. As a mother, I've had my name taken in vain by my son's friends many a time -- I told him the same thing I'll tell you -- I can defend my own name; if I think it's even worth discussing. Any Goddess worth her salt would certainly be able to stand proudly at her God's side and defend her subjects. The fact that the Mormon Goddesses are MIA says all that needs to be said about Joseph Smith and Brigham Young's view of women. To be even more clear, Elohim doesn't have co-creator Goddesses with him -- he simply has a huge harem.
Why women submit to the misery and pain of the Mormon belief system has always baffled me. Of course, they aren't the only ones to be betrayed by a patriarchal religious belief. Ladies, of ALL faiths, take your power back. There is NO reason to sacrifice your own just wants and needs because some man tells you that a male god says so. Use your brains, use some critical thinking, allow yourself to LIVE!
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Responding to some Bile
So, Bill Medvecky, a person I sincerely hope you’ve never inflicted upon yourself, has come up with an interesting rant which, yet again, sheds quite a bit of light on his dark, twisted mind. Now I stopped posting on his site when I discovered that he has a habit of editing posts to say what he wants, and then he responds to ---- HIMSELF! It’s pointless AND twisted! So I felt it appropriate to address his criminal minded insanity here, where my posts are under MY control.
First of all, I think Bill's allegation that every man in San Angelo has a middle school pregnant girlfriend says volumes about his own view of women and girls. I've always taken the assertions of his pedophilia with a grain of salt but this really makes me wonder. After all, people tend to accuse other people of their own sins --- it's human nature.
As for his use of the word "Mormon" for FLDS, I don't think he's winning any brownie points with either group there.
And his magical thinking belief that all the evidence will get thrown out as fruit of the poisoned tree -- dream on Bill. The search warrants weren't invalidated by the probability that the calls were a hoax. I still wonder how many girls were hidden and/or removed during the raid who were pregnant or about to be married off. I suspect more of them than we know about, that's for sure.
Sure Bill, you go on living in your dream world. So far you've batted 0 for 0 anyway.
If you feel like reading this bile filled entry for yourself, you can find it at:
http://www.flds.ws/2010/01/08/despite-barbies-wishes-texas-cant-charge-michael-with-hilderbrands-law/
Just don’t say I didn’t warn you about the sleaze factor. ;)
First of all, I think Bill's allegation that every man in San Angelo has a middle school pregnant girlfriend says volumes about his own view of women and girls. I've always taken the assertions of his pedophilia with a grain of salt but this really makes me wonder. After all, people tend to accuse other people of their own sins --- it's human nature.
As for his use of the word "Mormon" for FLDS, I don't think he's winning any brownie points with either group there.
And his magical thinking belief that all the evidence will get thrown out as fruit of the poisoned tree -- dream on Bill. The search warrants weren't invalidated by the probability that the calls were a hoax. I still wonder how many girls were hidden and/or removed during the raid who were pregnant or about to be married off. I suspect more of them than we know about, that's for sure.
Sure Bill, you go on living in your dream world. So far you've batted 0 for 0 anyway.
If you feel like reading this bile filled entry for yourself, you can find it at:
http://www.flds.ws/2010/01/08/despite-barbies-wishes-texas-cant-charge-michael-with-hilderbrands-law/
Just don’t say I didn’t warn you about the sleaze factor. ;)
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Women and Children have always been the First Slaves in any society.
I found these two links on another blog and think they are VERY thought provoking.
http://www.intuition.org/txt/lerner1.htm
http://www.intuition.org/txt/lerner2.htm
They are transcripts of a two part interview by a social researcher and historian named Dr. Gerda Lerner and discuss her research and two books about the rise of patriarchy in history. (She has a doctorate degree but from what I've read is not a medical or psychological doctor.) I'd love to hear from anyone who has actually read the books. The interviews have lead me to believe I must get copies of the books.
The Creation of Patriarchy (1986)
The Creation of Feminine Consciousness (1993)
http://www.intuition.org/txt/lerner1.htm
http://www.intuition.org/txt/lerner2.htm
They are transcripts of a two part interview by a social researcher and historian named Dr. Gerda Lerner and discuss her research and two books about the rise of patriarchy in history. (She has a doctorate degree but from what I've read is not a medical or psychological doctor.) I'd love to hear from anyone who has actually read the books. The interviews have lead me to believe I must get copies of the books.
The Creation of Patriarchy (1986)
The Creation of Feminine Consciousness (1993)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
