Engaging Without Rancor

There’s nothing wrong with believing you’re right, or having strong convictions. Yet in approaching religious conversations we have more options than dogmatic fundamentalism on the one hand, and freely negotiable theology on the other.

Jesus Christ’s own declarations reflect his clear understanding of who he was. “I am the way, the truth, and the life,” He said. “No man cometh unto the Father but by me.” On the face of it, that’s a pretty bold declaration that leaves little room for dialogue.

Yet Jesus engaged people from all levels of society – the poor and the wealthy, the rulers and the disenfranchised, men and women, children and the aged, the healthy and the sick, Jew and Gentile. Jesus talked to anyone He thought would listen, sometimes adding “Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.” For only one group of people – hypocrites who urged devotion to the letter of the law while seemingly dismissing the fundamentals of love of God and man – did Christ reserve his most condemnatory language.

It is perfectly possible to hold devoutly strong convictions and yet engage others in conversation. Since we can all learn from each other, disagreement does not have to mean being disagreeable, accusatory or demeaning. Neither must a firm opinion inevitably be accompanied by an attitude of self-righteousness. It’s always possible to find common ground and build from there – for instance, the universality of God’s love for his children, or seeing religion as a sanctuary for our most cherished values.

This is not putting style over substance. It is simply recognizing that people who aren’t willing to discuss things with mutual respect, even among those with whom they strongly disagree, will take themselves out of the conversation entirely.

By Michael Otterson | November 15, 2006; 3:45 PM ET Save & Share:
Previous: No Time for Arrogance | Next: We Are Already In The Conversation

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.

wtexdarlj irbfvdaho znpj qadu jcplruabe oqgr tkfzcbjg

Posted by: bwst iapd | February 14, 2008 7:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

wtexdarlj irbfvdaho znpj qadu jcplruabe oqgr tkfzcbjg

Posted by: bwst iapd | February 14, 2008 7:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment

mbtradeltd@excite.co.uk
We are accredited wholesalers,importers & exporters of general
electronics., we have all brands of Mobile Phones,Ipods,xbox we want you to
get back to us with your quote so that we can begin a good business
relationship. Note all our product are Brand New and comes in their
original sealed box, With 1 year international warranty
from the manufacturer, We deliver straight to your doorstep via FedEx
Courier service. get back to
with our mail here .........
Below is our price lists and many more. mbtradeltd@excite.co.uk ................... .....................mbtradeltd@hotmail.com
SIDEKICK
SIDEKICK 2............ $150usd
SIDEKICK 3 ............$200usd
NOKIA
Nokia N95..............$400usd
Nokia n93..............$230usd
Nokia n92..............$210usd
Nokia N75..............$200usd
Nokia N70..............$180usd
Nokia N71..............$125USD
Nokia N90..............$210usd
Nokia N91..............$135usd
Nokia n80..............$200usd
Nokia 8800. sirocco............$300usd
Nokia 6288.............$170usd
Nokia 6682.............$150usd
Nokia 6800.............$130USD
Nokia 6830.............$140usd
Nokia 6600.............$180usd
Nokia 7380.............$160usd
Nokia 7370.............$180usd
Nokia 7270.............$130usd
Nokia 7280.............$140usd
Nokia 7650.............$145usd
Nokia 8800.............$180usd
Nokia 8910i............$150usd
Nokia 8850.............$150usd
Nokia 9210.............$130usd
Nokia 9210i............$160usd
Nokia 9300.............$160usd
Nokia 3250.............$180usd
Nokia 9500.............$170usd
Nokia N Gage QD........$180usd
O2
O2 3G Datacard.........$140usd
Orange Blackberry......$200usd
Orange 3G Datacard.....$200usd
Orange SPV C500........$145usd
Orange SPV M2000.......$134usd
SAMSUMG
Samsung P310...........$320usd
Samsung Z720...........$300usd
Samsung Z620...........$280usd
Samsung Z600...........$250usd
Samsung E570...........$300usd
Samsung D900...........$120usd
Samsung D307...........$130usd
Samsung D840...........$140usd
Samsung D500...........$110usd
Samsung D600...........$140usd
Samsung D720...........$120usd
Samsung MM1940.........$170usd
MOTOROLA
Motorola A600..........$146usd
Motorola A630..........$148usd
Motorola A1010.........$220usd
Motorola MPX300.,......$125usd
Motorola Q.............$250usd
Motorola W375..........$210usd
Motorola W208..........$205usd
Motorola W200..........$200usd
Motorola V300..........$130usd
Motorola KRZR KI.......$215usd
Motorola RAZR V3xx.....$220usd
Motorola RIZR..........$220usd
Motorola V3Razr........$140usd
Motorola V400..........$130usd
Motorola V600..........$135usd
Motorola V661..........$150usd
SONY ERICSSON
Sony Ericsson 1900.....$160usd
Sony Ericsson K750i....$150usd
Sony Ericsson P980i....$160usd
Sony Ericsson P990.....$170usd
SONY ERICSSON P910 ....$200usd
Sony Ericsson K600.....$180usd
Sony Ericcson K500.... $150usd
Sony Ericsson S600i....$155usd
Sony Ericsson W800i....$180usd
sony Ericsson w700i....$160usd
Sony Ericsson: Z1010.. $120usd
Sony Ericsson MZ5......$140usd
Mpx300.................$200usd
Palm Treo 600..........$200usd
Palm Treo 650..........$190usd
VERTUASCENT BLACK /BROWN PHONE....$600USD
VERTUSTAINLESS STEEL DUO PHONE....$700USD
VERTUSTAINLESS STEEL STANDARD.....$800USD
VERTU18KT YELLOW GOLD POLISHED /BRUSHED.....$900USD
VERTU18KT WHITE GOLD POLISHED /BRUSHED......$1000USD
VERTUPLATINUM POLISHED/BRUSHED PHONE........$1200USD
IPODS
Apple 2 GB iPod Nano..........$100
Apple 4 GB iPod Nano..........$120
Apple 20 GB iPod .............$150
Apple 40 GB iPod photo........$200
Apple 60 GB iPod Photo M9830LL/A......$250
Apple 30 GB iPod Photo M9829LL/A......$260
Apple 512 MB iPod Shuffle MP3 Player......$200
Apple 30 GB iPod Vidoe.....$150
Apple 60 GB iPod Vidoe......$120
New apple 60 gb ipod photo = $40
New apple 4 gb ipod nano = $60
New apple 2 gb ipod nano = $62
New apple 60 gb video ipod = $120
New apple 30 gb video ipod = $100
New apple 40 gb ipod photo = $80
I-pods video (60GB)...$120
i-mate Jasjar.........$600
i-mate K-Jam..........$300
i-mate PDA-N..........$450
Camcorders............$300
Digital Cameras.......$200
TELEVISION SET
FOR SALE Sharp LC37GA6E 37" LCD JUST ........$290USD
FOR SALE Sharp Aquos 32" HD TV @JUST..........$285USD
FOR SALE Sharp Aquos 26" HD LCD TV@JUST.......$260USD
LAPTOPS
SONY VAIO B100B08 60GB HD-- 512MB RAM-- XP = $450
SONY VAIO B100B08 60GB HD-- 512MB RAM-- XP = $600
SONY VAIO FS295VP 80GB HD-- 512MB RAM-- XP = $550
SONY VAIO FS215Z 100GB HD-- 512MB RAM-- XP = $650
SONY VAIO LAPTOP-- VGN-S1XP = $800
SONY VAIO LAPTOP-- VGN PCGK21 5Z = $500
SONY VAIO PCVW2 DESKTOP = $450
SONY VAIO LAPTOP-- VGN PCGK21 5S = $400
SONY VAIO DESKTOP-- V1 = $300
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP- A40-231 = $300
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP-- A40-892 = $350
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP-- M30-106 = $400
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP-- A40-892 = $350
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP-- P20-102 = $500
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP-- P10-803 = $500
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP-- M30-832 = $400
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZX5030 = $400
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZD7145EA = $500
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZD7255EA = $500
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZX5151EA PHOTOSMART = $400
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZT3215EA = $550
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZX5275EA = $400
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZT3350EA = $400
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZV5230EA = $300
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZV5213EA = $300
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZV5169E = $300
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP = $350
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP = $300
DESKTOP/NOTEBOOK
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 1.8GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER = $500
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 2.0GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER = $700
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 2.5GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER = $100
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP = $350
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP = $300
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI-- GPRS-- BLUETOOTH-- 1GHZ (SILVER) = $500
All electronics and mobile phones comes in its original sealed box direct
from the factory.
All electronics and mobile phones price are negotiable if buying in bulk
quantity.
Hope to hear from you as soon as possible with your private phone number
for easy communication
Delivery Time:
We deliver the products been purchased directly to your doorstep within
48hrs via fedex intl delivery services
Contact Details:
Address:103 Clarendon Road,
City:LEEDS,
Zipcode:LS2 9DF,
Sate:West Yorkshire,
Country:United Kingdom
+447024092781

mbtradeltd@excite.co.uk

mbtradeltd@hotmail.com

Posted by: kane | July 4, 2007 6:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Google is the best search engine Google

Posted by: Allan Stoltz | May 18, 2007 4:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment

ELECTRONIC SHOPPER LIMITED is a registered company, as a whole seller and international distributor of a variety of consumer electronics. Through hard work and researches, we have expanded our business into a new level. We have set up office and factory. Therefore, we are capable of providing local and international services to customers throughout the world. By stocking up a portion of our products in our Company, we are able to minimize the delivery time to the international wholesalers. Our management team understands the market needs and buyers' increasing expectations. Therefore, we are always aiming at designing and manufacturing new and attractive products with competitive price. To ensure the quality of our products, our inspection team works closely throughout all aspects of the manufacturing process. If you are interested in any of our products, please feel free to contact us or visit our website for more information. We are looking forward to form business relationships with customers from all over the world.

contact through email:electshopltd@hotmail.co.uk

Here is our price list ,

NOKIA PRODUCT
NOKIA 8800 sirocco.....$180usd
Nokia n93..............$250usd
Nokia n95..............$300usd
Nokia n92..............$180usd
Nokia N70..............$140usd
Nokia N71..............$150USD
NOKIA N73..............$165usd
NOKIA N72..............$160usd
Nokia N90..............$170usd
Nokia N91..............$180usd
Nokia n80..............$170usd
Nokia 6682.............$160usd
Nokia 6830.............$160usd
Nokia 7700.............$130usd
Nokia 1110.............$50usd
Nokia 1600.............$65usd
Nokia 2125.............$125usd
Nokia 2255.............$100usd
Nokia 3128.............$100usd
Nokia 5140i............$125usd
Nokia 6101.............$135usd
Nokia 6030.............$100usd
Nokia 6060.............$110usd
Nokia 7280.............$127usd
Nokia 7600.............$90usd
Nokia 7610.............$100usd
Nokia 7710.............$110usd
Nokia 810..............$125usd
Nokia 8800.............$135usd
Nokia 8910i............$145usd
Nokia 9210i............$142usd
Nokia 9300.............$145usd
Nokia 9500.............$170usd
Nokia N Gage QD........$128usd
Nokia E61 .............$150USD

MOTOROLA PRODUCT
MDA4...................$130usd
Mitac MIO 8930.........$280usd
MOTOROLA Maxx..........$220usd
MOTOROLA v3xx..........$200usd
MOTOROLA Q.............$180usd
MOTOROLA V3X ..........$120usd
MOTOROLA RAZR V3.......$110usd
Motorola A600..........$146usd
Motorola A630..........$148usd
Motorola A760..........$150usd
Motorola A780..........$154usd
Motorola A840..........$162usd
Motorola E1............$134usd
Motorola MPX...........$125usd
Motorola MPX100........$120usd
Motorola MPX300.,......$115usd
Motorola A1200.........$150usd

SONY ERICSSION PRODUCT
Sony Ericsson J210i....$120usd
Sony Ericsson J300i....$122usd
Sony Ericsson K300i....$123usd
Sony Ericsson K508i....$132usd
Sony Ericsson K600i....$128usd
Sony Ericsson K608i....$127usd
Sony Ericsson S600i....$134usd
Sony! Ericsson V600i...$132usd
Sony Ericsson V800i....$137usd
Sony Ericsson W800i....$140usd
sony Ericsson w600i....$138usd
sony Ericsson p910i....$140usd
Sony Ericsson P900.....$160usd
Sony Ericsson P980i....$180usd
Sony Ericsson P990i....$180usd

IMATE JASJAR PRODUCT
I-MATE Smartflip ........ $130
I-MATE JAMin ............ $200
I-MATE JASJAR ........... $230
I-MATE K-JAM ............ $130
I-MATE SP5 .............. $140
I-MATE SP5m ............. $120
I-MATE SP4m .............. $125
I-MATE JAM Black ......... $120
I-MATE JAM ............... $115
I-MATE PDA2 .............. $150
I-MATE PDA2k ............. $140
I-MATE SP3i .............. $110
I-MATE SP3 ............... $110
I-MATE Pocket PC ......... $120
I-MATE Smartphone2 ....... $100
I-MATE Smartphone ........ $100

NEXTEL PRODUCT
Nextel i930............$130usd
Nextel i870............$120usd
Nextel i860............$110usd

TOM TOM GO
TOM TOM GO 500 $130USD
TOM TOM GO 510 $195USD
TOM TOM GO 700 $200USD
TOM TOM GO 910 $250USD
TOM TOM GO 300 $180USD

Nitendo wii ....................... $150
Dopod 838 pro ......................$300
motorola v3c .......................$150
Sony digital camera dsc-w100 ...... $130
Memory stick duo 2 gb (sony}........$60
Sandisk titanium cruzer 2gb .......$40

PDA O2/CDMA PHONES
XDA Trion .................................$200
xda Neo .................................$200
xda Atom .................................$230
xda Orion .................................$230
xda Exec .................................$240
xda Mini 5 ................................$235
xda IIi ...................................$180
xda II ....................................$200
Cingular 8125 .............................$250

SIDEKICK PRODUCT

Juicy couture sidekick ii..................$130
T-Mobile mister cartoon ...................$150
T-Mobile MDA ..............................$180
NOW RELEASED SIDEKICK 3....................$180

QTEK PDA PRODUCT
Qtek 9000 .................................$200
Qtek 9100 .................................$180
Qtek 8100..................................$160
Qtek 2020i.................................$120
Qtek 1010..................................$100
Qtek 8080..................................$165
Qtek 8310..................................$160
Qtek 9090..................................$170

PLAYSTATION PRODUCT
playstation 1 .............................$120
playstation 2..............................$150
Playstaion 3 60GB..................$350

Pioneer AVIC-Z1 Car DVD Player-----$650usd
Pioneer AVIC-N3 Car DVD Player-----$450usd
Pioneer AVIC-N2 Car DVD Player---$400usd

PLASMA TVS
Panasonic TH-37PHD8UK Plasma $350
Panasonic TH-42PWD8UK Plasma $600
Panasonic TH-42PHD8UK Plasma $500
Panasonic TH-42PD50U EDTV $ 450
Panasonic TH-42PX50U Plasma $650
Panasonic TH-50PX50U Plasma $700
panasonic TH-65PHD8UK Plasma $900

Sony FWD-42PV1 Plasma Display $500
Sony PFM-42X1 Plasma Display $550
Sony FWD-50PX2 Plasma Display $700

Philips 42PF7320A/37 Plasma TV $600
Philips 42PF9630A/37 Plasma HDTV $700
Philips 50PF7320A/37 Plasma HDTV $720
Philips 50PF9630A/37 Plasma HDTV $550
Philips 50PF9830A/37 Plasma HDTV $800

Samsung HPP3761 Plasma TV $600
Samsung PPM42M5S Plasma Display $500
Samsung SPP4251 Plasma TV $650
Samsung PPM42M5H Plasma Display $530
Samsung HPR4252 Plasma $650
Samsung HPR4262 Plasma TV $520
Samsung HPR4272 Plasma $530
Samsung PPM50M5H Plasma Display $840
Samsung HPR5052 Plasma $620
Samsung HPR5072 Plasma $720
Samsung HPP5581 Plasma TV $740
Samsung PPM63H3Q Plasma Display $700
Samsung HPR6372 Plasma $800

Hitachi CMP4211u Plasma $850
Hitachi CMP4212u Plasma $550
Hitachi 42HDF52 Plasma HDTV $400
Hitachi 42HDT52 Plasma TV $440
Hitachi 55HDS52 Plasma HDTV $480
Hitachi 55HDT52 Plasma TV $650
Hitachi CMP-55HDM71 Plasma $420

AOC Envision A42W64 Plasma $400
Maxent MX-42VM7 Plasma EDTV $570
Maxent MX-50X2 Plasma $500

NEC 42VP5 Plasma TV $600
NEC 42VM5HA Plasma TV $570
NEC 42VR5HA Plasma - Silver $500
NEC PX-42XM3A Plasma Display $500
NEC PX-42XM4A Plasma Display $450
NEC PX-42XR4A Plasma Display $550
NEC PX-50XM5A Plasma Display $570
NEC PX-50XR5A Plasma Display $500
NEC PX-61XM3A Plasma Display $600
NEC PX-61XM4A Plasma Display $750
NEC PX-61XR4A Plasma Display $700
NEC PX-84VP5A Plasma Display $690
NEC PX-84VM5A Plasma Display $650

All price given as been confirmed by the Director of Sale.

