Was the massacre at Mountain Meadows the only massacre of Mo

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

Witch of Hope

Was the massacre at Mountain Meadows the only massacre of Mo

Post #1

Post by Witch of Hope »

I went to an internet page of former members of the LDS yesterday. One of them has translated the books from J. & S. Tanner into German for years. Unlike the Tanners he is not a Christian but what I mention a "freethinker".
There was a link to a web page on this internet page which reported of further massacre, of which 26 people were the victim. Only two boys and a girl survived. All of them was cut the throat. Here now the report of the original web page:

http://www.blackhawkproductions.com/circleville.htm

I quote:
The captured Indians, 26 in all, showed a lot of unrest, then on the evening of the following day some of the Indians were able to cut themselves loose from their bindings and make a break. In the excitement the two Indians trying to free themselves were shot and killed by the guards. The remainder of the Indians were then taken to a nearby underground cellar and imprisoned there. The captured Indians knew they were going to be killed, they could feel it.
The settlers had another meeting and it was decided among them to kill the remaining captured Indian people. And so it was one by one they were led out of the cellar, 24 in all.
There were women, men, and children, and they were first struck from behind on the head to stun them, then their throats were cut and their bodies held to the ground until they bled to death. A terrified mother of two young boys and one girl, seven or eight years of age, told her crying children to run for their lives, and when the door was opened for the next victim to be killed the three made a break and forced their way past the guards and ran. In the dark of night the guards fired several shots at the three but were unable to hit them. One was shot in the
side but the bullet barely grazed his rib, not enough to stop him. It is safe to say the mother never knew if her children had managed to escape.
It was a cold-blooded execution. As each person sat in line waiting for their death to come. And what state of mind dose one have to be in to carry out such a heinous deed, resisting the cries and pleadings of each poor sole as they beg for their life to be spared? And what kind of person could run his blade across an innocent child's throat? It's reaches far beyond anyone's ability to fully comprehend the dark evil of that night in Circleville. (...)
When Brigham Young heard of the details of this heinous crime he was upset, but did nothing more than verbally chastise the murders. Later they were praised by other members for having done their dirty deed well. The saints at Circleville did all they could to cover up the tragic event, saying that they acted in self defense when the Indians attacked the guards. But in time the event leaked to the news, but curiously none of the aggressors were prosecuted. (...)
A day following the killings, two Indian boys and one girl were found hiding in a nearby cave, where taken to the nearest town Marysvale, Utah. Jackson Allred then took one of the boys, who may have been 8 or 9 years of age at the time,
to Spring City. There Allred spoke with a family who was interested in taking care of the boy, and said to them, he would trade a horse for the boy, otherwise he would just kill him. Allred agreed to the payment of a horse and a bushel of wheat, and the Monson family took the boy in and raised him. He was given the name David Munsen. The spelling of the last name was changed as the Monson family, I was told, didn't want their name in connection with an Indian.(...)
And members of the LDS had tried again to cover-up something. This draws himself by ecclesiastical history like a recurring theme: cover-up and the fault then giving the to the victims.

User avatar
The Ex-Mormon
Apprentice
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:53 pm
Location: Berne

Post #31

Post by The Ex-Mormon »

About hate

My father, not a member of the church; told me once what the word hate really means really; related to single people or organizations:
Hate is disappointed love. You hate what you have loved once. Love which was disappointed. It be, because you had a too much or too high expectation to the love object; or because this love really had disappointed you.
The love is not to blame, but our expectations to love. Or, that different people develop differently; from also each other away.
Hate destroys!

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #32

Post by Nickman »

The Mormon wrote: About hate

My father, not a member of the church; told me once what the word hate really means really; related to single people or organizations:
Hate is disappointed love. You hate what you have loved once. Love which was disappointed. It be, because you had a too much or too high expectation to the love object; or because this love really had disappointed you.
The love is not to blame, but our expectations to love. Or, that different people develop differently; from also each other away.
Hate destroys!
That is a very good analogy and I agree your absolutely right. I had expectation that the LDS CHURCH was something of truth and when I found out it wasn't I was dissapointed. I don't want others to go through that.