Our email:electshopltd@hotmail.co.uk

Advertiser
MARKETING MANAGER.
447011132737

Posted by: Allan Smith | April 19, 2007 1:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment

LINK 64 MOBEIL PHONS STORES
NEW GSM PHONES/PDA - UNBEATABLE PRICES WE ARE CERTIFIED WHOLESALERS OF
VARIOUS GSM MOBILE PHONES AT VERY AFFORDABLE PRICES ATTACH IS OUR VERY
CURRENT PRICE LIST OF GSM PHONES FOR YOUR REFERENCE ALL PHONES/PDA ARE
BRAND NEW SIM FREE/OPEN LINES/UNLOCK.
We are mobile phones wholesalers and we do sale in pieces to enhance
our sales.We deals on all brands and models of mobile phones such as
Nokia,Motorola,Samsung,Sony Ericsson,Sagem, Nextel,Sidekick
II,Sprint,Ipods, Laptops, Mp3 players etc at very cheap prices.Also, this is to reach
our customers globally that its the season of BUY TWO GET ONE FREE.
We are using
this medium to reach interested buyers of mobile phones.Do kindly reply
back if you are interested. THE KINDS OF MOBILE PHONES ARE LISTED BELOW:
Email address...link45_mobilestores@hotmail.com
Email address...link45_mobilestores@yahoo.com
PRICE LIST BELOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Brand Playstation and XBox Game
PLASTATIONS:
Ninten do Wii-----------------------------$160
GARMIN 396-----------------------------$150
Playstation 1-----------------------------$120
Playstation 2-----------------------------$130
Playstation 3-----------------------------$180
Sony PSP Value Pack---------------------$105
XBOX GAMES:
Xbox 360 Core System ------------------- $163
Xbox 360 Prenium pack ------------------$190
Xbox 360 Platinum Bundle Console ----- $155
Intec G8600 Xbox 360 9.2 TFT Screen--$85
SIDE KICK S
D-WADE SIDE KICK 3 FOR JUST...........$180USD
SIDE KICK 1 FOR JSUT...............$100USD
SIDE KICK 2 FOR JUST ..............$130USD
SIDE KICK 3 FOR JUST...............$180USD
LRG SIDE KICK 3 FOR JUST...........$160USD
PINK COUTURE SIDKEICK 3---------$120USD
MR CARTOO SIDKEICK .................£110USD

Noka N Series:
Nokia N95--- $250
Nokia N70--- $170
Nokia N71--- $170
Nokia N72--- $170
Nokia N73--- $170
Nokia N80--- $180
Nokia N90--- $170
Nokia N91--- $180
Nokia N92--- $200
Nokia N93--- $210
Nokia 8800 --- $200 sirocco
Nokia N-Gage--- $175
Nokia N-Gage QD--- $180
cNokia 6680-----------$160
Nokia 6060-----------$240
Nokia 6111------------$200

Motorola A388C......170 USD
Motorola A760.......250 USD
Motorola A768.......260 USD
Motorola A768i......200 USD
Motorola A780.......290 USD
Motorola C550.......90 USD
Motorola C650.......100 USD
Motorola E365.......100 USD
Motorola E398.......120 USD
Motorola E680.......240 USD
Motorola RAZR V3....270 USD
Motorola V220.......170 USD
Motorola V303.......100 USD
Motorola V400.......150 USD
Motorola V500.......150 USD
Motorola V501.......200 USD
Motorola V525.......150 USD
Motorola V600 (OEM) w/ Bluetooth Headset..260 USD
Motorola V600 OEM...180 USD
Motorola V690.....170 USD
Motorola V750.....180 USD
Motorola V80......200 USD
Motorola V80 with Bluetooth...260 USD
Motorola V872.....200 USD
Motorola V878....180 USD
Motorola V300....150 USD

Samsung D600...260 USD
Samsung D500...240 USD
Samsung E600...140 USD
Samsung E800...180 USD
Samsung P510...120 USD
Samsung SGH-D410.200 USD
Samsung SGH-D500..270 USD
Samsung SGH-E700..150 USD
Samsung SGH-E715..170 USD
Samsung SGH-P100..130 USD
Samsung SGH-P400..95 USD
Samsung SGH-P408..240 USD
Samsung SGH-P730..150 USD
Samsung SGH-S200..90 USD
Samsung SGH-S300..70 USD
Samsung SGH-S300M..100 USD

Sony Ericsson W910--US260
Sony Ericsson W900--US250
Sony Ericsson W810i--US200
Sony Ericsson W800i--US200
Sony Ericsson P800-- US$155
Sony Ericsson P900-- US$205
Sony Ericsson P910i-- US$210
Sony Ericsson T20e-- US$35
Sony Ericsson T20s-- US$39
Sony Ericsson T28s-- US$39
Sony Ericsson T28 World-- US$45
Sony Ericsson T29s-- US$49
Sony Ericsson T100-- US$30
Sony Ericsson T105-- US$35
Sony Ericsson T200-- US$45
Sony Ericsson T230-- US$55
Sony Ericsson T300-- US$55
Sony Ericsson T310-- US$50
Sony Ericsson T600-- US$69

Sony CMD-J5-- US$30
Sony CMD-Z7-- US$35
Sony CMD-J7-- US$40
Sony CMD-J6-- US$40
Sony CMD-Z5-- US$90
Sony CMD-MZ5-- US$155
Sony Ericsson R520m-- US$100
Sony Ericsson R380 World-- US$90
Sony Ericsson R380s-- US$105
Sony Ericsson R600-- US$35
Sony Ericsson S700-- US$175
Sony Ericsson K500i-- US$180
Sony Ericsson K700i-- US$189

Siemens A35-- US$15
Siemens A40-- US$19
Siemens A50-- US$25
Siemens A52-- US$29
Siemens A55-- US$30
Siemens C45-- US$30
Siemens C55-- US$35
Siemens CL50-- US$70
Siemens CL55-- US$65
Siemens CT56-- US$30
Siemens M50-- US$35
Siemens M55-- US$120
Siemens MC60-- US$79
Siemens ME45-- US$50
Siemens S45-- US$60
Siemens SL42-- US$65
Siemens SL45i-- US$69
Siemens S55-- US$85
Siemens SL55-- US$125

Nextel i55sr-- US$65
Nextel i2000plus-- US$35
Nextel i58sr-- US$30
Nextel i530-- US$35
Nextel i205-- US$20
Nextel i305-- US$25
Nextel i35s-- US$29
Nextel i88-- US$30
Nextel i90-- US$59
Nextel i95cl-- US$70
Nextel i60c-- US$40
Nextel 6510TM-- US$110
Nextel i730-- US$85
Nextel i733-- US$95
Nextel i736-- US$105
Nextel i830-- US$115
Nextel i860-- US$125
Nextel i930-- US$140

ALCATEL One Touch 501-- US$39
ALCATEL One Touch 311-- US$35
ALCATEL One Touch 511-- US$49
PANASONIC GD67-- US$49
PANASONIC GD92-- US$69
PANASONIC GD90-- US$69
SENDO X2 MUSIC PHONE:----------$96
HTC FARADAY-2100/2125:--------$300
SANYO MM-7500:-------------------$180
LG VX-8100---------------------------$215
PALMONE UNLOCKS TREO 650:---$140
TREO 650:-----------------------------$170
TREO 600:----------------------------$170
PALM TREO 650:---------------------$200

Pda’s
Hp ipaq pocket pc h4150 ========= $190
Asus my pal a716 ================= $175
Hp ipaq pocket pc h4350 ========= $185
Toshiba pocket pc e405 ========== $120
Sony clie peg-th55 ============== $155
Toshiba pocket pc e800 ========== $220
Palm one zire 72================== $120
Palm one tungsten e ============== $90
Palm one tungsten c ============== $140
Palm one zire 31 ================= $65
Palm trio 650=====================$240

IPODS
Apple 4 GB ipod mini blue m9802ll/a---------------us$64.00
Apple 4 GB ipod mini pink m9804ll/a'-----------------us$64.00
Apple 4 GB ipod mini green m9806ll/a--------------us$64.00
Apple 6 GB ipod mini blue m9803ll/a'----------------us$68.00
Apple 6 GB ipod mini silver m9801ll/a-------------------us$68.00
Apple 20 GB ipod m9282ll/a--------------------------us$69.00
Apple 4 GB ipod mini pink m9435ll/a-----------------us$49.00
Apple 40 GB ipod photo------------------------------us$49.00
Apple 4 GB ipod nano----------------------------------us$69.00
Apple 2 GB ipod nano-------------------------------------'us$62.00
Apple 4 GB ipod mini silver m9160ll/a-------------------us$49.00
Apple 60 GB ipod photo m9830ll/a--------------------us$86.00
Apple 60 GB ipod photo---------------------------------'us$49.00
Apple 30 GB ipod photo m9829ll/a'-------------------us$73.00
New apple 60 GB video ipod--------------------------us$140.00
New apple 30 GB video ipod--------------------------us$120.00

PRICELIST FOR QTEK PHONES :
Qtek 8100 Tri-Band Camera Music Unlocked GSM Phone White.....$125
QTEK 8300 GSM MOBILE SMARTPHONE.....$145
Qtek 8310 Unlocked Quadband GSM Phone....$165
Qtek 8500 Unlocked SmartPhone.....$155
Qtek 8600 Unlocked GSM SmartPhone....$225
Qtek 9000 3G Pocket PC Unlocked GSM Phone.....$320
Qtek 9100 Smartphone / Pocket PC Unlocked GSM Phone....$190
Qtek 9600 Unlocked GSM SmartPhone.....$280
Qtek G100 GPS PPC and Pharos Ostia GPS Software(US Maps)....$175
QTEK S200 GSM/GPRS Pocket PC Unlocked Quadband Phone.....$185

I-Mate JAM 128MB Unlocked....$180
I-Mate JAMin Unlocked....$200
I-Mate JASJAR Unlocked....$290
I-Mate K-Jam Unlocked....$200
I-Mate Smartflip Unlocked....$190
I-Mate SP5 Unlocked....$130
I-Mate SP5m Unlocked....$120
BlackBerry 8800 $180
Blackberry 8700v $170
Blackberry 8700r $165
Blackberry 8700g $160
Blackberry 8700c $155
Blackberry 8707g $150
Blackberry 8703e $145
Blackberry 8705g $140

We offer prompt shipping from our Warehouse factory,Typically the product will arrive within 2/3 Days Via Either Fedex/Ups Courier Sevices.
NOTE: Shipping Charges are Base On Destination,So when Placing Order with Us Kindly Include your Location Such as State and Zipcode
SO GET BACK TO US IF YOU QRE INTRESTD IN ANY OF OUR PRODUCT VIA ANY OF YOUR EMAIL BELOW
Email address...link45_mobilestores@hotmail.com
Email address...link45_mobilestores@hotmail.com
Thanks and god bless you

Posted by: ivory | April 13, 2007 11:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: ivory | April 13, 2007 11:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment

IMRANCELLULAR LIMITED
111 GSM VILLAGE LAGOS
TELEPHONE:2348026900051
EMAIL : AGNESF@IMRANCELLULARLTD.COM
.
We are mobile phones wholesalers,we have all brands and models of
gsm,tdma and cdma phones for sale at very cheap prices.We also have
all models of Nextel phones for sale also at very cheap prices.We
sell our phones at very cheap and reasonable prices.We do ship all
over the world.Do kindly contact us if you are interested in buying
some phones from us,thank’s and God bless.

Hello below are some phones prices,do check them out and let me know
what you think about them:

HERE IS THE PRICE LIST.
Brand new Model Unit Prices

MODELS: PRICE:
NOKIA 8800 SIROCCO EDTION$280
NOKIA N97_ US $300
NOKIA N95_ US$250
NOKIA N93_ US$230
NOKIA N91_ US$210
NOKIA N90_ US$200
NOKIA 2100– US$75
NOKIA 6150–US$80
NOKIA 6600–US$220
NOKIA 3650– US$160
NOKIA 5100– US$135
NOKIA 7210 Turquoise– US$109
NOKIA 7250– US$175
NOKIA 7650– US$140
NOKIA 8310– US$85
NOKIA 8910 TITANIUM– US$165
NOKIA 8850 SPECIAL EDITION– US$165
NOKIA 8850 GOLD EDITION– US$150
NOKIA 8910 Black– US$165
NOKIA 9210 Communicator– US$210
NOKIA 9210i Communicator– US$210
NOKIA 8910i– US$210

SONY ERICSSON T65– US$89
SONY ERICSSON T20—US$75
SONY ERICSSON T310– US$69
SONY ERICSSON T39m– US$79
SONY ERICSSON T66– US$79
SONY ERICSSON R520m– US$89
SONY ERICSSON A3618–US$60
SONY ERICSSON R380 World– US$89
SONY ERICSSON R380s– US$69
SONY ERICSSON T68m– US$79
SONY ERICSSON T610– US$129
SONY ERICSSON P700– US$200

SONY CMD-MZ5– US$169
SONY CMD-Z5– US$89
SONY CMD-J5– US$69
SONY CMD-Z7– US$79
SONY CMD-J7– US$79
SONY CMD-J6– US$79
SONY CMD-J70– US$49

MOTOROLA V66– US$59
MOTOROLA v66i– US$59
MOTOROLA TALKABOUT192– US$49
MOTOROLA V51– US$69
MOTOROLA V50– US$69
MOTOROLA V70– US$69
MOTOROLA V60– US$69
MOTOROLA V60i– US$69
MOTOROLA T720– US$69

SAMSUNG SGH-S300– US$69
SAMSUNG SGH-A500– US$139
SAMSUNG SGH-T500 Champagne– US$129
SAMSUNG SGH-V200– US$159
SAMSUNG SGH-T200– US$149
SAMSUNG SGH-R225–US$15
SAMSUNG SGH-E715–US$175
SAMSUNG SGH-V206–US$105
SAMSUNG SGH-A460–US$65
SAMSUNG SGH-V205–US$100
SAMSUNG SGH-R220–US$30
SAMSUNG SGH-N740–US$45

ALCATEL One Touch 501– US$39
ALCATEL One Touch 311– US$35
ALCATEL One Touch 701– US$43
ALCATEL One Touch 511– US$49
ALCATEL OT525– US$39
ALCATEL One Touch 512– US$9
ALCATEL One Touch 715– US$69

panasonic TX310–$115
PANASONIC TG2593B–$159
PANASONIC GD35– US$39
PANASONIC GD52– US$49
PANASONIC GD67– US$49
PANASONIC GD92– US$69
PANASONIC GD90– US$69
PANASONIC GD93– US$69
PANASONIC GD75– US$79
PANASONIC GD55– US$79
PANASONIC GD95– US$79

SIEMENS SL45– US$69
SIEMENS SL45i– US$69
SIEMENS S55– US$69
SIEMENS S55 Camera– US$39
SIEMENS C150–us$29
SIEMENS A40–us$13
SIEMENS SX56–US$165

PHILIPS Fisio 120– US$19
PHILIPS Fisio 311– US$29
PHILIPS Fisio 620– US$21
PHILIPS Fisio 825– US$29
PHILIPS OzÃ©o 8@8– US$29
PHILIPS XÃ©nium– US$59
NEXTEL PHONES PRICES:
HERE ARE ALSO SOME NEXTEL PHONES PRICELIST:

NEXTEL
i60c — 50UDS
i90c — 95USD
i95cl — 130USD
i30sx — 13USD
i88s — 70USD
i35s — 30USD
i58sr –75USD
i2000 — 60USD
i830–120USD
i860–137USD
i930–151USD

Do kindly reply back now,thank’s and God bless.

Kindly acknowledge the reciept of our mail and get back to us .
Regards,

AGNES FRED
(MrS) SALES DIRECTOR

Posted by: agnes | April 7, 2007 11:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment

snvadcy dbxn itjb kiwpmo cnuysgmo xdpc mlswokrni http://www.kzwd.twzkn.com

Posted by: etowshr mdatz | March 2, 2007 8:58 AM
Report Offensive Comment

pdikewahj emkugihyz nswfrugo gahlwf yitc herwv spdk

Posted by: lehz pkljunef | March 2, 2007 8:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Yo, Treo Mart (the dude flooding this site with his bogus phone advertisements)

Unless you have a phone that can be used for direct communication with God why dont you donate yourself to a worthy cause near a dying star.

Doyle

Posted by: doyle r. myers | February 26, 2007 8:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Treo-Mart Inc is a recognized distributer of Various consumer electronics. We specialize in a wide range of Products such as Laptops,Mobile Phones,Xbox 360,Sony Psp,Plasma Tv,Pda Phones,MP3 & MP4 Players,Video Games Console, Digital Cameras,Dvd Players, LCD TV, CD ROM, DVD Writer, Windows XP, Office 2003 Software, IP phone, USB Phone, Bluetooth Earphone, Bluetooth USB Dongle (Etc) At Affordable Rates.

All Our Products Are Delivered with their Full Accesories and they Come with 1 Full Year International Warranty From Manufacturer,Products will be delivered to your Door Step. Our aggressive purchasing team enables us to provide our customers with the best prices possible. We have a very large warehouse which allows us to purchase and stock in sizable quantity.

For more information and ordering,Kindly Contact Us at treomartinc@hotmail.com We look forward in placing your Order with Us,and giving you the most competent services.

PRODUCTS WE STOCK:
Nokia 1100--- $120
Nokia 1101--- $120
Nokia 1110--- $120
Nokia 1110i--- $120
Nokia 1112--- $120
Nokia 1600--- $120
Nokia 2100--- $120
Nokia 2300--- $120
Nokia 2310--- $120
Nokia 2600--- $120
Nokia 2610--- $120
Nokia 2650--- $120
Nokia 2652--- $120
Nokia 3100--- $120
Nokia 3120--- $120
Nokia 3200--- $120
Nokia 3220--- $120
Nokia 3230--- $120
Nokia 3250--- $120
Nokia 3300--- $120
Nokia 3310--- $120
Nokia 3410--- $120
Nokia 3510i--- $130
Nokia 3650--- $130
Nokia 3660--- $130
Nokia 5100--- $130
Nokia 5140--- $130
Nokia 5140i--- $130
Nokia 5210--- $130
Nokia 5500--- $130
Nokia 6020--- $130
Nokia 6021--- $130
Nokia 6030--- $130
Nokia 6060--- $130
Nokia 6070--- $130
Nokia 6080--- $130
Nokia 6100--- $130
Nokia 6101--- $130
Nokia 6103--- $130
Nokia 6111--- $130
Nokia 6125--- $130
Nokia 6131--- $130
Nokia 6136--- $130
Nokia 6151--- $130
Nokia 6170--- $130
Nokia 6220--- $130
Nokia 6230--- $130
Nokia 6230i--- $130
Nokia 6233--- $130
Nokia 6260--- $130
Nokia 6270--- $130
Nokia 6280--- $130
Nokia 6310i--- $140
Nokia 6600--- $140
Nokia 6610--- $140
Nokia 6610i--- $140
Nokia 6630--- $140
Nokia 6650--- $140
Nokia 6670--- $140
Nokia 6680--- $140
Nokia 6681--- $140
Nokia 6800--- $140
Nokia 6810--- $140
Nokia 6820--- $140
Nokia 6822--- $140
Nokia 7200--- $140
Nokia 7210--- $140
Nokia 7250--- $140
Nokia 7250i--- $140
Nokia 7260--- $140
Nokia 7270--- $140
Nokia 7280--- $140
Nokia 7360--- $140
Nokia 7370--- $140
Nokia 7380--- $140
Nokia 7600--- $140
Nokia 7610--- $140
Nokia 770--- $140
Nokia 7710--- $150
Nokia 8310--- $150
Nokia 8800--- $150
Nokia 8910--- $150
Nokia 8910--- $155
Nokia 9210--- $160
Nokia 9210i--- $160
Nokia 9300 --- $160
Nokia 9300i--- $160
Nokia 9500 --- $160
Nokia E50--- $165
Nokia E60--- $165
Nokia E61--- $165
Nokia E70--- $165
Nokia N70--- $165
Nokia N71--- $165
Nokia N72--- $165
Nokia N73--- $165
Nokia N80--- $170
Nokia N90--- $175
Nokia N91--- $180
Nokia N92--- $195
Nokia N93--- $210
Nokia N95 -- $220
Nokia N-Gage--- $175
Nokia N-Gage QD--- $180
Nokia 8800 Sirocco --- $390

Motorola Mobile Phones
Motorola A1000--- $200
Motorola A780--- $160
Motorola A835--- $180
Motorola A920--- $180
Motorola A925--- $180
Motorola C350--- $130
Motorola C385--- $130
Motorola C550--- $125
Motorola C650--- $130
Motorola C975--- $140
Motorola E1000--- $175
Motorola E1070--- $175
Motorola E365--- $180
Motorola E398--- $180
Motorola E550--- $180
Motorola E770v--- $180
Motorola L2--- $175
Motorola L6--- $170
Motorola L7--- $175
Motorola MPx200--- $150
Motorola MPx220--- $140
Motorola ROKR E1--- $130
Motorola T720i--- $150
Motorola V1050--- $140
Motorola V180--- $130
Motorola V220--- $100
Motorola V3--- $190
Motorola V300--- $130
Motorola V360--- $120
Motorola V3i--- $130
Motorola V3X--- $190
Motorola V500--- $145
Motorola V525--- $145
Motorola V545--- $130
Motorola V547--- $140
Motorola V550--- $140
Motorola V6--- $150
Motorola V600--- $140
Motorola V620--- $130
Motorola V635--- $130
Motorola V80--- $130
Motorola V975--- $130
Motorola V980--- $150

Sony Ericsson Mobile Phones
Sony Ericsson D750i--- $130
Sony Ericsson F500i--- $130
Sony Ericsson J100i--- $130
Sony Ericsson J210i--- $130
Sony Ericsson J220i--- $130
Sony Ericsson J230i--- $130
Sony Ericsson J300i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K300i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K310i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K500i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K508i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K510i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K600i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K608i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K610i--- $130
Sony Ericsson K700i--- $150
Sony Ericsson K750i--- $150
Sony Ericsson K790i--- $150
Sony Ericsson K800i--- $150
Sony Ericsson M600i--- $150
Sony Ericsson P800--- $150
Sony Ericsson P900--- $160
Sony Ericsson P910i--- $157
Sony Ericsson P990i--- $180
Sony Ericsson S700i--- $150
Sony Ericsson T230--- $150
Sony Ericsson T290i--- $150
Sony Ericsson T300--- $150
Sony Ericsson T310--- $150
Sony Ericsson T610--- $150
Sony Ericsson T630--- $150
Sony Ericsson T68i--- $150
Sony Ericsson V600i--- $150
Sony Ericsson V630i--- $150
Sony Ericsson V800--- $150
Sony Ericsson W300i--- $150
Sony Ericsson W550i--- $150
Sony Ericsson W700i--- $150
Sony Ericsson W800i--- $150
Sony Ericsson W810i--- $150
Sony Ericsson W850i--- $180
Sony Ericsson W900i--- $180
Sony Ericsson W950i--- $190
Sony Ericsson Z200--- $170
Sony Ericsson Z300i--- $165
Sony Ericsson Z520i--- $165
Sony Ericsson Z530i--- $165
Sony Ericsson Z550i--- $165
Sony Ericsson Z600--- $165
Sony Ericsson Z710i--- $165
Sony Ericsson Z800i--- $165

SIDEKICK:
SIDEKICK III----- $120
SIDEKICK II ----- $115
JUICY COUTURE SIDEKICK I----- $100
SIDEKICK II MISTER CARTOON--$130
JUICY COUTURE SIDEKICK II----- $130

PLASTATIONS:
GARMIN 396--$130
Playstation 1 --- $120
Playstation 2 --- $130
Playstation 3 --- $195
Sony PSP Value Pack--$105
Nintendo Wii --- $175

XBOX GAMES:
Xbox 360 Core System ----- $170
Xbox 360 Prenium pack --$200
Xbox 360 Platinum Bundle Console ----- $160
Intec G8600 Xbox 360 9.2 TFT Screen--$85

NEXTEL:
NEXTEL i60c ----- $50
NEXTEL i90c ----- $95
NEXTEL i95cl----- $130
NEXTEL i30sx----- $55
NEXTEL i88s ----- $70
NEXTEL i35s ----- $30
NEXTEL i58sr----- $75
NEXTEL i2000----- $60
NEXTEL i830 ----- $120
NEXTEL i860 ----- $130
NEXTEL i930 ----- $110
NEXTEL i860 ----- $100
NEXTEL 1930 ----- $120
NEXTEL i870 ----- $140
NEXTEL i450 ----- $90
NEXTEL 1860 ----- $110

02 PHONES:
O2 X2i--$120
02 X4----- $130
02 X3----- $120
02 x7----- $140
02 xDA Exec--$280
02 XDA Atom--$260
02 XDA NEO----- $265
02 XDA IIi----- $180
02 XDA IIs----- $185
02 XDA mini S----- $270
02 XDA II mini--$200

Samsung Mobile Phones
Samsung A300--- $120
Samsung A800--- $120
Samsung C100--- $120
Samsung C120--- $120
Samsung D410--- $120
Samsung D500--- $120
Samsung D520--- $120
Samsung D600-- $170
Samsung D800-- $170
Samsung D820--- $150
Samsung D830--- $120
Samsung D900--- $120
Samsung E300--- $120
Samsung E310--- $120
Samsung E330--- $120
Samsung E330N--- $120
Samsung E350--- $120
Samsung E370--- $135
Samsung E400--- $135
Samsung E530--- $135
Samsung E600--- $135
Samsung E630--- $135
Samsung E700--- $135
Samsung E710--- $135
Samsung E720--- $135
Samsung E760--- $135
Samsung E770--- $135
Samsung E800--- $135
Samsung E810--- $135
Samsung E820--- $135
Samsung E870--- $135
Samsung E900--- $135
Samsung i300--- $135
Samsung N500--- $135
Samsung N620--- $150
Samsung P300--- $150
Samsung P400--- $150
Samsung P510--- $150
Samsung S300--- $150
Samsung S400i--- $150
Samsung S500i--- $150
Samsung Serene--- $150
Samsung T100--- $150
Samsung V200--- $150
Samsung X450--- $150
Samsung X460--- $150
Samsung X480--- $150
Samsung X600--- $150
Samsung X640--- $150
Samsung X660--- $150
Samsung X820--- $150
Samsung Z107V--- $150
Samsung Z130--- $150
Samsung Z140--- $150
Samsung Z300--- $150
Samsung Z320i--- $150
Samsung Z400--- $150
Samsung Z500--- $150
Samsung Z510--- $150
Samsung ZM60--- $150

Sagem Mobile Phones
Sagem MY100X--- $130
Sagem MY201X--- $130
Sagem MY300X--- $130
Sagem MY400X--- $130
Sagem MY405X--- $140
Sagem MY501X--- $140
Sagem MY700X--- $140
Sagem MYC-1--- $140
Sagem MYC2-3--- $140
Sagem MYC-3--- $140
Sagem MYC3-2--- $140
Sagem MYC4-2--- $140
Sagem MYC5-2--- $140
Sagem MYS-7--- $140
Sagem MYV-55--- $140
Sagem MYX1-2--- $150
Sagem MYX-2--- $150
Sagem MYX2-2--- $150
Sagem MYX-3--- $150
Sagem MYX3-2--- $150
Sagem MYX-4--- $150
Sagem MYX5-2--- $150
Sagem MYX-6--- $150
Sagem MYX6-2--- $150
Sagem MYX-7--- $150
Sagem MYX-8--- $150
Sagem MYZ-5--- $150
Sagem MYZ-55--- $150

Siemens Mobile Phones
Siemens AL21--- $130
Siemens C62--- $130
Siemens C65--- $130
Siemens C75--- $130
Siemens CF110--- $130
Siemens CF75--- $130
Siemens CFX65--- $130
Siemens CL75--- $130
Siemens CX65--- $130
Siemens CX75--- $130
Siemens M55--- $130
Siemens M65--- $130
Siemens M75--- $130
Siemens MC60--- $130
Siemens ME75--- $130
Siemens S65--- $130
Siemens S75--- $130
Siemens SF65--- $130
Siemens SFG75--- $130
Siemens SK65--- $130
Siemens SL55--- $130
Siemens SL65--- $130
Siemens SL75--- $130
Siemens SP65--- $130
Siemens SX1--- $130
Siemens SXG75--- $130

BenQ-Siemens Mobile Phones
BenQ-Siemens C81--- $100
BenQ-Siemens CF61--- $100
BenQ-Siemens CL71--- $100
BenQ-Siemens E61--- $100
BenQ-Siemens E71 -- $110
BenQ-Siemens E81--- $120
BenQ-Siemens EF81--- $130
BenQ-Siemens EF91--- $130
BenQ-Siemens EL71--- $140
BenQ-Siemens M81--- $140
BenQ-Siemens P51--- $150
BenQ-Siemens Q-fi EF51--- $150
BenQ-Siemens S68--- $145
BenQ-Siemens S81--- $160
BenQ-Siemens S88--- $130
BenQ-Siemens SL91--- $120

LG Mobile Phones
LG 7050--- $130
LG 7100--- $130
LG B2050--- $130
LG C1200--- $130
LG C3300--- $130
LG Chocolate KG800--- $130
LG F2250--- $130
LG F2400--- $130
LG KG220--- $130
LG KG225--- $130
LG KG920--- $130
LG L343i--- $130
LG L5100--- $130
LG P7200--- $130
LG S5200--- $130
LG U300--- $130
LG U400--- $130
LG U8110--- $130
LG U8120--- $130
LG U8130--- $130
LG U8138--- $130
LG U8150--- $130
LG U8290--- $130
LG U8330--- $130
LG U8360v--- $130
LG U8380--- $130
LG U880--- $130
LG U890--- $130

NEC Mobile Phones
NEC 343i--- $120
NEC e101--- $120
NEC e122--- $120
NEC e228--- $120
NEC e313--- $120
NEC e338--- $130
NEC e606--- $130
NEC e616--- $130
NEC e808Y--- $130
NEC N223i--- $140
NEC N22i--- $140
NEC N341i--- $130
NEC N343i--- $130
NEC N400i--- $130
NEC N401i--- $130
NEC N410i--- $130
NEC N411i--- $130
NEC N412i--- $160

I-MATE:
I-MATE SP5----- $150
I-MATE SP5m--$155
I-MATE SP4m--$120
I-MATE JAM----- $160
I-MATE PDA2--$190
I-MATE SP3i--$130
I-MATE SP3----- $135
I-MATE PDA2k-$168
I-MATE JAMin--$240
I-MATE JASJAR-$280
I-MATE K-JAM--$180
I-MATE Pocket PC--$140
I-MATE JAM Black--$150
I-MATE Smartflip--$140
I-MATE Smartphone2--$110
I-MATE Smartphone----- $115
Treo 700--$200
Treo 600--$150
Treo 650--$160

Sharp Mobile Phones
Sharp 550SH--- $130
Sharp 703--- $130
Sharp 770SH--- $130
Sharp 902--- $130
Sharp 903--- $130
Sharp GX1--- $130
Sharp GX10--- $130
Sharp GX10i--- $150
Sharp GX15--- $150
Sharp GX17--- $150
Sharp GX20--- $150
Sharp GX25--- $150
Sharp GX29--- $150
Sharp GX30--- $150
Sharp GX30i--- $150
Sharp TM100--- $150

QTEK:
Qtek 8500.....$130
Qtek S200.....$100
Qtek 9000.....$120
Qtek 8310 ....$170
Qtek 8300.....$180
Qtek 9100.....$185
Qtek 8100.....$195
Qtek S110.....$190
Qtek S100.....$180
Qtek 9090.....$185
Qtek 8020.....$195
Qtek 8010.....$160
Qtek 2020i....$200
Qtek 2020.....$190
Qtek 8080.....$120
Qtek 8060.....$130
Qtek 1010.....$120
Qtek 7070.....$210

Orange Mobile Phones
Orange SPV C500--- $130
Orange SPV C550--- $130
Orange SPV C600--- $130
Orange SPV M1500--- $130
Orange SPV M2000--- $130
Orange SPV M3100--- $130
Orange SPV M500--- $130
Orange SPV M5000--- $130
Orange SPV M600--- $130

Panasonic Mobile Phones
Panasonic GD55--- $130
Panasonic GD67--- $130
Panasonic GD87--- $130
Panasonic VS2--- $130
Panasonic VS3--- $130
Panasonic VS6--- $130
Panasonic X500--- $130
Panasonic X70--- $130

Apple iPod 30GB (Video) New! -- US$105.95
Apple iPod 60GB (Video) New! -- US$125.95
Apple iPod Nano 2GB New! -- US$85.95
Apple iPod Nano 4GB New! -- US$90.95
Apple iPod Shuffle 512 MB -- 68.95
Apple iPod Shuffle 1 GB -- US$80.95
Apple iPod Mini 4 GB -- US$85.95
Apple iPod Mini 6 GB -- US$100.95
Apple iPod Photo 30 GB -- US$115.95
Apple iPod U2 SE 20 GB -- US$125.95
Apple iPod Photo 60 GB -- US$135.95
Apple iPod 20 GB -- US$100.95
Apple iPod 80 GB -- US$165.80

PLASMA TV:
Panasonic TH-42PD50U TH42PD50U 42" Plasma TV 852 x 480 ----- $550
HP PL4245N 42" HDTV-Ready Plasma TV ----- $620
Samsung SPR4232 42" Flat Panel EDTV Plasma TV ----- $510
Samsung HPR4252 42" High Definition Plasma TV ----- $510
Samsung PPM42S 42" Inch HDTV Black Plasma TV ----- $530
Panasonic TH-42PX50U/P TH42PX50U/P 42" Viera Plasma TV ----- $520
Samsung HP-R5052 50" Plasma TV ----- $610
Samsung SPN-4235 Flat Panel 42-inch Plasma TV ----- $440
SVA 42" Plasma TV (852x480; 16) 550:1, 480i/480p/720p ----- $510
Hitachi CMP-420V2 42 inch EDTV Plasma TV in Silver ----- $450
Panasonic TH-50PX50U 50" High Definition Plasma TV ----- $510
Philips - 50PF7320A - Philips 50" HDTV Ready Wide SCRN ----- $510
Optoma PD50 50-Inch 1366 x 768 3000:1 Contrast ----- $500
Panasonic TH-42PX500U 42"" HDTV Plasma TV ----- $700
Toshiba 42HP95 42"w Integrated HD Plasma TV ----- $700
Sharp PZ-43HV2U 43" High Definition Plasma TV ----- $1,200
Gateway 42" Plasma TV 16 : 9 Aspect Ratio ----- $655
Samsung HPR5052 50 High Definition Plasma TV ----- $1,100
Vizio P42HDe 42" 1024 x 768 5000:1 Contrast ----- $655
Samsung SPP4251 42" Plasma TV 16 852x480 Resolution ----- $655

LAPTOPS:
LAPTOPS SONY VAIO A217S-- 100GB-- 512MB RAM-- XP HOME-------------$900
SONY VAIO B1VP-- 40GB HD-- 512MB RAM-- XP PRO--------------$930
SONY VAIO T370P/L-- 60GB HD-- 512MB RAM--XP----------------$900
SONY VAIO A215Z 60GB HD-- 512MB RAM--XP------------------$950
SONY VAIO A397XP-- 80GB HD-- 512MB RAM--XP----------------$1000
SONY VAIO B100B08 60GB HD-- 512MB RAM--XP---------------$950
SAMSUNG LAPTOP-- M40 HWM 745--------------------------------$500
APPLE G4 POWERBOOK 1.3GHZ COMBO WITH 15 INCH DISPLAY-$700
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP--P20-801-----------------------------$500
APPLE GHZ SUPERDRIVE DESKTOP COMPUTER WITH 20 INCH MONITOR$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZX5275EA----------------------------------$800
SONY VAIO LAPTOP-- VGN PCGK215S---------------------------$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZT3350EA----------------------------------$800
SAMSUNG LAPTOP-- X15PLUS HZM--------------------------------$800
APPLE G4 POWERBOOK 1.33GHZ COMBO WITH 12 INCH DISPLAY$550
SONY VAIO LAPTOP--PCGK215M---------------------------------$800
SONY VAIO DESKTOP--RS504-------------------------------------$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZX5030------------------------------------$800
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP--M30-106----------------------------$800
HP MEDIA CENTER DESKTOP COMPUTER-- M1080 PHOTOSMART---$800
APPLE IBOOK 1.2GHZ COMBO WITH 14.1 INCH DISPLAY---------$800
APPLE GHZ SUPERDRIVE DESKTOP COMPUTER WITH 17 INCH MONITOR----$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZV5230EA---------------------------------$600
SAMSUNG LAPTOP-- P28 LTC 330---------------------------------$600
SONY VAIO DESKTOP--V1------------------------------------------$600
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP--A40-231----------------------------$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZV5169EA---------------------------------$800
APPLE GHZ COMBO DESKTOP COMPUTER WITH 17 INCH MONITOR-$600
APPLE IBOOK 1GHZ COMBO WITH 14 INCH DISPLAY---------------$600
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP--A40-892----------------------------$650
APPLE IBOOK 1GHZ COMBO WITH 12 INCH DISPLAY--------------$600
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZV5213EA---------------------------------$600
SONY VAIO B100B08 60GB HD-- 512MB RAM--XP---------------$900
SONY VAIO FS295VP 80GB HD-- 512MB RAM--XP---------------$950
SONY VAIO FS215Z 100GB HD-- 512MB RAM--XP---------------$950
SONY VAIO A417M 80GB HD-- 512MB RAM--XP-----------------$950
SONY VAIO B1VP-- 40GB HD-- 512MB RAM-- XPPRO-------------$800
SONY VAIO T370P/L-- 60GB HD-- 512MB RAM-- XPPRO----------$900
SONY VAIO LAPTOP--VGN-A117S-----------------------------$900
SONY VAIO LAPTOP--VGN-S1XP--------------------------$800
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP------------------------$830
APPLE G4 POWERBOOK 1.5GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 15 INCH DISPLAY--$950
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 2.0GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER-------------$900
APPLE G4 POWERBOOK 1.5GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 17 INCH DISPLAY--$900
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 2.5GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER---------$700
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP--P20-102--------------------------$900
APPLE 5GHZ SUPERDRIVE DESKTOP COMPUTER WITH 20 INCH MONITOR-$900
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP--P10-803-----------------------------$900
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP------------------------$850
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP PACK WIFIVERSION-$950
OQO MODEL 01 ULTRA PERSONAL COMPUTER (XPPRO)--------------$950
TOSHIBA SATELLITE PRO A60 40GB-- C2.8GHZ-- 15INCH--DVD/CDR---------$950
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI-- GPRS-- BLUETOOTH-- 1GHZ(BLACK)----$950
FUJITSU SIEMENS LIFEBOOK P7010 60GB-- P4 1.1GHZ--10.6INCH-- DVD/CDRW ---$900
ASUS A4744K-LH AMD64 POWER WORKSTATION LAPTOP--------$950
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI-- GPRS-- BLUETOOTH-- 1GHZ(RED)------$910
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI-- GPRS-- BLUETOOTH-- 1GHZ(BLUE)-----$900
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP------------------------$800
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI-- GPRS-- BLUETOOTH-- 1GHZ(YELLOW)--$900
TOSHIBA TECRA M2 40GB-- PM 1.5GHZ-- 14INCH-- WIFI--DVD-CDRW----$900
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI-- GPRS-- BLUETOOTH-- 1GHZ(SILVER)---$900
TOSHIBA PORTEGE R100 40GB-- 512MB-- XP PRO------------------$900
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP--M30-742-------------------------------$960
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 1.8GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER--------------$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZD7145EA-----------------------------------$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZD7255EA-----------------------------------$800
APPLE CINEMA HD 23-INCH TFT LCD MONITOR---------------------$800
SONY VAIO LAPTOP-- VGN PCGK21 5Z----------------------------$800
SAMSUNG LAPTOP-- X30 LWC 1500--------------------------------$800
G4 POWERBOOK 1.33GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 12 INCH DISPLAY-$600
SONY VAIO PCVW2 DESKTOP-------------------------------------$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP-- ZX5151EA PHOTOSMART-------------------$800
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP--M30-832----------------------------$800
HP PAVILION LAPTOP--ZT3215EA----------------------------------$800

All items provided by Treo-Mart Inc are Brand New, Unlocked, Factory Sealed with Complete Accessories and Product comes with Full 1 Year International Warranty From Manufacturer.We Assure 24/48Hours Doorstep Delivery Via Either FedEex/ UPS Courier Services.

NOTE: Shipping Charges are Base On Destination,So when Placing Order with Us Kindly Include Your Location.

For more information and ordering,Kindly Contact Us at treomartinc@hotmail.com .We look forward in placing your Order with Us,and giving you the most competent services.

Your Prompt Response Will be Greatly Appreciated.

Your's Sincerely,
Mr. Hayes Diaz.
E-Mail: treomartinc@yahoo.com
Thanks & God Bless.
Treo-Mart Inc.

Posted by: Hayes Diaz | January 19, 2007 5:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Quite honestly, people can learn from one another. But I think the only way we can discuss and learn from one another is if we go into a conversation realizing...you know, this person will undoubtedly believe different than you on many topics, and it's not your job to prove them wrong. Just speak your mind on what you believe, not trying to convince them, and listen to them and their idea's, not worrying that they might try to convince you!

I have learned from Jehova Witnesses to be more zealous (and not in a confrontational manner) for that which I believe. I have learned from those of Jewish faith to be less narrow-minded and judgemental. I have learned from Catholics a greater importance on families. I have learned from many protestants how to state beliefs with a true conviction and not just mundane answers. I have learned from Muslims how to not revile to those who accuse me of horrendous acts because of other people of my ethnicity.

I have learned much from other people, and oddly enough, it was before I learned the best lesson of all. I can learn from others, without releasing my own beliefs and values; but moreso, I can learn more about my beliefs and values from those who may not understand or share them.

Posted by: LDSMusic483 | December 26, 2006 2:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I believe the first vision as we have recorded in our scriptures today. It doesn't matter to me if Joseph told different versions. Paul told different versions of His Heavenly Vision in the New testament as well. Sometimes you get so excited about one part of the story, you might breeze over, or forget a part. That's human. I have no problem that Joseph Smith had more than one wife. If God told him to do it, then God told him. Age can't be a big factor, because God doesn't expect us to follow cultural norms all the time, but more so His will. More and more scientific evidence help validate the Book of Mormon, but I don't care. I read it, pray about it, and try to allow it to influence my life, and I feel at peace when I do so. I don't care if Joseph or any other Prophet made mistakes. Abraham lied, Noah got drunk, Moses killed, Peter tried to continue circumcision and was rebuked by Paul and all of the Apostles fled from their Master. Certainly, perfection is not required to lead Gods church? So women couldn't pray until 1978. Ask God about it. They weren't allowed to during New Testament times either. Heaven forbid that it was a reason that God had, and not some sexist thing the leaders were doing to make women inferior. I'm imperfect as well, and have my own idea's on topics that have not received specific revelation from God concerning their topics. Shoot, I've probably stuck my foot in my mouth and will think how dumb I was when I fully understand those things. It happens. It happens to Prophets as well. Not every word uttered from them is necessarily what God would have had them say. Prophets can make mistakes, otherwise they would not continue to grow. And I would expect Joseph Smith to have "messed up" more than any other Prophet, because he was the one who had to learn everything new again. He didn't know how a Prophet was supposed to be. He didn't know when to maybe keep his opinions to himself so unready ears would try to twist and destroy his words.