User avatar
The Ex-Mormon
Apprentice
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:53 pm
Location: Berne

Post #33

Post by The Ex-Mormon »

Nickman wrote:
That is a very good analogy and I agree your absolutely right. I had expectation that the LDS CHURCH was something of truth and when I found out it wasn't I was dissapointed. I don't want others to go through that.
Did you therefore become an atheist? Do you believe in nothing at all? Or how we say in German-speaking Switzerland:: A pound of a good beef yields a soup tasting splendid"?

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #34

Post by Nickman »

The Mormon wrote:
Nickman wrote:
That is a very good analogy and I agree your absolutely right. I had expectation that the LDS CHURCH was something of truth and when I found out it wasn't I was dissapointed. I don't want others to go through that.
Did you therefore become an atheist? Do you believe in nothing at all? Or how we say in German-speaking Switzerland:: A pound of a good beef yields a soup tasting splendid"?
Not from there no, I continued a search for god. The facted that I found the church to be false led me to ask questions I never would have before concerning god. And after much study I realized I have absolutely no evidence for god so I let him god aqlongb with all the beliefs pertaining to him.

User avatar
The Ex-Mormon
Apprentice
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:53 pm
Location: Berne

Post #35

Post by The Ex-Mormon »

Nickman wrote:
Not from there no, I continued a search for god. The facted that I found the church to be false led me to ask questions I never would have before concerning god. And after much study I realized I have absolutely no evidence for god so I let him god aqlongb with all the beliefs pertaining to him.
So how you describe it; you are rather an agnostic. An agnostic does not know whether there is a God. But he does not deny God (unlike the atheists).

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #36

Post by Nickman »

The Mormon wrote:
Nickman wrote:
Not from there no, I continued a search for god. The facted that I found the church to be false led me to ask questions I never would have before concerning god. And after much study I realized I have absolutely no evidence for god so I let him god aqlongb with all the beliefs pertaining to him.
So how you describe it; you are rather an agnostic. An agnostic does not know whether there is a God. But he does not deny God (unlike the atheists).
No I am atheist to the core. I am an evidence man. I never rule out possibilities or evidenced ideas. I have no reason to believe in gods. There is no evidence for them. I am open to any possibility if the evidence is right, the same way I am open to any evidence presented for anything even if I were to be opposed to the claim.

User avatar
The Ex-Mormon
Apprentice
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:53 pm
Location: Berne

Post #37

Post by The Ex-Mormon »

Nick, I would like to apologize to you.
I was a credulous idiot. I have just completed the topic of the first vision; and am so furious about the LDS! If I had a bomb, I would know where I would put it! :mrgreen: :evil: :yikes:
If you were right with the first Vison, the probability is great; that you were in the right also with the other quotations. I will to be on the safe side nevertheless check it.
Only too bad that the members of the LDS do not speak about it here in the forum.

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #38

Post by Nickman »

The Mormon wrote: Nick, I would like to apologize to you.
No need to apologize, im just trying to show people evidence.
I was a credulous idiot. I have just completed the topic of the first vision; and am so furious about the LDS! If I had a bomb, I would know where I would put it! :mrgreen: :evil: :yikes:
If you were right with the first Vison, the probability is great; that you were in the right also with the other quotations. I will to be on the safe side nevertheless check it.
Only too bad that the members of the LDS do not speak about it here in the forum.
Don't say that about yourself. Learn to think critically, it is very tough to do after we have been told this or that as truth with no evidence. We tend to just believe what we are told. As an atheist I no longer listen to anything at face value, unless it is from a credible source, even then I like to verify. Always question, the only bad question is the one never asked.

User avatar
The Ex-Mormon
Apprentice
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:53 pm
Location: Berne

Post #39

Post by The Ex-Mormon »

Nickman wrote: Always question, the only bad question is the one never asked.
I like that!

Post Reply