Posted by: LDSMusic483 | December 26, 2006 2:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Could someone Please remove these advertisments?

Posted by: Anonymous | December 25, 2006 2:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Dear,

We sale Brand new mobilephone, unlocked, with full accessories,and 1year international warranty from the Manufacturer,

Here is the stock we have for now

Here are some of our present stock:

Samsung D900. .. ..134usd
Samsung E770. .....150usd
Samsung E900.. ....172usd
Samsung X820. .....143usd
Samsung Z400.......120usd
Samsung D600.......110usd
.Benefon Twing. ....200usd
Benq Siemens.. . ...180usd
Blackberry Paerl. . 170usd

Lg Chocolate......162usd
Lg U890............182usd

Qtek
Qtek 8500 ....... 150usd
Qtek S200 ....... 180usd
Qtek 9000 ....... 210usd
Qtek 8310 ....... 190usd

NEXTEL PHONES.
Nextel i930-120usd
Nextel i860-150usd
Nextel i870-180usd

Motorola Kkrz1. ...150usd
Motorola L6...... ...140usd
Motorola pebl.. ..180usd
Motorola v3i.. . ..120usd
Motorola q............180usd

Nokia N95... . ... 320usd
Nokia N73.. ..... 180usd
NOKIA N93------220usd
Nokia N92... .. . 192usd
Nokia N91... .... 175usd
Nokia N90.. ......155usd
Nokia N80... .....180usd
Nokia N70..... . 145usd
Nokia 6030.... ..121usd
Nokia7360..... ...130usd
Nokia 8800... . . 170usd
Nokia 9300i... .. 150usd
Nokia9500.... . . 162usd
Nokia E61..... . ..180usd

UNLOCKED I-MATE PHONES.
I-MATE Smartflip ......160usd
I-MATE JAMin ......... 190usd
I-MATE JASJAR ........200usd
I-MATE K-JAM ......... 180usd

Sony Ericsson W810i... 170usd
Sony Ericsson W850i... .175usd
Sony Ericsson P910i......191usd
Sony Ericsson W900i... .189usd
Sony Ericsson W950i.....200usd
Sony Ericsson K800i......180usd
Sony Ericsson K600i......150usd

Pamtreo PHONES
Pamtreo 600180usd
Pamtero 650200usd
Treo 700220usd
Treo 750200usd
Palm Treo 700wx......220usd

T Mobile Compact Li...200usd

02 Xda Exec...................220usd
02 XDA Atom ................200usd
02 XDA NEO .................180usd

HP iPAQ hw6900..............220usd
Cingular 3125 (HTC Sta......220usd
Dell Axim X51v..................220usd
HP iPAQ h6300 Series........220usd
RIM BlackBerry Pearl..........220usd

TomTom GO 500-180usd
TomTom GO 510-210usd
TomTom GO 700-230usd
TomTom GO 910-240usd
TomTom RIDER-.-250usd

XBOX GAMES:
Xbox 360 Core System ................ 200usd
Xbox 360 Prenium pack -................-220usd
Xbox 360 Platinum Bundle Console 240usd
Nintendo Wii (Nintendo Wii)............150usd
Sony PSP 4GB Core Bundle ...............180usd
New Tickle Me Elmo T.M.X.................100usd

Apple iPod nano Media Player 2GB ....60usd
Apple iPod nano Media Player 4GB ....80usd
Apple iPod nano Media Player 6GB ....100usd
Apple 4 GB iPod Mini Blue M9436LL/A...60USD
Apple 2 GB iPod Nano.........................60USD
Apple 4 GB iPod Nano........................100USD
Apple 30 GB iPod Video......................120usd
Apple 60 GB iPod Video.....................150USD
....
Camcoders Price List:

Sony DCR-DVD403 Digital Camcoders.......530usd
Sony DCR-HC18 Digital Camcoders ......200usd
Sony DCR-SR50 Digital Camcoders.......665usd
Sony DCR-DVD405 Digital Camcoders.... ..665usd
Sony DCR-HC44 Digital Camcoders.......230usd
Sony DCR-SR30 Digital Camcoders.......435usd

LAPTOPS Note Book PC

SONY VAIO VGN-AR11S........1GB 200Gb700usd
SONY VAIO A217S 100GB.....................450usd
SONY VAIO B1VP 40GB HD...................400usd
SONY VAIO T370P/L 60GB....................400usd
SONY VAIO A397XP 80GB.....................400usd

Dell Inspiron 6000- $400
Dell Latitude D505$400
Dell Latitude D610$460.

THE ABOVE LISTED MOBILE PHONES ARE BRAND NEW PHONES
WITH ALL THEIR COMPLETE ACCESSORIES AND CARRIES 1 FULL
YEAR INTERNATIONAL WARRANTY.

Condition: brand new wireless standard with 1 year manufacturer warranty >and 6 months seller guarantee,with original mother board, OriginalEnglish British battery, all software and manual contain writing English languages and multilingual.

Our phones are simfree and it's never lock to any network, Specification: (EU/American specifications) general network gsm 900/gsm1800/gsm 1900 platform - tri band (gsm900 + 1800 + 1900 MHz: original,EU
spec,9 >languages.

RETURN POLICY
----------------------------------
You may return the item within ten (10) days of delivery of the order.Products with Manufacturer Warranties which exceed 30 days, may be returned directly to the manufacturer according to their instructions.
Customer may request a replacement product otherwise company credit will be issued.

OUR TERM
------------------------------
We ship to any destination within 48hours after confirming your part payment for the types and pcs you demand .

We use reputable courier services of your choice for distribution of our goods worldwide! .

We want to assure you that you will never regret buying from us because the delivery will be to your doorstep via FedEx Courier service.And the Tracking number shall be sent to you upon acknowledgement of your payment.

Kindly acknowledge the reciept of our mail and get back to us.

Note: They are all Brand New T2 Euro specs, unlocked, sim-free, no operator logo, come in their original sealed box, With 1 year international warranty from the manufacturer, English & Spanish manual, Finland made.

Best regards.
Mr..Baloy
Sales Director

CONTACT ; MR PETERSON (SALES REP)

[game.phone@yahoo.com]

[game_phone2@hotmail.com]

Tell : +447031929349
+447031898906

FAX; 44874782815

You can send you shipping address to our mail box (which will include the following :)
Name..........................................................
Home/office address..................................
country......................................................
state...........................................................
city............................................................
zipcode......................................................
phone number(if any)...............................

Posted by: Anonymous | December 16, 2006 6:05 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Dear,

We sale Brand new mobilephone, unlocked, with full accessories,and 1year international warranty from the Manufacturer,

Here is the stock we have for now

Here are some of our present stock:

Lg Chocolate......162usd
Lg U890............182usd

Qtek
Qtek 8500 ....... 150usd
Qtek S200 ....... 180usd
Qtek 9000 ....... 210usd
Qtek 8310 ....... 190usd

NEXTEL PHONES.
Nextel i930-120usd
Nextel i860-150usd
Nextel i870-180usd

Motorola Kkrz1. ...150usd
Motorola L6...... ...140usd
Motorola pebl.. ..180usd
Motorola v3i.. . ..120usd
Motorola q............180usd

UNLOCKED I-MATE PHONES.
I-MATE Smartflip ......160usd
I-MATE JAMin ......... 190usd
I-MATE JASJAR ........200usd
I-MATE K-JAM ......... 180usd

Pamtreo PHONES
Pamtreo 600180usd
Pamtero 650200usd
Treo 700220usd
Treo 750200usd
Palm Treo 700wx......220usd

T Mobile Compact Li...200usd

02 Xda Exec...................220usd
02 XDA Atom ................200usd
02 XDA NEO .................180usd

HP iPAQ hw6900..............220usd
Cingular 3125 (HTC Sta......220usd
Dell Axim X51v..................220usd
HP iPAQ h6300 Series........220usd
RIM BlackBerry Pearl..........220usd

TomTom GO 500-180usd
TomTom GO 510-210usd
TomTom GO 700-230usd
TomTom GO 910-240usd
TomTom RIDER-.-250usd

LAPTOPS Note Book PC

Dell Inspiron 6000- $400
Dell Latitude D505$400
Dell Latitude D610$460.

THE ABOVE LISTED MOBILE PHONES ARE BRAND NEW PHONES
WITH ALL THEIR COMPLETE ACCESSORIES AND CARRIES 1 FULL
YEAR INTERNATIONAL WARRANTY.

OUR TERM
------------------------------
We ship to any destination within 48hours after confirming your part payment for the types and pcs you demand .

We use reputable courier services of your choice for distribution of our goods worldwide! .

Kindly acknowledge the reciept of our mail and get back to us.

Best regards.
Mr..Baloy
Sales Director

CONTACT ; MR PETERSON (SALES REP)

[game.phone@yahoo.com]

[game_phone2@hotmail.com]

Tell : +447031929349
+447031898906

FAX; 44874782815

Posted by: Anonymous | December 16, 2006 6:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Dear,

We sale Brand new mobilephone, unlocked, with full accessories,and 1year international warranty from the Manufacturer,

Here is the stock we have for now

Here are some of our present stock:

Lg Chocolate......162usd
Lg U890............182usd

Qtek
Qtek 8500 ....... 150usd
Qtek S200 ....... 180usd
Qtek 9000 ....... 210usd
Qtek 8310 ....... 190usd

NEXTEL PHONES.
Nextel i930-120usd
Nextel i860-150usd
Nextel i870-180usd

Motorola Kkrz1. ...150usd
Motorola L6...... ...140usd
Motorola pebl.. ..180usd
Motorola v3i.. . ..120usd
Motorola q............180usd

UNLOCKED I-MATE PHONES.
I-MATE Smartflip ......160usd
I-MATE JAMin ......... 190usd
I-MATE JASJAR ........200usd
I-MATE K-JAM ......... 180usd

Pamtreo PHONES
Pamtreo 600180usd
Pamtero 650200usd
Treo 700220usd
Treo 750200usd
Palm Treo 700wx......220usd

T Mobile Compact Li...200usd

02 Xda Exec...................220usd
02 XDA Atom ................200usd
02 XDA NEO .................180usd

HP iPAQ hw6900..............220usd
Cingular 3125 (HTC Sta......220usd
Dell Axim X51v..................220usd
HP iPAQ h6300 Series........220usd
RIM BlackBerry Pearl..........220usd

TomTom GO 500-180usd
TomTom GO 510-210usd
TomTom GO 700-230usd
TomTom GO 910-240usd
TomTom RIDER-.-250usd

LAPTOPS Note Book PC

Dell Inspiron 6000- $400
Dell Latitude D505$400
Dell Latitude D610$460.

THE ABOVE LISTED MOBILE PHONES ARE BRAND NEW PHONES
WITH ALL THEIR COMPLETE ACCESSORIES AND CARRIES 1 FULL
YEAR INTERNATIONAL WARRANTY.

OUR TERM
------------------------------
We ship to any destination within 48hours after confirming your part payment for the types and pcs you demand .

We use reputable courier services of your choice for distribution of our goods worldwide! .

Kindly acknowledge the reciept of our mail and get back to us.

Best regards.
Mr..Baloy
Sales Director

CONTACT ; MR PETERSON (SALES REP)

[game.phone@yahoo.com]

[game_phone2@hotmail.com]

Tell : +447031929349
+447031898906

FAX; 44874782815

Posted by: Anonymous | December 16, 2006 6:02 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Revelation directly from God allows those seeking for spiritual truths to transcend the discourse of modernity and find security in God's loving assurences. Not to say the discourses of modernity are not worthy for engagement, they certainly are, but God would be elitist indeed if he made his most vital truths accessable to those only with "greater opportunities for learning." So I would say, give a break to those with great convictions based primarily, if not exclusively, on the source God deems a worthy foundation for knowledge of him.

Posted by: John D. | December 7, 2006 1:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I in no way can even pretend to be an expert in my religion. That is actually what brought me to this site. I am currently in a process of learning all that I can about it. I struggled recently when I ran across an anit-mormon site. I hadn't even heard of many of the claims against the church (mostly the Book of Mormon), just as I have never heard of some of the claims posted in this thread.

The only way I can answer most of the questions you posed is to say again that people are not perfect. Also, I think that there is a lot that we do not know and will not know while we are here on earth.

The purpose of my post was to simply state my thoughts on some of the things posted. I no doubt have a lot to learn about the church but I have approached Heavenly Father with an earnest and un-biased heart to know whether the church was true. That is how I have received my firm postition that I now hold as to the truth of the Gospel.

Most likely I will go to the sites you mentioned and do some research. Like I said, I want to learn as much as possible about it all. The biggest confirmation that I will receive, however, is not from the mouths of men but of our Heavenly Father only. That is why I make the bold statement as to its truth.

I am appreciative of your comments because that is also a reason for posting here. I wanted to generate comments to know what other aspects to research. They don't exactly have a class on Sunday that says "These are the things you need to research in order to become an expert on the church" Though maybe they should ;).

Posted by: Ange | December 6, 2006 6:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment

It is ironic that a statement exhorting us to engage without rancor becomes...well an engagement of rancor.

As a muslim on this site i have experienced a great deal of rancor aimed at my faith of choice- i am happy for this reminder of the gentle manners of Jesus(ata) and will try to remember this in my own responses.
peace

Posted by: victoria | December 6, 2006 2:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Ange, when you say that the mormon church is the only church fully restored on this earth, that position appears a bit myopic on this forum. Your are assuming that: A) Christianity is correct B) The mormon doctrine of the great apostacy is correct C) That Joseph Smith had authority to restore a Christian church. Only a few of the other churches on this forum even believe that A is a possibility and fewer believe that B is possible. If you seek common ground with other religious affiliates, you may want to drop the whole "fully restored" mantra, since 95% of the world's religions do not even believe a restoration of Christianity was necessary, possible, or even probable. To fully understand and empathize with other religions, the mormon church should drop the "one and only true church" dogma, and be open to possible interpretations of the many contradictions of Joseph Smith, that include him being wrong on some accounts.

To your point of apologizing for your beliefs, you may want to check church history out before you make this claim. Do you support a prophet marrying 14 year old girls? Do you support a prophet who marries other men's wives? How do you feel about a prophet who degrades blacks for having a wide nose and black skin? What can you say for a prophet who says the only way to heaven is through polygamy? Can you justify a prophet who condemned monogamy? How do you feel about a prophet who started a bank that lost over $100,000, and then left the state to avoid lawsuits? Maybe you support a prophet who encourages breaking the law of the land, like John Taylor? Is it possible that you support the doctrine of blood atonement, spilling your own blood for sins that Christ's blood doesn't cover? A prophet has taught this during General Conference. Do you support a prophet who teaches that men are superior to women? Do you support a set of scriptures that was translated from Egyptian, but is an incorrect translation? Do you support a prophet who teaches conditional love? Do you support a prophet who revealed ceremonial practices identical to freemasonry? Do you support a prophet who excommunicates half of the twelve apostles? Do you support a prophet who lies about his polygamous relationships? Do you support a prophet whose own wife and children left the church? Do you support a prophet who proclaims the church is growing, when it is stagnant? Do you support a prophet who doesn't know what we teach regarding the nature of God? Do you support a prophet who gives multiple versions of his first vision of God? Do you support a prophet who revealed the earth is only 6,000 years old? Do you support a prophet that has no new revelation? Do you support a prophet who is a son or grandson of another General Authority? Do you support a prophet that focuses on outward appearance instead of the inner vessel? Do you know that two of the twelve apostles resigned their apostleship in 1906 over polygamy? Do you support the current polygamy practiced by prophets?

If you answer "no" to any of these questions, then you had better do some studying about your own church, before you go out and try to defend something you really know little about. It is wise to understand your own religion, before trying to discuss it with others. Each of the issues I raise have been discussed frequently on the FAIR discussion board, NOM discussion board, FLAK discussion board, and MormonDiscussions discussion board, at great length. I would suggest that you take the time to familiarize yourself with any of these issues before announcing to the world that you stand up for a religion that many members don't even understand themselves. I do admire you courage doing it though, although I agree with you, many people do suffer the consequences of mormonism, including myself. I've been a lifelong member.

Posted by: DV | December 6, 2006 12:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I have read through the comments and I have a few things to say:

People are not perfect. It seems to me that a great deal of feelings towards the LDS church stem from the actions of these imperfect people.

There is a great amount of scientific evidence that lends to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. A lot of which you can read on this bloggers site: www.jefflindsay.com. He is LDS so it is highly biased of course (as are anti-Mormon websites) but he does cite many non-LDS sources amongst well-researched LDS ones.

Speaking of bias- I think it is impossible to go into a religious discussion thinking "I know I am missing something in my religious beliefs and the person(s) I will be talking to will help me to see exactly what it is." unless you are searching for something. So to say that the Mormon who comes on this site thinks they are right and everyone else is wrong is absolutely true. But this should not be attributed to Mormons only, as almost everyone else with a view/opinion thinks that they are right and the rest of us are wrong. Afterall, how likely is it that what I am writing in my comment will have any affect on your opinions? Though I would hope it does have some affect, your opinions will most likely stay the same. Just as my opinions and beliefs will likely stay the same despite the other opinions expressed her. None of this, however, means we think we can't learn from another (my faith in Christ has certainly been strengthened by those of other faiths.)Thinking you are right and they are wrong leads me to another point...

If you do not believe in the church and what it teaches than why waste any of your time on it? If you have made up your mind that it is wrong why do you come here asking for people to prove otherwise? Whereas, those who believe the church to be true have every reason to try to convert others. We are trying to save as my people as possible here!! The same reason other churches have their members on missions as well.

Life would be much more simple and so much easier if the church were not true. But, alas, it is true and we will suffer the consequences.

Either way, I think this thread has caused Brother Ottersons initial theory to be proved. As hard and as unlikely as it may be, I feel that the thread has held quite a non-rancorous discussion.

I believe in the infallible truth of the LDS Gospel- it's doctines not its people. I don't believe its members or leaders have ever claimed to be perfect. I hold strongly to the claim that the church is the only church fully restored on this earth. Other churches may have some parts of the truth but not all. And I don't apologize for my beliefs either. I think we can learn from others by their actions and have a desire to improve ourselves. After all, we all want to be more like Mother Teresa or Ghandi regardless of religious affiliation. I hope if you respond to my comments you understand that I hold tightly to my beliefs and am not easily swayed, but I do not condemn anyone or think you are a bad person for not believing the same. I just wish you did.

Posted by: Ange | December 4, 2006 4:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment

We all, as human beings, oversimplify reality. Can you other human beings really blame us Mormons for doing so? It's cognitively economical to ignore ambiguity. If we humans didn't do it, we would be non-functional, directionless beasts. Oversimplification is an evolutionary imperative! For he or she who wants to follow the teachings of Christ however, oversimplification with regards to one's neighbor can be devastatingly dysfunctional. As an orthodox, fully believing Latter Day Saint, I concur that there have been accurate portrayals in this Blog of the church's teachings on apostasy. Mormon Exaltation is not acquired individually, but in community, as a cooperate group of individuals bound to one another, to Christ and ultimately to God by means of divine sealing power given to his covenant people. The church is earth's vassal state for God's Kingdom in Eternity. Therefore it follows that rejecting this cooperate group (apostasy) renders one unable to reach exaltation unless, of course, one returns. This truth, which I believe to be based on God's disclosures, does not say anything about the heart, the intentions, and moral status of the individual who leaves. I think Mormon theology leaves room for infinite contingencies that may surround this choice, which allows for the individual to maintain the status of a moral, truth seeking human being, despite their choice the leave the church. This world is complex and questions surrounding Mormonism are complex. The Lord knows this, and will in the end judge the intentions of the heart. When our loving, patient Heavenly Father shows them the whole picture of Eternity and ambiguities disappear, those who are seekers of light will be willing to once again make themselves God's covenant people. Our commandment as disciples of Jesus is to withhold judgment concerning who those people are and simply love, serve and give people the benefit of the doubt.

Posted by: John D | December 2, 2006 3:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I find Michael Otterson's silence deafening. Earth to Michael. Are you there? What happened to your idea that "It is perfectly possible to hold devoutly strong convictions and yet engage others in conversation." Do you find that the best way to engage others in conversation is to disengage entirely? Could this possibly be indicative of the brethren's overall detached attitude from the rest of society? Your lack of participation on this board is quite telling, and somewhat juvenile. Maybe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints should elect another front man, one who will actually take some heat, like Joseph Smith or Brigham Young. One who won't go into hiding like Josep... err, like Brigh... err, I mean somebody like John Tayl.. well, you know what I mean. Somebody who will actually stand up for his beliefs, you know? Like Abraham Lincoln. Isn't there any authority who will stand for something on this forum, or don't we teach 'standing for something' anymore?

Posted by: Ignacio | November 30, 2006 10:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Ram and Nathon:

Excellent posts.

though, ram, there should be one clarification: there is more disgust airing with ones own religion than that of another. not that that is any better, i just dont see other religioners hashing it out on here. that said, its sadly ironic that within the mormon church there is more tolerance for the religion/faith/atheism of ones neighbor than there is for the religion/faith/atheism of one's child.

Nathon, your points are groovy cool and spot on. i too did a mission and i had a great time. it seemed like the right thing to be doing and i was in a fun place with mostly fun people. you are right that there is grand elitism in the tone of missionaries and other mormons. i hope people can forgive the missionaries, they really are messengers for an institution. for those folks reading this, i hope they take a minute and buy those dudes and ladies a meal and learn their story. they all gave up something to be out there. sadly, they are generally pre-programmed young teachers. rarely are they aware of the real historical details behind their message. and more, they are taught that when they are in a bind, uncertain, confronted, challenged or when there is a window where others may be curious of their message that they should testify of the truth, meaning, the true things that set the lds church apart. its a great tactic, and it can work.

unfortunately, its a bit silly to use the same tactic on someone that is often more informed than the compliant mormon and has already spent years in the mormon system. and it often breaks down when the participating mormon dismisses any discussion, rancorless or not, as having its roots in satan and being void of "the spirit."

again, well done ram and nathon.

Posted by: Mayan Elephant | November 28, 2006 11:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I am a member of the LDS church, and when I was 19, I was a missionary for the LDS church in asia. I taught many Buddhists who made the claim that there were many paths to God. We would counter that they didn't have ALL truth, nor the authority to get into heaven, but that the LDS church had both. I don't think my experience is unique; I think that reply was, and still is, the standard answer regarding "Truth" vis a vis the LDS church. The LDS / Mormon church teaches that all other churches are abominations unto The Lord, and that they are all wrong. LDS teachings regarding priesthood authority are that no other church is authorized by God to perform holy ordinances. This attitude does not promote dialogue without rancor. It doesn't promote dialogue at all, actually. It's very much "The LDS way, or the highway." As a former mormon missionary, I can say that most conversations with others about religion were only originated as a means to try to convert them. LDS missionaries are not sent out to have pleasant conversations about religion, they are sent out to try and convert others to the faith and increase the membership rolls. There is no dialogue. As a member of the LDS church I freely admit that trying to engage the typical mormon, much less a mormon missionary, in genuine dialogue about religious beliefs is a charade and merely an opportunity for the mormon to try and correct other people's religious views. I find it hard to believe that there can be true dialogue between mormons and others about religious topics without the underlying assumption that the mormon is completely correct in his beliefs, is not really interested in the opinions or beliefs of others, and is only trying to convert the other person. True, some of the more "enlightened" mormons may take a long view, and may see their conversation as planting a seed to be harvested later. But, there is no dialogue. There is no give and take. A mormon will never cede a doctrinal point or practice. It may be polite, it may lack surface rancor, but there there will never be true dialogue with a mormon about religion.

Posted by: Nathan C. | November 28, 2006 8:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I just found this site and thought the premise was fascinating: A place where one can go to discuss and debate faith and religion in a constructive way. I've read a few threads and so far I find very little here that is constructive or useful. Rather, it appears to be nothing more than a forum to air one's disgust with another's religion. I suppose that's what happens when all are invited to participate. I would suggest, though, that we will all learn much more from each other by listening and thoughtfully considering each other's views than by engaging in shrill argument. It's easy to point out something wrong; it's much harder to find common ground with that person. I suggest that the latter will be more productive and fulfilling than the former.

Posted by: RAM | November 27, 2006 5:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment

DV:

Let me first state again that the post to which you refer was written by me, and that it was posted under "Anyonymous" because I neglected to type my name in the field before hitting post. I'm sorry for any confusion this may have caused.

"To state that your children might mock you, or speak contemptuously to you, is to propogate the stereotypical "apostate" that has been circulating ever since Kirtland."

I certainly HOPE I will raise my children to behave better than this. But I also HOPE my children will not leave the church. Ultimately both of these things will be up to them. I only intended to point out that it would be compassionate on their part not to engage in such behavior if they were to make that choice.

Such mocking, contempt, etc. is not drawn from some vague, distant "stereotype", but rather is behavior that I have witnessed in person, and have had described to me by family members who have experienced it. However, I certainly recognize that there are many, many people who leave the church who do not engage in such behavior. It is indeed wrong to stereotype those who leave the church as "all" behaving this way. I don't think I ever said they did. I only said it is easier for LDS families to love them if they do not engage in these behaviors.

Likewise it is wrong to stereotype their families as judgmental, condemning, and shunning. While it is true that these attitudes are sometimes present in *some* families, there are many, many LDS families who are very loving and accepting toward family members of other faiths.

I think it's important to recognize the full range of attitudes on BOTH sides of the issue, and for BOTH sides to refrain from stereotyping one another. Don't you?

"...it pains me knowing there are many members of our church who claim to be christians, yet exhibit very little Christian love for those who are different from themselves."

This pains me as well. And I see in the teachings of the church that this attitude is counter to the church's doctrine. Unfortunately, this same failing is present in many other Christians of other faiths. This also, is not exclusive to Mormonism. Many people of all faiths fail to live up to all the teachings of their faiths. This, in my opinion, is because we are all still mortal, and human, and have room for improvement. I do not think, however, that having "Christian love" for someone means that you have to agree with all of their beliefs. Do you?

I am also encouraged by the number of members of our church and others who DO exhibit the trait of Christlike love.

Posted by: Sister B. | November 25, 2006 4:05 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Lunar:

"I don't know if you have any first-hand experience with the type of shunning and family discord that occurs in Mormon families when a close relative leaves the faith. But Mayan, myself, and countless others in our same circumstances understand this all too well."

Yes, I am aware through personal experience of the kind of feelings and reactions that can occur when a close relative leaves the faith. I am aware that in the incident in question, the LDS family members did try hard to maintain a close and loving relationship with the family member in question. I am also aware that each time they contacted the family member in question, he was abusive and insulting, and had a strong tendency to lecture them as to the evils of their faith. I am very much aware that it was this, not the fact of his having left the church, that eroded the relationship over time to the point where some family members no longer wished to be in close contact with him. I am further aware that after a number of years had passed, all the time with periodic contacts from various LDS family members, this particular person was able to back down a little on the attitude and agree to behave in a civil manner toward other family members, after which he was again included in family functions and whatnot, and was again in regular contact with the family. He did not rejoin the church, and continues to have strong objections to some of its doctrines. His family members have not changed their minds about his beliefs either. But they are able to be a family because they have learned to agree to disagree CIVILLY. This is one of the reasons I feel so strongly about the necessity of being able to do so--on both sides.

"I disagree that it not unique to Mormonism...."

I respect your right to disagree. I hope that we can engage in civil dialog despite our disagreement on this point. I disagree to some extent with your construction of LDS doctrine and your use of out of context quotations. My experience has been that far from a "get thee hence" attitude raining down from the pulpits, there is rather a "please come home" attitude raining down from the pulpits, and rather than contempt for former members, I see compassion. From what you have written I understand that you think I'm wrong about this. I hope you will respect my right to disagree with you.

Posted by: Sister B. | November 25, 2006 3:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment

-Anonymous

Your characterization of the plight of the devastated LDS parent, whose adult offspring announces a change in faith, is undermined by your accusatory tone toward those offspring. LDS people who change their beliefs are not typically judgmental, condemning, lecturing, and ridiculing as you state. Many people in this situation are similar to Grant Palmer, whose faith changed through intense study of church history, after many years in the CES system. He described the pain of his new discoveries as similar to that of losing a loved one. And it wasn't something he ever contemplated, he simply learned truths that had been obscured from his sight.

Many who change their faith through discovery of the authentic history of the church or eccliastical abuse, keep their intense feelings of betrayal locked up inside, or share them with a few friends who have gone through the same process. Most who go through this change, never anticipated this step, because of their assumption that their faith was founded on principles that they believed were objectively true. When they discovered that many foundational elements of the church are not accurate, an intense level of frustration and agony accompanied that discovery. This feeling of intense agony is almost never passed along to parents. Only after many months or years of recovery from this jolt to their belief system, are the conclusions passed along to parents, and oftentimes they are communicated in the kindest way possible.

To state that your children might mock you, or speak contemptuously to you, is to propogate the stereotypical "apostate" that has been circulating ever since Kirtland. This is unfortunate, because for every man that has been characterized as losing his testimony over milk cream strippings, there is the man who actually lost his testimony over the Danites looting and burning Galatin. Correlated history books are not always accurate. Most of the mormon history books are written by believing mormons who have selectively edited out much of the "unfaithful" history of the church, as instructed by Elder Boyd K. Packer. Unfortunately, history is history, and any editing which occurs is really just revisionism. The Nauvoo Expositor sought to warn new young female converts away from the sophistries of Joseph Smith, yet the LDS version mentions that the Nauvoo Expositor was simply an "anti-mormon" periodical that was "persecuting" the saints.

Please do not characterize those who leave the church as judgmental, condemning, and ridiculing. Many times these same qualities summarize the posture of the Church in dealing with historians and scholars who discover sensitive areas of church history, that the General Authorities have deemed "not very useful." Most of the people that I have met, who have left the church and found even higher spirituality in another religion or philosophy, are the kindest, nicest people you would like to meet. I continue to attend the LDS church as a member, and it pains me knowing there are many members of our church who claim to be christians, yet exhibit very little Christian love for those who are different from themselves. I only pray that we can all get along and treat one another with respect, without stereotyping.

Posted by: DV | November 25, 2006 2:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Mayan, first let me apologize for neglecting to post my name on that previous post. It was an oversight, and I'm glad you rightly deduced that it was from me.

I am not certain as to the cause of your speechlessness. Are you expressing offense at the fact that some people object to interracial marriage, or are you just surprised by the fact that I listed this among things that cause upset in some families? Perhaps you disagree with me, and would argue that nobody would ever be upset if their child married someone of another race? If so, I would suggest that you are being rather naive--but I suspect this is not the case. I would guess that you agree with me that while it is true that many families would not find this objectionable (I happen to adore my Latina sister-in-law, for example) this has certainly been a cause for divisiveness in some families.

I hope you are not reading something into my response that was not intended. Just to be clear, my intent was to list some non-religious things that I am aware have caused divisions within families, as an illustration that such divisions are a common human failing. I am not at this time making a judgment as to whether I think getting upset over the things I listed is justifiable (because that would take us way off topic), only to state that people DO get upset about them, and to point out that such feelings are not exclusive to religious differences in families.

My position would be that people are entitled to "feel" however they feel about all the things on the list, but there should be some expectation that *in spite of* the way they feel, they should be able to engage in civil interactions with one another. Some people, whether you and I like it or not, object to one degree or another to interracial marriages. This is just a fact of life. But in such a case, I would hope that if their child married someone of a different race, the parents would find it in themselves to be polite, and find a way to interact civilly with their child and their child's spouse, REGARDLESS of how they feel about it. And conversely, the couple should try to be compassionate toward the parents and treat them with love and courtesy. You don't have to agree with someone's choices in order to be polite.

Similarly, it is my position that if one of my children were to leave the LDS church, they should be able to expect me not to fly off the handle and kick them out of the family, but to be courteous and respect their autonomy even though I would strongly object to that choice. And I think I should be able to expect the same kind of civility from them that they want to see from me.

Again, just to clarify, my list was one of things about which I am aware that some people feel strongly, and about which "rancor" sometimes enters the dialog--NOT a list of things about which I feel it is appropriate to express "rancor", or of which I approve. My POINT was that such rancor is NEVER appropriate in interpersonal relationships, regardless of the issue, or whether we agree with the other person's position. In a civilized society it is reasonable to expect civilized behavior while still allowing room to hold strong opinions in opposition to one another. It is reasonable to expect courteous behavior even when we are expressing disagreement.

Posted by: Sister B. | November 25, 2006 2:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment

"i. am. speechless."

I am hoping that she meant that she acknowledges that there are some people in the world who would feel distressed if their child married someone of a different race. That she is acknowledging racism in others, not necessarily in herself.

Sister B:

I don't know if you have any first-hand experience with the type of shunning and family discord that occurs in Mormon families when a close relative leaves the faith. But Mayan, myself, and countless others in our same circumstances understand this all too well.

I disagree that it not unique to Mormonism. I think that the uniqueness of the doctrine of eternal families (and the flip side, eternal separation) brings in much more powerful emotions than you are admitting. Not to mention such teachings as the denial of the Holy Ghost being the unpardonable sin, the numerous prophetic warnings about associating with apostates, the fear of losing one's testimony, and the false notion that people who are inactive left the church because they were offended. The utter contempt for former believers and the "get thee hence" attitude that rains down from the pulpits, the temple recommend question that asks if you "associate with" apostates, the constant fear-mongering.

The teachings like this from Spencer Kimball:

"Apostasy usually begins with question and doubt and criticism. It is a retrograding and devolutionary process. The seeds of doubt are planted by unscrupulous or misguided people, and seldom directed against the doctrine at first, but more often against the leaders."

It's the church that gives the impression that all people who leave the faith are part of the "great and spacious building" who point and mock. One of the prevalent themes in the Book of Mormon is priestcraft, anti-christs, and apostasy--Sherem, Nehor, Korihor, Laman and Lemuel, and the Amlicites. A favorite story to tell in General Conference is that Thomas Marsh left the church over a dispute about milk and cream. A favorite scripture is "when they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God."

The church has even added another definition for apostasy to it's newest General Handbook of Instructions. It says that formally joining another church constitutes apostasy.

These kind of teachings about apostasy and apostates are not lost on the members. I have yet to find another mainstream church that has a similar emphasis on the dire consequences of leaving their particular denomination.

Some of these teachings may be subtle. But all of it has a profound effect on families.

Posted by: Lunar Quaker | November 25, 2006 2:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Anon/Sis. B said: "Or marries someone of a different race."

i. am. speechless.

for the rest of the commments, i will make time and come back for them. but for now, i am speechless. unbelievable.

Posted by: Mayan Elephant | November 25, 2006 1:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Mayan:

"thanks. great points. i especially appreciate the suggestion that perception changes the experience just as experience can change the perception."

Thanks, I calls 'em as I sees 'em. That's all. :)

"it is interesting that you consider it difficult for families, regardless of which religion or ideology, when a child veers from their inherited course..."

I don't think it's so much about "inherited" as it is about belief and personal identity. And it's not just religion. If a person believes strongly about ANYTHING, and tries to raise their children to believe the same way, the parent will feel hurt if the child chooses another path. It isn't so much about carrying on the "inherited" tradition as it is about rejecting beliefs that are so deeply held by a parent that it forms a part of the parent's identity. The same thing can happen as regards other areas of living and belief that form part of a person's identity--race, for example, or politics, culture of the country of a parent's origin, attitudes about education...lots of things. A parent might feel devestated if, after they tried to raise their child with an understanding of the importance of a college education and career, their child chooses to drop out of high school. A parent might feel rejected if a child who was encouraged to be a sports hero turns instead to competetive chess. Or if their child becomes a Republican. Or marries someone of a different race. It's just a human nature thing. It's not specific to Mormonism, and not even particularly specific to religion. And in my observation it has more to do with rejecting things the parents hold so deeply that it forms a significant part of the parent's personal sense of identity. Religion certainly falls under that umbrella for many people. Do Mormons need to work on this? Certainly. But I think it's a little shortsighted to blame the behavior on Mormonism when it is so pervasive among humans in general.

"...there are countless faith promoting anecdotes within the LDS faith about converts leaving their families to choose mormonism, and how great and worthwhile that sacrifice is for the individual. along with that is an expectation of respect from the converts family, or more, the hope that the rest of the converts family will follow. i dont see suggestions to converts to not join, or to temper their enthusiasm for mormonism, as a means of showing compassion toward the converts parents. i wish there was more of that. but its fo shizzle not the standard procedure."

Nor is this at all unique to Mormonism, as I am sure you will recognize given a little thought. I rather suspect you may have heard some "faith promoting anecdotes" about people who have left Mormonism over the objections of their families, for example, or we would likely not be having this conversation.

Leaving one's family is not necessary--or even encouraged--in order to join the LDS church. This does sometimes happen, yes, when reconciliation is impossible. But the church itself encourages converts to maintain their loving relationships with family members. Many converts do certainly hope that their families will eventually follow; they find great peace and joy in the teachings of the LDS church, and naturally wish for their families to find it too. I don't think there's anything particularly sinister about wanting to share something that brings you joy with the people whom you love the most. I do think it's reasonable that the convert should be able to expect a degree of respect and common courtesy from their family, and I think it equally reasonable that the family should expect the same courtesy and respect from their LDS family member. We can all be civilized, I think, even if we disagree.

As it happens, my husband is an adult convert to the church. And yes, I DO admire his strength in standing up for his convictions, regardless of who objects. I also respect his parents' strength in standing up for their own convictions. I greatly admire the way in which this disagreement over religion has been handled on both sides. There have been a few heated discussions in which feelings were sometimes hurt, but both sides have been able to forgive these because they love each other. That doesn't mean they agree with, or accept each other's position, or say that the differences don't matter. The differences do matter, and there are some areas in which there will be no agreement. But for vastly the most part, both sides are able to be polite even when they disagree. They are able to focus on areas where we do agree, and find common ground--some religious in nature, much just "family" in nature--on which we can all come together and love one another and have lots of positive interactions with each other. Disagreeing with someone, even about important things, does NOT mean you have to be hateful, sarcastic, preachy, or unpleasant about it. I respect that my in-laws have strong beliefs that differ from mine and their son's, and I cherish them for raising such a strong man who thinks these things through and then stands for what he believes--lovingly, gently, compassionately, but firmly. It takes great parents to raise a guy like that.

"...i know the drill for which you are referring all too well. it seems we both agree that this drill is sad and unproductive. so why is it so common?"

Again, I'm convinced that this is just part of human nature. That's not an excuse--the "everyone does it" thing--it's just the way it is. I do think it's something that we should strive to overcome in ourselves, and encourage those with whom we come in contact to overcome as well. I think, in fact, that being able to act in a civilized manner in spite of what our "human nature" gut instinctual reaction might be, is part of what separates us from the animals. We are able to choose to act contrary to our "nature" when we understand that doing so is preferable.

"...do you consider this an extreme extension of this thread topic, meaning, can both sides dialog without rancor, judgments and insults when it involves a change of faith, parents and children?"

I think it's a fair extension of the topic. Can we engage without rancor? Can we do so even under particularly trying circumstances? I think we can, and I think God expects us to do so. The principle is the same regardless of the circumstances. If it's not ok to steal, then it's not ok to steal no matter how much you want that doohickey, or how many such doohickeys the owner may already possess. If it's "good" to be able to dialog without rancor, then it's "good" to do so even when it's particularly difficult, such as in parent/child relationships.

"i have heard a wise woman say to me and others, regarding mormonism and mixed-faith families, "it is just church." you sorta kinda exclaim that same point. its just like other churches, the reaction is the same as other churches."

I think I must not have been clear on this. I am not saying "it is just church". What I'm saying is "they're just people". My position on this would not be that the LDS church is just like other churches, but rather that the people in the LDS church are just as human as people in other churches. People are people. They act like people. LDS people are still just people like everyone else. I would also not say that the reaction is the same as other *churches*, because different churches have different teachings about how to relate to a family member who leaves the fold, and I wouldn't presume to say that they are all the same in their *teachings* about this when I know they are not. But I would say that people, being human, sometimes react in ways that are consistent with their human nature even when their church teaches them something else. Joining the LDS church is not a destination at which perfect people who react perfectly in all situations get together to pat each other on the back and look down their noses at other people. It's not a destination at all, it's a beginning. We're all imperfect people who react imperfectly, who are learning and growing and reaching toward (among other things) a better way of "being", but who have not yet achieved all our goals in that respect. We make mistakes, we lose our cool, we sometimes do things that we regret. Sometimes our relationships are not all that we would wish. But that's not because we're "Mormon", it's because we're "human".

The church *is* different from other churches. But people are people regardless of what church they are in. You don't stop being human just because you get baptized. This was my point.

"...why i think it can be trickier, is that mormons believe they are it: the one true church. gods church. jesus is at the helm. as the restored everything church, something should be different. the fact that its not different, and that in terms of the friction between parents and children it is often worse, is a fairly obvious fruit by which one concludes that this is just another church. an institiution, no different than many others. sure there are some good things, but we can see from the many on faith contributors that good things are not unique to mormonism."

What being the "one true church" means is probably better left to a different thread, as I think it could take on a life of its own here and I don't want to get too far off topic. But it doesn't mean we think we're better than other people, it has more to do with how close to objective truth about God the teachings are.

I agree with you that something should be different. I believe that something IS different. The fact that we are "different" is one of the things that seems to stir up so much controversy. We believe different things, and we (imperfectly) behave in different ways. But believing differently, and behaving differently doesn't make us a different species than the rest of the human race. We have our struggles, the same as everyone else.

I would be interested to see where you get your information about "friction between parents and children" being "worse" among Mormons. I've seen several studies which concluded that Mormons in general have unusually good familial relationships and a positive rapport between parents and children. I don't dispute that there are exceptions, of course, but in general relationships in Mormon families are quite good compared to the general population. Even many of our detractors point to strong, close, loving families as being characteristic of the LDS faith--one of the "good things" in the LDS church. (Incidentally, this is again somewhat off topic, but the LDS church does teach that there is much good, and much truth in other religions.)

"it sounds to me, sis. b, that if your children chose to follow another faith that you would be kind and welcoming. you would be open to their decision and not have the disappointment that they were rejecting you as their eternal perpetual family. rather, you would welcome their exploration. that is great. if its true that that is your position, you will have great shared experiences with your kid[s]."

On the contrary, I would be devastated if my children chose to follow another faith. I sincerely hope they never do. That being case, I do encourage them to explore and ask questions. I think this is a vital step toward gaining a sound understanding and lasting faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ as it taught in the LDS church. They are still quite young, but already asking very insightful questions and seeking real answers. I encourage them in this and assist however I can. I make sure they know what I believe and how I arrived at that belief, as well as what I DONT believe and why.

If either of my children ever did choose to follow another faith, I hope that in spite of my feelings on the subject I would always be able to be polite and gracious to them and continue to have great shared experiences with them. This would be greatly aided if my children could be compassionate toward me, and would be as respectful of my choices as they would like me to be of theirs. It would be made harder if they mocked me, or spoke contemptuously of things that are sacred to me. This unfortunately seems to be the sort of thing many parents face if their children leave the church. Many children demand tolerance and acceptance from their parents while at the same time judging, condemning, lecturing, and ridiculing their parents. Some faith communities encourage this sort of behavior in their members toward LDS family members.

I think it's sad whenever this kind of attitude is present in interfaith families, regardless of who is doing it to whom. As I said before I think it's unproductive and uncivilized. I hope never to be in that position, but pray that if I ever am I will be able with God's help to handle it with kindness and compassion in spite of how I know I would feel under those circumstances.

Posted by: Anonymous | November 24, 2006 11:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Sister B:

thanks. great points. i especially appreciate the suggestion that perception changes the experience just as experience can change the perception.

it is interesting that you consider it difficult for families, regardless of which religion or ideology, when a child veers from their inherited course. there are countless faith promoting anecdotes within the LDS faith about converts leaving their families to choose mormonism, and how great and worthwhile that sacrifice is for the individual. along with that is an expectation of respect from the converts family, or more, the hope that the rest of the converts family will follow. i dont see suggestions to converts to not join, or to temper their enthusiasm for mormonism, as a means of showing compassion toward the converts parents. i wish there was more of that. but its fo shizzle not the standard procedure.

i know the drill for which you are referring all too well. it seems we both agree that this drill is sad and unproductive. so why is it so common? do you consider this an extreme extension of this thread topic, meaning, can both sides dialog without rancor, judgments and insults when it involves a change of faith, parents and children?

i have heard a wise woman say to me and others, regarding mormonism and mixed-faith families, "it is just church." you sorta kinda exclaim that same point. its just like other churches, the reaction is the same as other churches.

why i think it can be trickier, is that mormons believe they are it: the one true church. gods church. jesus is at the helm. as the restored everything church, something should be different. the fact that its not different, and that in terms of the friction between parents and children it is often worse, is a fairly obvious fruit by which one concludes that this is just another church. an institiution, no different than many others. sure there are some good things, but we can see from the many on faith contributors that good things are not unique to mormonism.

it sounds to me, sis. b, that if your children chose to follow another faith that you would be kind and welcoming. you would be open to their decision and not have the disappointment that they were rejecting you as their eternal perpetual family. rather, you would welcome their exploration. that is great. if its true that that is your position, you will have great shared experiences with your kid[s].

Posted by: Mayan Elephant | November 24, 2006 3:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Mayan,

I am definitely aware that not all women, in the church or out of it, share my views. I think to some degree a person's views on this are influenced by his or her experiences, and to some degree one's experiences are interpreted through one's views. I may experience intolerance toward women and interpret it as the intolerant person's deviation from LDS teachings, whereas another person may experience intolerance toward women and interpret it as being caused by the church's teachings. This would depend, in part, on our understanding of what the church teaches regarding the relationship between men and women.

Be that as it may, the vast majority of LDS men I have met are very respectful of women, and have in turn earned my respect. There is certainly present within the LDS church, the whole spectrum of humanity, however, and all that comes with that. You are right, though, that the subject of women is in many ways a hot-button topic when it comes to religious faith, and this probably not the most appropriate place to delve deeply into it. I appreciate you keeping us on topic.

Regarding your other comments, I would like to just point out that this reaction to a loved one choosing a different religious path from his or her family is not unique to Mormonism. I have met people who were raised in many different faiths whose parents had the same kind of reaction--you're going to hell, you're a child of Satan, you have turned your back on your family, you are abandoning your ancestors, Allah will curse you, you are no longer my son, I would rather you had died, the best I can hope for you now is limbo, I can't believe you've been stupid enough to get brainwashed into this religion mumbo jumbo when I raised to to be smarter than to delude yourself into believing in a God....you know the drill.

I think that any time a family has strong religious views (and in many ways secularism and atheism function as religious systems), parents and relatives do feel a painful degree of rejection and loss when a child turns his or her back on it. Yes it is definitely sad, and I do think that the parents need to be able to work through that in as peaceful and loving a way as possible. But I think that it would also be nice if the child in the scenario would be a little more compassionate toward the parents. It's a difficult situation from both sides, and villianizing one side or the other is not helpful.

Posted by: Sister B. | November 24, 2006 12:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Annie. Right on. Here is a raised glass to the first discussion in many languages.

Sister B. I disagree with a whole whole bunch of what you have said, though i dont feel this is the thread to discuss it. Perhaps the hosts of the site will invite us all to comment on women's issues and women in LDS church at some point. i dont see that this is the proper thread for it.

I admit that I was part of the hijacking with my comments about spokeswomen, I will respond on that to otterson in another place. my bad. sorry bout that.

i would like to add though, there are many in your congregation that disagree with you and your views. i was one. i have been on all the councils you mention, and more. i have started the morning with bishopric meeting, priesthood executive committee, ward council, then a three hour block, then bishops youth council yada yada yada. been there. i have done the same with stake high councils, aaronic priesthood committee, etc. done that too. and its my observation, that women and their experiences are not properly weighted. meaning, there is heirarchy that shuts down the dialog regarding women.

on topic. i dont ask that everyone change their views. i dont ask that women get the priesthood. i dont ask that the church apologize, though it wouldnt hurt. all i ask, is that the tone of the conversation changes and for increased allowance for others to rise up and say - it aint for me. just once, i would like to see the leadership beg parents to cease the judgment of their children that are not pleased with the experience. there is too much pain in families where parents and children and siblings choose to leave the mormon church. i actually dont mind the rancor that is common on websites, i despise the rancor that comes in the form of letters from a parent that says, for example, "you have turned your life over to satan, you havent prayed enough, you have always lacked sufficient faith, you are doing a disservice to your children, you are displaying a lack of love by not wanting to be a forever family, etc, etc, etc."

that is the rancor that i despise. the rancor about 9 plus versions of the first vision - i love it. the rancor that creates harsh tension in an interfaith or heretic househould, i despise.

Posted by: Mayan Elephant | November 23, 2006 12:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Interestingly, one complaint I hear from my Christian friends of various denominations is that many men no longer feel greatly inclined to attend church or to participate in church leadership. Many men say they feel that there is no real place for them at church. They feel that the women are doing a great job with the administration, and with the ministry, which they think is great, but they don't feel needed anymore at church. Some have also said that the style of the worship services in their churches are subtly geared to appeal more to women, as far as the music, the topics covered, and the manner in which the service is handled. Evidently, in many Christian churches there is quite a high ratio of men to women. Mothers take children to church, but fathers don't feel a need to participate.

All of this is to say that one function an all-male priesthood serves is to keep the men involved, to carve out a place where they feel needed. Women do actually serve in administrative positions within the church. The programs for women and children (of which there are many more than men in the church) are administered entirely by women. There is no place for men in the Relief Society, Primary, or Young Women's organizations. Yes, these organizations are "supervised" by the bishop. If this were not the case, husbands and fathers would be pretty much excluded from the picture entirely. I think it is a good thing to allow the men some form of input. I have never known a bishop to be heavy-handed in micromanaging any of these programs. In fact, since "priesthood" in the LDS church is more about service than about exherting power, the function of the bishop in regards to the programs administered by women is largely to make sure the women have what they need in order to do their jobs. The presidents of these organizations (who are all women, and always women) do indeed serve on the bishop's counsel, and have a voice there equal to that of the men on the counsel. Their input is sought, respected, and frequently implemented in the church. The structure is similar on stake and general levels.

LDS women can pray in church, they can teach at church, they speak in worship services. They serve in church music positions, and minister to those in need. Women perform all the same functions as men in the church with the exception of a few administrative and ceremonial ones.

As a mother, I have a particular kind of bond with my children. I carry them inside my body, and nurse them at my breast. Only I can do these things for them. Their father cannot. Men are excluded from these bonding activities. My husband and I both can (and do) teach our children, discipline our children, hold and cuddle our children--but men do lack those special maternal bonding functions that only women can do. When children are ill or struggling in some other way, they turn most often to their mothers, not to their fathers. Organizing things so that only a man (usually the father) can give a baby a name and blessing (similar to a Christening) or baptize and confirm a child, my husband now also has his special bonding moments with our children, that only their father, not their mother, can do. I find that this helps to keep us on more balanced ground with our children and with each other. When the children are ill or struggling, they know they can go to their mother for that special brand of comfort and counsel that only a mother can give. But they ALSO know they can go to their father for a priesthood blessing or advice.

In my opinion, based on my personal observations of LDS congregations and those of other faiths, having the "priesthood" (but not the ministry) be exclusive to men, the sexes are placed on more even footing. Equality is better preserved.

(And, interestingly enough, this is an aspect of my own faith which I learned mainly through civil dialog with members of other faiths. I'm not sure I would have really thought about it in this way without discussing the functions of men and women with people who had observed the imbalance in their own congregations. I find I often learn things in this way, and I think Bro. Otterson has a good point in saying that we can learn from one another. We may never agree with one another, but we may find our outlooks expanded by honest, polite discourse.)

Posted by: Sister B | November 23, 2006 10:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Lunar- My relation of the account was for others, I was aware that Equality already knew it. Some didn't, I thought it would help to bring it up. I do apologize if my remarks on men were over the top. I meant no offense, merely to point out that women have been shown to be more innate nurturers. There was a classier way to put it, and I'm sorry.
Mayan Elephant-So can I. :) However I would like to say that I meant no disrespect to others who decide for themselves that this faith is not what they are looking for. You have every right to expect respect from others on your beliefs, and I have every right to hold mine dear, while examining the genuine good in others. I appreciate those who have looked for that good in my faith. The point of the website is to learn about one another. I was telling the account that my faith background comes from in order to try and foster some understanding and answer questions.
Wish you all the best in your quest for understanding. Thanks for the eye opener.
-Annie

Posted by: Annie Laurie | November 22, 2006 10:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Annie,

wow wow wow. very impressive. i can tell that same story in multiple languages. whadya think of that?

there are countless websites dedicated to the topics you summarized. there are countless rebuttals.

i would like to take this back to the topic of discussion/debate/dialog sans rancor. before i do that, let me just highlight a few things for other readers. Annie summarized *A* version of mormon history. its true that this is almost exactly what is taught to young children and to teens and new members. she has all the buzz in her story.

there are several things that are missing. for example, smith was a polygamist, he married young girls and already-married women, he never told the vision story as you just read it, that is the version taken from his mothers journal, he gave several contradicting versions of the story. there were no witnesses of the actual "gold". the witnesses touched plates, who knows if they were gold or iron. nobody is a witness to the gold. joseph stuck his face in a hat and while staring at a rock in a hat he spoke the text that is the book of mormon. the book of mormon is a supposed record of america, but it includes such fantastic records of horses and elephants (hmmmm, mayan elephants)it is more practical to be considered as mythological as the old testament. the chronology of the many events annie mentions are suspect, to say the least.

there, nuff said on that topic.

i wish one of the many women that have a mormon heritage and have contributed to the world in a similar way as other on faith panelists have could represent the church on this site. its unfortunate that some of these panelists are people that have lived their spirituality outwardly and faced many challenges, and the mormons representative is a professional marketer and employee responsible for protecting the message of the church. i wish a woman was in that role. it will never be.

as for the rancor. annie brought this all home for us very succinctly. it is core to the religion that it is all or nothing. its ALL true, or its all a sham. and by faith, promptings of the 'spirit', etc, one will know that it is true, or a sham. however, what is not in her message is this part - the underlying assumption in this faith is that the story is true, and if you do not believe it, then there is something wrong with the person, not the story. that to me is the undertone of rancor. its not loud, but it cuts like a knife.

i wish rancor could leave these discussions. i really do. i wish there was sympathy for those that believe that a man who says he saw god, but cant get the facts straight, may not have seen him after all. i wish there was empathy for women that had greater ambitions than to bow their veiled head and pledge allegiance to a man. i wish there was respect for those that did ask, and came away with the response that it was a sham. thats all. i am of mormon heritage annie. i wish that mormons believed that families are forever. instead, mormons believe that MORMON families are forever, and if you think its a sham, your reward in heaven, is seperation. yikes.

so, really, i want less rancor. i want less at the pulpit and at the press rooms that affect my family and friends the most.

and that is what is wanted.

Posted by: Mayan Elephant | November 22, 2006 7:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Annie Laurie -

Equality is familiar with the First Vision story as taught by the church. As he said, he has been a member of the LDS church for nearly 20 years, has served in stake and ward leadership positions, and graduated from BYU. I don't see how a review of the church's version of events adds anything to this discussion.

I've been a member of the churh my entire life. I served a mission, graduated from BYU, married in the temple, and have served in numerous priesthood leadership positions. Until recently, I even did my home teaching every month.

You demean men by saying that they do not have a natural inclination to serve others and to extend themselves.

Posted by: Lunar Quaker | November 22, 2006 6:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

First, sincere apologies, Mr. Equality. >grin Second, I wasn't referring to budgets or organizational decisions. I was referring to the molding of civilizations. This is the high honor I hold as a woman. I feel that being a mother and a wife is in some ways a sacrifice, but one I would willingly make in order to increase the level of goodness in the next generation. I learned as a missionary in Washington DC that I would never have as much influence on anyone in this world than I could have on my own children. The priesthood is a complementary organization that helps men learn how to serve others and extend themselves (something women are wired with)
Third, let me exlpain the 'Mormon' story. :) I wish I could sit in a room with you all and talk about this, it would be so much nicer.
In the 1800's, there was a religious movement known in our country as the Great Awakening. Young America was flexing its religious muscles with zeal; the problem was the many varying ways in which the leaders of the Christian faith interpreted the Bible. Some believed in baptism by immersion, some by sprinkling, and others felt that it wasn't even a necessary ordinance. Around this time a young man named Joseph Smith (don't turn up your nose at that name yet, just let me finish)was trying to figure out what was right, or even if there was a right. He listened to several sermons, read the Bible, and came to a conclusion. At the ripe age of 14, he realized he didn't know everything. He could never figure out by himself whether or not the Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians or Catholics had it right. One day he was reading in James 3:5 ," If any of ye lack wisdom, let him ask of God that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth[or chastize] not, and it shall be given him."
Taking the verse at face value, Joseph decided to kneel in a grove of trees apart from his home and pray vocally. He offered a prayer to know which church to join. In answer, Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him, and said-and this is critical- that he should join none of them. Not that the other churches did not have any truth at all, nor that their members were somehow lesser. The fact was that the authority to act in God's name was, according to my beliefs, lost after the apostles in Christ's day were killed. Reformation wasn't enough-there needed to be a restoration of that which was lost.
Joseph, an imperfect, unschooled, young person was given that authority, along with several others. There were other witnesses, as is indicated in the first pages of the Book of Mormon-with the exception of his first vision. That is the testing point for everyone. He either saw what he said he saw, and Christ's gospel has been restored in its purity, or he didn't see it and this whole thing is a sham.
Joseph wasn't perfect, no one is, so to assume the leaders or the members are going to be is to arrange for failure. However, it is possible for the doctrine to be perfect, and I think the whole idea is that if you follow perfect doctrine, eventually (wayyyy down the line) we'll get the hang of being decent to one another. :)
The nature of faith is that you don't always get to see with your natural eyes. Opportunists and dishonest people take advantage of that, and they shouldn't-but that shouldn't negate the fact that one can pray and ask God whether or not a thing actually happened, and fully expect to receive an answer from him. On issues of faith, I believe it is too important for him not to answer.
Incidentally, the missionaries are the answer for making it easier to tell people about Joseph and the restoration. They share the gospel and what has brought them joy, inviting and then allowing the individual/family to decide for themselves whether or not it is right or something they wish to incorporate in their lives. Usually they're only 19-21 year olds, so if they don't know something, cut them some slack and ask them to figure it out with you. That's what they are giving up two years of their lives to do.

Posted by: Annie Laurie | November 22, 2006 5:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Endurance -

The doctrines are not difficult to believe once you have accepted the foundational claims of the church. When the church teaches the missionary discussions, one of the key objectives is to get the prospective convert to gain a personal conviction of Joseph Smith as a prophet and the Book of Mormon as the word of God. The reasoning is that these convictions provide the foundation for believing the rest of the Mormon story.

The problem is that the Mormon story does not hold up to scrutiny. Some would argue that certain questions, such as the existence of a supreme being, lie outside the realm of scientific and historical inquiry. I can accept that. In contrast, the foundational events of the Mormon church only happened within the last 200 years, and are thus open to investigation.

It does not make sense that God would place mountains of contradictory evidence in the paths of His children when his work and glory is to bring to pass their immortality and eternal life. Seems pretty counterproductive.

Posted by: Lunar Quaker | November 22, 2006 4:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Thank you Endurance. This is so true. You are inspiring with your message. I agree that Heavenly Father puts obstacles in our path.

In the Book of Mormon there are wars and more wars. Almost every chapter has contention in it and we see that the people keep learning when they are in tough times and get lazy when they are prosperous. That is good to know and it gives me great comfort to know that God sees the Iraq war we are in today and it is helping people to grow closer to Heavenly Father and come unto Christ.

I think the war and religious conversations help us to learn more about each other and teach about the Plan for each of us. This is Gods way of helping us. And its not mean or tricky if you consider that this life is just an instant of our eternal lives.

Posted by: Sessions | November 22, 2006 2:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Why does God place so many obstacles in our path to Eternal Life? Would he provide such exhausting tests and if so, is He sadistic and cruel?

In my experience, obstacles are nearly always present in the path toward any goal worth obtaining. I enjoy mountain climbing--especially the final act of reaching a summit. But I can't think of any climb where I didn't feel exhausted along the way, and on some of them I have become too sick or discouraged to continue. Is it worth it? For many people who don't climb, the answer is an easy "no way!"

Disciples of Christ faced serious obstacles in their belief and many deserted the Lord when his doctrine seemed to be far outside the mainstream. In Chapter 6 of John they were reported to have said: "This is an hard saying; who can hear it?" and "From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him." When the Lord then asked the twelve if they would also leave him, Peter testified of Jesus' divinity, saying: "to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life." (John 6:60-68)

That attitude perfectly frames my own testimony of Him and His Church. Swimming against the current isn't easy, but in doing so I receive strength. He wants us to struggle and gain our own conviction of the truth, for if it were just given to us, we wouldn't treasure it. The beautiful pattern of struggle against difficult odds is repeated throughout nature and in our lives. He loves us! He isn't cruel, but He knows how to make His children stronger.

_______________
My comments are based on personal experience and my own limited understanding of truth. I am not a significant leader in or official spokesperson for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Posted by: Endurance | November 22, 2006 1:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I want to clarify that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and that I have been a member in good standing since the 1960s. I am not here to ask "anti" style questions or "de-convert" anyone. I go to church every week and have many friends in my ward, and enjoy serving in the youth organizations of the church.

My confusion stems from the fact that the institutional church seems bent on creating an atmosphere of disinformation. On the one hand, the church renounced polygamy officially in 1890. On the other hand, D&C Section 132 continues to be authoritative scripture that was never renounced, and men are sealed to multiple women in the LDS temples today. What gives?

When even General Authorities today are being sealed to multiple wives in the temple, and the PR arm of the church is loudly proclaiming that we do not practice polygamy, then something is wrong. Full disclosure is a concept the church could find enlightening. Medical practitioners routinely give their patients full disclosure regarding risky medical procedures they are about to receive. Our church could take a more pro-active stance and explain to the membership and to society in general our current policy regarding polygamy, without demonizing the FLDS church or it's leaders. Especially when the FLDS church has the same founder as our church, Joseph Smith.

Another thing that would be productive would be full disclosure about the life of Joseph Smith. As a youth I was taught that Joseph Smith did not actively participate in polygamy. Now I have learned that he actually taught polygamy since around 1834, and married at least 33 polygamous wives during his lifetime, starting with Fanny Alger. He also fathered children with them. His wives included 14 year old girls, and his own adopted daughters, which I was never made aware of growing up. This is distinctly difference from what I was taught in all those years in Sunday School, Seminary, and Institute class in which I was always a top student.

Since polygamy is a current societal issue, with Warren Jeffs being on the FBI's most wanted list recently, I would expect my church's leaders to embrace this opportunity to explain the rich history of polygamy in our church, starting with Joseph Smith, and not run from our history. Reluctance to discuss a topic would tend to indicated that there is something to hide, and on a number of occasions President Hinckley has told the media that we really have nothing to hide, as a church. Then it is really not too much to ask to be more open about our past, that's all.

Posted by: DV | November 22, 2006 1:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Equality, i think annie was referring to heresy, not hearsay, though you still make a great point in your comments.

Annie, do you know chris rock? he does a schtick about dads paying their child support and not going to jail. the gist of it is that dads arent supposed to go to jail and if that is any measure whatsoever of ones daddingness, then that person has low expectations.

I draw great parallels with this chris rock's message and this discussion. of course people should dialog without rancor. thats not a higher standard. you are not supposed to have rancor. claiming to not have rancor or having the expectation to avoid it is not the higher ground, its just choosing the right. thats all.

if you notice, i linked to lds.org ahead of your post. i was pointing out that the original poster and his organization do NOT engage in debate without rancor. they do not provide allowances for those of different faiths and standards. quite the contrary, brother otterson orchestrated a powerful message suggesting something different, and here claims to be rancorless.

i agree with you completely annie. everyone should read lds.org if they have an interest in this faith. along with that, they should read FAIR, FARMS, Evergreen, Sunstone, Bruce McConkie and the Holy Order of Things as delivered by Mr. Packard. In doing so, one can approach that non-hearsay and non-rumored position that you suggest.

for what its worth, i maintain a connection to this church and always will. i would love nothing more than to see the dialog within the institution match the standards otterson suggest, being, a dialog sans rancor. i dont just mean reverent conversation in soft voices, but rather, softer conversations that allow for inter-faith families and heresy. yes, heresy, not hearsay.

Posted by: Mayan Elephant | November 22, 2006 12:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Sister Laurie,

I think that the discussion could be productive if the person who originally posted the entry on how to engage in nonrancorous discourse (i.e., Brother Otterson) would actually join the discussion and answer some of the questions that have respectfully been put to him.

I am happy that you have made a contribution to the church by serving in positions in the LDS church. However, you know as well as I do that any position a woman holds in the LDS church is in an _auxiliary_ organization. Women do _not_ hold the Priesthood and women do _not_ serve in any council with actual administrative power in the church. There are no _independent_ women's organizations in the LDS church. Women can serve in the Primary (the children's organization), which at the local level is under the authority of the all-male Bishopric, at the stake level is under the authority of the all-male Stake Presidency and all-male Stake High Council, and which at the General level is under the authority of the all-male First Presidency, and the all-male Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Ditto for the church's women's auxiliary, the Relief Society. The fact is women are at the mercy of male authorities for their budgeting and, ultimately, for all decisions that are made. Women have no independent authority in the LDS Church.

You imply that the people who have posted pointed questions here are basing their views on hearsay and rumour. I assure you that is not the case. I have been a member of the LDS Church for close to 20 years and have served in numerous ward and stake leadership positions. I am even a graduate of BYU. I know some of the others who have posted comments here served two-year missions for the church, have been through the temple, served in the church, and are all-too-familiar with the subjects being addressed here.

I would recommend that you broaden your horizins a bit in your education about the LDS church. You might find that the missionaries and lds.org are not necessarily going to tell you the whole story. For starters, you can go to www.equalitysblog.typepad.com. BTW, it's Mr. Equality. :-)

Incidentally, I don't see any "bashing" in this thread. It is my experience, though, that sometimes true-believing Mormons view any questioning or criticism of any aspect of their faith as "anti-Mormon" and "bashing" and "contentious." I think rather than simply characterizing the comments of those who ask sincere, thoughtful questions as "narrowminded" you might instead attempt to answer them. That, I think, would lead to the kind of productive dialogue Brother Otterson suggests we ought to engage in (though, ironically, he remains on the sidelines of the discussion he started).

Posted by: Equality | November 22, 2006 11:42 AM
Report Offensive Comment

My friends,
You are missing the whole point. Your conversation has diminished into the very thing Mr. Otterson was trying to help you avoid. Comparison and exchanges of religious ideas, and an appreciation for different thoughts, if not acceptance of them, is the advocation here. True open-mindedness in stead of narrow-minded bashing is what Mr. Otterson was encouraging.
For those who would like further clarification on the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, I advise you to go to LDS.org, request two LDS missionaries to come explain things to you, and read the Book of Mormon for yourselves. That's the best way to learn first-hand, instead of basing opinion on heresay and rumor.
(As a sidenote, Ms. Equality, I am a woman, and have served in several meaningful leadership positions in the church. I would be happy to elaborate on the high role that women play in the church and in Heavenly Father's plan for us.)
Another website you may find interesting is whymormonism.org-it's not the official site but it is helpful.

Posted by: Annie Laurie | November 22, 2006 10:14 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Dear Lunar Quaker,

That is about the only sincere and non-rhetorical question I have seen posted on this thread. Good for you!

As you addressed your inquiry to Endurance I will not bother to answer.

Happy Thanksgiving to all! May your travels be safe.

Lug...out

Posted by: Lug Nutmegger | November 22, 2006 9:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I haven't read all the comments yet, and maybe this has already been addressed. This caught my eye, though, skimming down the list.

Ben R:
"When a court asks a prospective juror, "Do you have any belief about the guilt of the accused?" the idea is to get exclude from the dialogue people who are unlikely to weigh the evidence fairly. They are not productive interlocutors."

It strikes me that not everyone in a courtroom is a juror, or a prospective juror. In all trials there are people called "witnesses". When interviewing a witness, as opposed to a prospective juror, one would expect the witness to at least begin the interview from a position of relative certainty as to the subject about which he is testifying. If he cannot state that he's at least reasonably sure of the "facts" of which he is providing evidence (according to his point of view and understanding of the circumstances, naturally), then he is useless as a witness. Is this kind of "certainty" dogmatism? Do we, as jurors, dismiss his testimony merely BECAUSE he is adament as to his point of view regarding the "facts"? Is he then an unproductive interlocutor because he is not neutral in the case?

I am not at all sure that everyday conversation should be construed as a jury trial, but if we do accept that analogy, then surely we must people the courtroom with more than just prospective jurors? There would also be witnesses, presumably with contradictory testimony. While the "jurors" on the sidelines of the debate may be trying to make up their minds as to the facts of the case before them, it is certainly appropriate for the witnesses to present their evidence in a "dogmatic" (to use your word) manner. It is, in fact, the "dogmatic" witness testimony that assists the juror in reaching a decision. If no one with an opinion as to the guilt of the defendant is ever admitted to the courtroom and given a fair hearing, then the entire procedure is pointless.

In dialog about religion, there is no jury format--no "unbiased" committee to decide on the merits of the case (except perhaps for God, for those who believe in one). Each individual has to make up his or her own mind on the matter. But wouldn't it be pointless to do so without seriously listening to, and considering, the opinion of those who believe themselves to be right? What is a juror to do, who has no evidence to weigh?

In the mean time there are a few things, at least, that most civilized people can agree on. Fairness comes to mind, civility, honesty, respect for the property of others...that sort of thing. Can we not at least begin with this sort of "common ground" even if we never agree on the specifics? Can a person not maintain a degree of common courtesy even to a person they believe to be seriously misguided, or even mentally ill? Or is disagreement on one point grounds to throw out civilization, pull out our stone hatchets, and have at one another?

Posted by: That One | November 22, 2006 2:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Endurance said:

"critics of the Church want to be heard and most are sincere, but the criticisms are so numerous and many are so lengthy (and address so many points) that I can't respond intelligently to them or even make a cursory reading."

Fair enough. I suppose this is because the critics have the upper hand, since there are so many criticisms to choose from.

Let me choose just one, Endurance, and you are welcome to respond to it. Why would God declare the Mormon church to be the "only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth," hold Joseph Smith and Gordon B. Hinckley up as His mouthpieces, declare that the ordinances in the Mormon temple are the only means of receiving exaltation, and yet place so many obstacles in His childrens' paths so as to make it impossible for many of them to believe any of it? Do you think it's a test? If so, then God is sadistic and cruel. If not, then God doesn't have an ounce of logic in Him.

Posted by: Lunar Quaker | November 22, 2006 2:05 AM
Report Offensive Comment

James said, "As for religious cermonies in temples, they are not so much 'secret' as they are 'sacred'"

Funny the old version (pre 1990) did call it 'secret' not 'sacred'. This distinction between sacred and secret magically appeared in 1990. Just google it.

Posted by: Texasguy | November 21, 2006 9:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Equality, than could Otterson define for me what he projects as "dogmatic fundamentalism"? I am the first to admit that I hold to fundamentals of Scripture, and love being one of them.

Sincerely,

___________
www.heartissuesforlds.org

Posted by: Todd Wood | November 21, 2006 3:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Thank you, Equality, for posing questions that address the original subject and Otterson's response. I'd like to ask a favor of all who will respond to Otterson's posts: let's all stay on the current topic and question, and make our posts no lengthier than his.

I understand that critics of the Church want to be heard and most are sincere, but the criticisms are so numerous and many are so lengthy (and address so many points) that I can't respond intelligently to them or even make a cursory reading. I know some of you are offended or even angry about Church doctrine, or something you've seen a Church member do. But the longer and more rancorous the tone, the less likely I will read it, and many of my friends feel the same way. I’ll look at your criticism if you’ll make it answerable.

I believe you want a dialogue on these subjects as much as I do, and I offer to succinctly discuss the original question with those who will do the same. To do otherwise would be to take yourself "out of the conversation entirely" as Otterson anticipated.

Posted by: Endurance | November 21, 2006 2:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Mr. Otterson said, "Since we can all learn from each other,"

Mr. Otterson, this is an interesting quote from the spokesperson (wait, I mean "spokesman"; certainly the LDS Church would never have a female in such a high position; after all, women in the LDS Church were not allowed to pray in Sacrament Meeting until 1978 and there are no women in the governing councils of the LDS Church at any level).

Can you please tell us, kind sir, what the LDS Church thinks it can learn from, say, the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Buddhists, Sikhs, and/or Jews? My understanding of LDS doctrine is that Jesus Himself told the Prophet Joseph Smith that all other churches were wrong (I think the word used to describe their beliefs in the "official" account of the so-called First Vision is "abomination."), that the members of other churches are all "corrupt" and honor God with their lips but "in their hearts are far from" Him.

And according to Mormon scripture, the LDS Church is the "only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth with which the Lord is well pleased." Mormons have a living prophet, who allegedly receives revelation direct from God on an ongoing consistent basis (the "voice from heaven is a continuing thunderous appeal").

So what exactly does the one true church have to learn from those who belong to churches that Jesus Himself said were "all wrong."

Posted by: Equality | November 21, 2006 12:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment

In response to HYRUM:

Here's an "LDS friendly poster" responding to you. Frankly, your post is so full of anti-Mormon hype that all I see is an attack on the Church.

This blog is on inter-faith discussion, not history. Besides, I don't even know where you learned about every "mistake" you cite against the Church. Mormons have never claimed that their history is flawless. They are people like anyone else, prone to mistakes. The Church is another matter. If you observe the Mormon faith, what you do find is a consistency of doctrine. Interpretations of individuals, including Church presidents, may vary, or could be wrong. The Church does not claim to have infallible leaders.

As for religious cermonies in temples, they are not so much 'secret' as they are 'sacred'. I have not been through a temple, so I don't know about the rites performed in their, but one of the reasons they aren't publicly known is to avoid exactly the kind of attack you make on them. Since you don't really know what is going on, then you shouldn't try to pass judgement on their ordinances.

It is the harsh, dogmatic rhetoric such as yours that makes a discussion on religion difficult. History does not change faith. As for the few historians, scholars, and scientists you say the Church has punished for "publishing documented history," I am sure there are many historians, scholars, and scientist that would disagree with what they published. Also, if members were to base their loyalty to the Church on history, then it wouldn't be faith, would it?

The Mormons have had plenty of experience fending off rhetoric such as yours. The reason they protect their history so much is that the desire to avoid contentious dialoge with people of other faiths. Why should they let historians use their documents to twist the truth and attack them? The Church doesn't try to cover up any wrong doings, but they have the right to protect their history.

In all, the Church maintains a PR firm to ease its interfaith discussions. People with such positions as yours make the kind of discussions which Otterson speaks of difficult. The point is to respect the beliefs and faiths of others though you may not believe them. If you want others to respect your beliefs, respect theirs.

Once you have mutual respect, discussion on faith can have actual meaning. Debate is not discussion. The Mormons don't convert people by going out and bashing other faiths; they find success by respecting those they talk with and building upon the commonality between them. Contention hardens people, but understanding opens the door for meaningful discussion and increased tolerance. And though the different sides may have srong, opposing positions, if their is mutal respect, common ground can be found and coexistence is possible.

Posted by: James | November 21, 2006 12:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment

otterson:

your comments are truly offensive to the informed.

for example, your closing gem, "This is not putting style over substance. It is simply recognizing that people who aren’t willing to discuss things with mutual respect, even among those with whom they strongly disagree, will take themselves out of the conversation entirely."

i propose another point of view brother otterson, that people show incredible self-respect and restraint when they peacefully cease to dialogue with those with whom they vehemently disagree.

and here is a great example. you, brother O, arranged for this choreographed PR piece, http://www.lds.org/newsroom/issues/answer/0,19491,6056-1-202-4-202,00.html

in it there are some rather drastic suggestions, including suggesting parents not invite their homosexual children to join them in public situations. it encourages parents to separate themselves from their children. while it may be your way of standing for something, to others it is quite offensive. including being offensive to those sitting in the congregations of your church. now, what self-respecting lesbian would insist on debating that little bit of advice and counsel with you, mr. oaks, or a believing mormon? i say none. at some point, the self-loathing must heal and lesbians and gays AND THEIR FAMILIES, INCLUDING LDS FAMILIES, should be allowed to skip the dialogue, assess the offenses that you have contributed to in your PR piece, and move on. in no way are they showing less respect, simply softening the blows of living in the shadow of the LDS community.

your pr piece is the exact opposite of what you suggest. as oaks admitted later in a SL Tribune article, his comments were neither inspired nor were they based institutionally based, meaning qualified. they were a hip-shot at best, and an offensive one. it is not a discount of respect to blast your work and the offensive and brutal remarks of your leader without engaging in debate. just the opposite, it is choosing the right.

Posted by: ME | November 21, 2006 12:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Mr. Otterson, I find it very interesting that you would quote Jesus Christ and his tolerant approach, when the LDS church has such an intolerant approach to dissenting voices, even within its own ranks. Of particular interest to me, is your reference to Christ's condemnation of hypocrites, when the Mormon church is guilty of hypocrisy to the highest degree. As evidence, I offer the church's current stand on polygamy. Here is your own quote from the Salt Lake Tribune, regarding the HBO television show 'Big Love': "What concerns the church is anything that might make light of the abuse of women and children alleged to occur in some polygamist communities.

“To make polygamy, given those circumstances, the subject of television entertainment is not only a bad idea, but it’s going to add to the pain of those victims,” Otterson said.

He’s also worried that the church could lose some of the ground it has gained in educating the public about the differences between the mainstream church and splinter fundamentalist groups that practice polygamy.

“This, I think, is going to undo some of that. Because you only have to mention Salt Lake City and polygamy and Mormons in the same breath and people will start to get those old stereotypes again,” he said.

Otterson said HBO has “gone out of their way to call journalists who got it wrong.” But an epilogue statement, which is scheduled to air after the first episode, is inadequate, he said.

The statement says: “According to a joint report issued by the Utah and Arizona attorney general’s offices, July 2005, ‘approximately 20,000 to 40,000 or more people currently practice polygamy in the United States.’ The Mormon church officially banned the practice of polygamy in 1890.”

Well Mr. Otterson, it seems as if the LDS church has embarked on a journey of disinformation. You talk about the danger of the television show "teaching old stereotypes" again. You try to cast the impression that the LDS church does not practice polygamy, yet it still does, every day. Isn't it true that Doctrine and Covenants section 132 authorizes the practice of polygamy in the LDS church? Isn't it true that Doctrine and Covenants Section 132, from 1852 is still in full force today? Isn't it also true that this Section of LDS Scripture is revered as being authoritative doctrine? Isn't it also true that a number of current living LDS General Authorities such as Dallin Oaks, and Russell Nelson have been married to multiple wives in the LDS temples and are sealed to these multiple wives for eternity under mormon doctrine? Aren't these things common knowledge among mormons, and the LDS people are taught that polygamy will again be practiced during the Millenial reign of Jesus Christ, and will also be practiced in heaven?

If these things are true, which anyone with an internet connection can easily verify, then why are you trying to portray polygamy as an inaccurate stereotype of Mormons when it is in fact practiced today in the Mormon church?

Isn't this the same brand of hypocrisy Jesus was condemning?

Posted by: DV | November 21, 2006 11:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Please try to excuse typos. Regrettably, I can't spend too much time proof-reading this post.

OTTERSON: "There’s nothing wrong with believing you’re right, or having strong convictions. Yet in approaching religious conversations we have more options than dogmatic fundamentalism on the one hand, and freely negotiable theology on the other."

Not seeing eye to eye is normal. Hiding and doctoring history is not. Excommunicating historians, authors, and scientists for publishing documented history seems a bit cruel to me. The LDS church has cast out a fair number of lifelong members on these grounds. Certainly William Law, D. Michael Quinn, Simon Southerton, and Jeffrey Nielson had strong convictions, which Otterson seems to commend – having convictions that is. However, since their opinions dissented from the accepted norm within the Mormon faith at the time, they were practically exiled.

OTTERSON: "Yet Jesus engaged people from all levels of society – the poor and the wealthy, the rulers and the disenfranchised, men and women, children and the aged, the healthy and the sick, Jew and Gentile. Jesus talked to anyone He thought would listen, sometimes adding ‘Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.’ For only one group of people – hypocrites who urged devotion to the letter of the law while seemingly dismissing the fundamentals of love of God and man – did Christ reserve his most condemnatory language.”

How ironic! Christ supposedly referred adherents to a previously written scripture to back up his claim in the aforementioned reference. Looking back to past journals, historical accounts, scripture, discourses and the like is welcome in LDS circles - when it confirms the current worldview. When the citation speaks harshly of a particular race, the female gender, or advocates violence, it’s ignored. If I were to bring up any of these examples here (from Brigham Young, Joseph F. Smith, Ezra Taft Benson, etc.) then I’m classified as what Mr. Otterson says is “accusatory”. But didn’t Christ show the Sadducees and Pharisees that the scriptures not only contained principles to be adhered to, but also had other ideals that had run their course?

Why not just apologize for obvious mistakes? Why not admit that it’s possible that Joseph Smith could have been wrong in wedding women who were already married. Why not just apologize for Brigham Young’s and Ezra Taft Benson’s blatantly racist teachings? Instead of just stating that polygamy was disavowed over a century ago, perhaps it’s high time to acknowledge that marrying teenage brides was immoral from the onset. In lieu of pledging temple-goers to never speak about ceremonial overhauls, how about answering inquiries in an open and honest atmosphere? Some young LDS temple worshipping members today swear that their church would never have performed mock death penalty signs as sacred ritual.

The RLDS church has now adopted quite a liberal open-book policy. Though they likely have a firm opinion that their beginnings are divine, they don’t seem too self-righteous to admit that Smith could have slipped up from time to time. Again, Otterson gives the impression that he would promote this kind of conversation, but perhaps I’m wrong. He did say:
OTTERSON: "Neither must a firm opinion inevitably be accompanied by an attitude of self-righteousness ...”

Why not cast aside any pride associated with having the perfect doctrine? Or claiming to have a church founder who obeyed God in each step of the way – even in marrying teenagers, destroying presses, and declaring martial law? To me, coming clean seems like the right thing to do. Maybe then there wouldn't be so many lifelong devoted members who are left heartbroken when they learn of the dark underbelly that is Mormon history.

Christ is quoted as saying that those hypocrites drew close to him with their words but were actually far separated from him in their hearts. When any church’s leadership unashamedly acts as though they’re above the law, be it Catholic, Mormon, etc., then I figure it’s within reason to stand up to the injustice. When there are cover-ups of abuse, someone needs to speak out. Of course any LDS friendly poster will likely disregard my entire post. Maybe it’s a hard pill to swallow. Despite the fact that LDS defenders have the tendency to quickly retort that people like me “remove ourselves entirely” from the discussion by being critical – this doesn’t correct the problem. It doesn’t even sweep it under the rug anymore. There is an all too obvious public relations crisis within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, hence the constant and frantic efforts of its PR firm.

Mormonism’s history, though interesting, is riddled with problems. It can’t be hidden anymore. Burning presses doesn’t work. You can't cover up your tracks so easily in today’s world. And vilifying me will probably only go so far. The classic LDS persecution complex has grown tired. It’s time to move not only to a respectful discussion, but to an openly honest one.

Posted by: Hyrum | November 20, 2006 6:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Hi Lug:

Come now. All this bragging about your Marriott analogy! It was pretty astute I must admit.

Sure the best team will win and some humour is always an asset.

. . T . .

Posted by: Ted Swart | November 20, 2006 5:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I am pleased to hear that you are committed to civil and reasonable conversation about religion, Mr. Otterson. I hope that you will exercise your influence that the LDS Church forsakes the practice to excommunicate or disfellowship historians and other scholars for their research.

Unfortunately, the WSJ reported only this year that Mormon scholars who have been disciplined by the LDS Church apparently get black listed for Mormon studies positions. According to the WSJ, universities fear that the Utah state legislature and Mormon philanthropists would unfund Mormon studies research unless the best candidates are denied the job.

You will appreciate that such practices undermine the trust that is the foundation of fruitful conversation.

Posted by: Hellmut | November 20, 2006 4:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Mr. Swart,

Thank you for your message, comments and insight.

I was addressing Ben R. and used comments from you and another individual as examples.

Your point on public education: Agreed! I play on Mr. Otterson's team but I will readily place my children in another religion's private school. I went to a Methodist or Baptist (I think) private school when I was a youngster in Texas.

Your point regarding secularists discussing issues on religion: I will agree with your statement. Just as an individual has a favorite sports team, all other teams will suck and that is how the conversation will go. Although you may concede that another team has good players they will never be as good as the team you support. If you associate with no specific team than you will have an easier time discussing the pros and cons of each team. Good point!

Your "will your life change" point: At this juncture I would probably just have more time on Sunday and more money in my pocket. I don't suppose my life would change much because of my upbringing. I am comfortable, and happy, in my faith and my way of life.

Besides, my team is going to win anyway. That is a joke in case there was any confusion.

Did you like my Marriott analogy? I thought it was quite clever.

Lug...out

Posted by: Lug Nutmegger | November 20, 2006 2:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Living within the Idaho/Utah I-15 LDS corridor, I pray that I can engage without rancor. But I have many spirited questions over substance.

Posted by: Todd Wood | November 20, 2006 2:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment

My apologies to Ben R. and Lug Nutmegger. My latest post was really meant for Lug not Ben -- though naturally it is a post for all to see.

Posted by: Ted Swart | November 18, 2006 3:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Well now Ben R.
You sure went to the trouble of a detailed run down and critique of what I and others have said.

Am totally delighted that you are opposed to same-sex marriage (on both secular and religious grounds -- as you put it). What truly annoys me is the extent to which those in the educational system think nothing of stealing childhood away from young children. It is not just introducing them to homosexuality before it is necessary but all sorts of other teaching with sexual emphases which are entirely uncalled for. In one of my grandaughers classes the teachers were supposedly talking to the children about avoiding taking lifts from strangers -- which sounds reasonable enough until we leant of the details. The details included explicit discussion of sexual touching. And my granddaughter came home and reported that she should never allow her grandfather to hug her!

So my son -- who is an agnostic like I am -- and his wife decided to take their daughter out of the government school and place her in a Lutheran school instead where stealing away of chikdhood does not occur.

As for my comment that secularists have an easier time engaging in dialogue I was thinking specifically of the kinds of issues raised in these discussions -- namely issues such as the nature and validity of faith. In this arena I am pretty sure secualrists do have a much easier time. No dount full blown atheists and agnostics don't see eye to eye on everything but we do have a huge amount in common. I fully agree that, when it comes to politics, secularist Japanese or any other secularists can find themselves involved in heated discussion and disagreement.

Let me leave you and all others in this discussion with a simple question.

If you take all the world's major religions and excise from them all those beliefs which are not held in common what are you left with and, if you did drop the non-overlapping beliefs, would you change your way of life in any significant manner?

There is this strange notion abroad that unless you have religious faith you must be rudderless. I think this is baseless nonsense. If incontrovertible evidence came to light tomorrow which established beyond reasonable doubt that Jesus body was stolen from the grave (and that there was therefore no resurrection -- which is a core Christian belief) why would this cause you to change your ethical and moral standards in any way?

Thanks for the very thoughtful comments.

Posted by: Ted Swart | November 18, 2006 3:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment

BEN R.,

Thank you for your clarification, I was pleased to read your response last evening. I do have a couple of points:

Accusations of stupidity: Naturally, I was oversimplifying how religious discussions tend to evolve where ultimately someone will get offended and the conversation turns personal. Although I have yet to be called stupid, at least during religious discussions, I have had some unpleasant experiences. Which I think is the whole point of this blog and takes me to my next point...

Politics & Religion: While I concede your points in regards to politics and religion, I will differ with you regarding Mr. Otterson's comments; his post is spot on in the context of the nature of this blog. This blog is called "On Faith" and as I understand it the purpose of the blog is to bring together representatives of various faiths for honest and open dialog, not politics (although I will also concede it is difficult to seperate the two). Whether that is possible or not remains to be seen but I think as a first post Mr. Otterson provides a great lead-in by attempting to set the tone necessary for these types of discussions...even if you are a secularist.

I 100% agree with your statement, "As soon as you advocate a position on these issues that stems from your religious beliefs, your religious beliefs are susceptible to attack and ridicule." That said, I don't see how attacking and ridiculing an individual's religion would further discussions on said positions. Let's take Mitt Romney for example; Romney opposes same-sex marriage, naturally I believe because of his religious convictions (although I cannot prove that), but he does not come out and state "because I am LDS (Mormon) I am against same-sex marriage". He has simply stated that he feels children benefit from having a mother and father; as does Ted Swart, the secularist, in his comments in this thread. When in a debate and Mitt states his position on same-sex marriage; would your retort be to attack him for wearing magic underwear or that Joseph Smith was a fraud? I know this is an extreme example but I am interested how you would go about ridiculing/attacking an indiviual's religion as a means to affect change in a person or policy.

As Ted Swart mentions in his comments, he is "passionately" opposed to same-sex marriage but not because of religious beliefs as he is a secularist. How do you then debate rationally with empirical inquiry with Mr. Swart. The same argument can be used for abortion?

Ted Swart would have you believe that "Secularists do not all agree on everything but we sure have a much easier time conversing with each other since we have no dogmas getting in the way." I find this statement to be a astoundingly naive. I do not doubt that within like minded secular cirlces that Mr. Swart has an easier time discussing certain issues. However, I am sure a secular homosexual will not find your arguments rational or acceptable nor will the discussion be civil, indeed you will be accused of discrimination and bigotry.

I spent many years in Japan; a secular society. I did not find that secularist individuals in Japan discussing politics or social issues any more civil or rational than in America between those who may hold certain beliefs on social issues because of their religious beliefs. Issues such as women's rights, same-sex issues, North Korea would be a good example.

Rod also joins the party with this gem: "How about - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness inspired by reason, science, and the arts. It's so much easier to find common ground on secular values instead of nonsense."

Rod selectively takes this from Mr. Otterson's statement: "It’s always possible to find common ground and build from there – for instance, the universality of God’s love for his children, or seeing religion as a sanctuary for our most cherished values."

As this is a blog on faith Mr. Otterson naturally used an example of finding common ground based on religious philosophy. He could have easily stated "...for instance, we can all agree that Cap'n Crunch is the best breakfast cereal" mmmmm...Cap'n Crunch...wait, what was I talking about, oh yeah, finding common ground is easy if you allow yourself to find it. That said, it is NOT easier to find common ground as a secularist. Let's take the Cap'n; I find the Cap'n the best cereal on earth but you may find Count Chocula the best. Common ground would be we both think breakfast cereals are acceptable for all three meals of the day, who doesn't?

I am all for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness based on science, reason and art. What of I choose to accept the scientific studies which show "global warming" is a figment of Al Gore's imagination. What if I choose to accept the scientific studies which show embryonic stem cell research is ineffectual and no more investment should be wasted for that research. Do you see what I mean? These are all social issues facing our country and even based on science no reasonable consensus can be achieved. The ONLY thing secularists can agree upon is that religious people are nuts. That is the one thread that holds you together, and that is fine, God is the one thing that holds the religious nuts (I suppose including myself) together.

Either way, I believe that secularists and "nuts" will find more common ground than will individuals from various religions. I already agree that adding Creationism to a science curriculum is ludicrous. Whose brand of Creationism would you use anyway? Embryonic Stem Cell research, civil unions, etc, etc. These are all issues I would be interesting in discussing, in a civil manner, with a variety of people. Including Mr. Otterson's people.

BEN R.: One final point before I sign off, about your statement "Some people are able to separate religion from politics (and I'd argue that such people are culturally religious rather than theologically religious). Many -- most? -- are not." probably most, eh? But here is my point, I do not think that because an individual is able to seperate religion from politics does not mean that they are merely culturally religious. As long as we are on the Mormon thread let take a look at Marriott Hotels. The Marriott family is Mormon in case you didn't know. I stay at the Marriott often and there is always a Book of Mormon in the room. You know what else is in the room? Access to 12 porn movies available for 24 hours for only $14.95. SWEET! Up until last month smoking was acceptable as well and you can purchase alcoholic beverages and sometimes but no longer cigarrettes at a Marriott. Why would Marriott, a staunch Mormon allow these types of things in his hotel? MONEY? Sure, but ultimately in order to run a successful business you must cater to all persons, not just Mormons (at least outside of Utah that is). He is able to successfully seperate his religion from business in order to meet the needs of his clientele. He does no force his guests to partake of alcohol or tobacco, or to press "Order" on the remote. These are the choices of his "constituency". That said, Marriott did recently outlaw smoking is all of his hotels but not because of religion rather it was in the interest of business and the health and welfare of his guests. I am also a businessman and rarely do I come across a situation where my religious beliefs play a part in my decision making process. Of course if I was asked to do something unethical I believe I would have to say no due to my religious beliefs and you would say no due to societal mores. That is common ground.

I suppose I would be considered religious and borderline very religious but I view politics in the same manner as a business. The only time this gets tricky is with social issues (but like smoking sometimes the good of the whole outweighs the good of the few).

I do not approve of same-sex marriage for religious and secular reasons. For example, I do not want my child taught Creationism at school nor do I not want my child taught sex education which includes homosexuality and/or labels homosexuality as a viable lifestyle choice. I would ask that schools stick to the basics; evolution and heterosexual sex education. I will talk to and teach my children about both of the other issues. (Now I understand that teaching homosexuality in sex education and as a viable alternative is not the case at this moment but once same-sex marriages are approved and the discussion is purely secular, how long do you think it will be before that takes place?) Anyway, I believe that it is in the best interest of society (and so does secularist Ted Swart in this thread) not to allow same-sex marriage. I also think it is in the best interest of society TO provide the same benefits of marriage to same-sex couples through civil unions. In other words, you can smoke, but you just have to smoke outside.

I think it is entirely possible to be theologically religious and to keep that seperate from politics much like a business, like the Marriott.

I apologize for the verbosity of this post. I would be interessted in your comments.

Have a good weekend!

Lug...out

Posted by: Lug Nutmegger | November 17, 2006 4:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Lug, Rod:
I am afraid that I find all this discussion of common ground and the need for civility extremely misleading. It is possible to find common ground between the various Christian denominations and common ground between Christinaity , Judaism, the Bahai faith and Islam and also a good deal of common gournd with atheists and agnostics as well. But so what! If you do this you effectively reject the core beliefs of the different faiths.

The hard fact is that different faiths have mutually contradictory beliefs and there is no easy way to get round this. Precisly because they are mutually contradictory it is almost 100% certain that they are all phony.

Those like myself who do not have faith in any of the formal religions do not have this problem. Jesus may well have said "No man cometh unto the father but by me". But he is also reported to have said "Why call you me good. There is none good but God". This leaves me utterly unconvinced that any of the major religions or any of the Chritian denominations have an inside track on a true understanding of the nature of ultimate reality.
Secularists do not all agree on everything but we sure have a much easier time conversing with each other since we have no dogmas getting in the way. For my own part I am passionately opposed to legalizing homosexual marriages since I think heterosexual marriages are substantially different to homosexual unions. For the sake of children and the well being of society I think it is much better to maintin the distinction. Most countries have retained the common law definition of marriage whilst putting in place legal civil unions for homosexuals. This goes for France, Germany, Britain, New Zealnd, Mexico City etc etc and I applaud their decision. My views on this have nothing to do with religion and are in no way based on antipathy towards homosexuals.

Posted by: Ted Swart | November 16, 2006 11:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Lug:

Fortunately I haven't participations in any conversations about religion that end in accusations of stupidity, regardless of what the parties may have thought. If that's your experience, then I'm sorry to hear that. That's very discourteous.

Political discussions are a different matter.

Here's the problem. Arguments like Mr. Otterson's pretend to ignore the influence that religion has on politics, while they resort to an appeal to civility. Some people are able to separate religion from politics (and I'd argue that such people are culturally religious rather than theologically religious). Many -- most? -- are not.

Many of the most contentious political issues facing us today, e.g., gay marriage and the teaching of creationism, involve -- and have usually been drummed up by -- religion. As soon as you advocate a position on these issues that stems from your religious beliefs, your religious beliefs are susceptible to attack and ridicule. You don't get a free pass just because it's your "faith." This is no different from attacking and ridiculing the basis for any other policy decision (e.g., WMD as a basis for invading Iraq).

I'm all for civil discourse, and when individuals discuss (in person) controversial topics with one another this, happily, is the norm. Politics, however, is not always polite. If you bring your religion into politics, you do so knowing that it's fair game for the nice as well as the nasty.

Posted by: Ben R. | November 16, 2006 6:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"It’s always possible to find common ground and build from there – for instance, the universality of God’s love for his children, or seeing religion as a sanctuary for our most cherished values."

I'm afraid that statement is a fine example of just how far apart our common ground is. How about - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness inspired by reason, science, and the arts. It's so much easier to find common ground on secular values instead of nonsense.

Posted by: Rod | November 16, 2006 5:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Great post Mr. Otterson! Frankly, I find discussions of religion to be abhorent because they usually end up at "You're wrong!", "No You're wrong...and stupid".

Ben R,

I am not sure I understand your point.

Mr. Otterson states: "It is perfectly possible to hold devoutly strong convictions and yet engage others in conversation. Since we can all learn from each other, disagreement does not have to mean being disagreeable, accusatory or demeaning."

Is it your contention that the only manner in which religion can be discussed is with the gnashing of teeth and shaking of fist? Am I understanding you incorrectly?

I don't think Mr. Otterson's statements mention that you shouldn't disagree or that you shouldn't debate strongly, rather to do so with respect for your fellow man and with civility. I believe the "court" to which you refer is run in the same fashion, no?

Or is your argument simply that because the discussions at "ON FAITH" center around religious dogma that rational debate and empirical inquiry such as "God deas not exist and I can prove with with data" are impossible? I would probably agree with you there. But then again the site is called "ON FAITH" which would suggest that the site is to focus on a variety of religious beliefs.

I don't mean to focus on your post I am just dense and don't quite understand what you are trying to say.

Lug...out

Posted by: Lug Nutmegger | November 16, 2006 5:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"This is not putting style over substance. It is simply recognizing that people who aren’t willing to discuss things with mutual respect, even among those with whom they strongly disagree, will take themselves out of the conversation entirely."

It is most certainly style over substance, to use the author's phrase. What Mr. Otterson is advocating is humble dogmatism, but dogmatism nevertheless. This is incompatible with rational debate and empirical inquiry.

When a court asks a prospective juror, "Do you have any belief about the guilt of the accused?" the idea is to get exclude from the dialogue people who are unlikely to weigh the evidence fairly. They are not productive interlocutors.

The form of dialogue here is one in which no feelings are hurt, but then neither is anything learned other than that each interlocutor is firm in his convictions. Why talk about religion at all? Why not just discuss the weather?

Posted by: Ben R. | November 16, 2006 4:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Excellent post. Often times when bold statements I think it is important to remain open to understanding and listen to the other side who might disagree with such a statement. Doing so in no way retracts from your statement, yet in the long run might make them open to listening to your side more, since you have listened to them. Far too many people get offended and tune out when somebody makes bold declarations, but I think there is room for improvement on both sides of the table.

Posted by: Connor Boyack | November 16, 2006 8:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

Michael Otterson

Posts By Category

Posts By Date

Engaging Without Rancor

Comments