Mitt Romney sends people to my site, one by angry one

No, no, Mitt Romney’s not doing it personally. As far as I know, he’s never visited Trapped, and probably never will. But because of his candidacy, his recent “Christian” speech, and of course, his religion, angry Mormons are searching and finding Trapped by the Mormons. They are really UP IN ARMS about the whole Joseph Smith Nativity post from last year.

For example, essay Says:

“Joseph Smith Nativity”??? — Talk about grasping at straws, no where in the picture above is there anything that says “nativity”. What’s next, the Abraham Lincoln Nativity? The Mart Twain Nativity? And it’s nice to again see someone outside the LDS faith tell me what I believe.

Who the hell is Mart Twain? Mark’s evil twin?

Essay, essay, talk about grasping at straws…. I know, it’s so hard to explain Smith Worship, especially at Christmastime, when all the other “Christians” are worshiping Jesus….

But let’s cover this one by one.

1. It doesn’t have to SAY nativity to be a nativity. Christmastime is traditionally a time where we celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, although my understanding is that he was not actually born at this time. Nonetheless, this is when the Christian world celebrates it. So, when the Zoobies put up a “birth scene” for Joseph Smith, well, the implications were obvious. At Christmastime, one can find re-creations of the Jesus birth scene all across the world. Only the Mormons chose to do one for Joseph Smith, as well. It is no different.

It IS a nativity scene. Nativity does not mean a manger, or straw, speaking of grasping at it….

Nativity means birth with reference to place or attendant circumstances. Thus, Joseph Smith Nativity!

2. Let’s just face it, it was another bad choice.

3. What does Abraham Lincoln have to do with Mormons OR Christmas?

4. Presuming you mean Mark Twain, and not his evil twin MART, I’m not sure it’s wise for Mormons to reference him, since he was quite vocal about his opinion on Mormonism. He thought the Book of Mormon was “chloroform in print.” He ain’t helping your case.

5. You should have done some research, and you would have discovered I am not someone “outside” of your church telling you what you believe. Been there, done that, got the CTR ring.

With Mitt Romney’s recent speech, more and more angry Mormons are visiting. Since we already had plenty, that’s not necessarily a good thing, but hey….

We’ll make room.

As for Mitt himself, I found some interesting information on his speech. A USA Today blog headline said: Romney’s cult of religious liberty.
It wasn’t a blog about cults, really, but it won’t make the Mormons happy. Little except rabid exclamations of how they HAVE TO BE right does, so we won’t worry too much about that.

This blog post noted that he left out the non-believers, or perhaps atheists, which could cause a problem for his candidacy.

In a big-tent speech clearly aimed at inclusiveness, Romney left himself open to criticism by leaving out non-believers. A single sentence recognizing that tolerance for all faiths also includes tolerance for the faithless seems an unwise oversight. As explained by someone close to Romney, however, there was never any planned tactic to exclude non-religious people. Implicit in the idea of religious liberty is that one freely chooses to be religious or not. Also assumed was that even non-believers would respect America’s tradition of religious pluralism.

The other weakness — just to get them both out of the way — was a single line that was unnecessarily confounding: “Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom.”

It does? It will be interesting to see how people react to that.

Advertisements

About Natalie R. Collins

Natalie has more than 30 years writing, editing, proofreading and design experience. She has written 20 books (and counting), has worked for the Sundance Film Festival, and as an investigative journalist, editor, and proofreader. She embraces her gypsy-heart and is following her new free-thinking journey through life. Follow her as she starts over and learns a bunch of life's lessons--some the hard way.
This entry was posted in Natalie's Posts. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Mitt Romney sends people to my site, one by angry one

  1. PMP says:

    Thanks for the link to Mark Twain. I needed a Monday morning giggle.

    Like

  2. Tracy says:

    Interesting to see how people see only what they want to see when they are reading someones blog.

    I guess you’re going to have to pull up your info on growing up Mormon, again.

    Like

  3. azteclady says:

    I love Mark Twain! Thank you! I’ve been giggling since I opened.

    Like

  4. Cele says:

    Oh they shall becoming out of the woodwork, mad and ready to take it out on someone. I hope they are ready for a lesson in their own religion. Oh wait! That would imply they would listen after their tirades.

    Like

  5. Renee says:

    I prefer “Mart” Twain, the evil twin, myself. Chloroform in Print. That is priceless. Gotta remember that one when the missionaries come to the house again.

    Like

  6. Tracy says:

    “And it came to
    pass” was his pet. If he had left that out, his Bible would have been
    only a pamphlet. ”

    LOL!!! I just read that and burst out laughing. Ole’ Clemens sure had a wicked sense of humor.

    Like

  7. I love your Mark Twain reference. And Mitt Romney gets me to yell at the T.V. (as if that’s not normal)

    Like

  8. George says:

    hey Natalie check this out http://www.youchoose.net/news/exclusive_linda_harvey_warns_parents_against_anti_christian_fantasy_golden_compass
    hat’s the mormon point of view… a golden compass with a girl being able to interpret it and such…
    I know I’m off topic but this is just too funny!

    Like

  9. Richard says:

    Natalie, I stumbled on your blog quite by accident and find it fascinating. For the record I’m not Mormon and the older I get the more skeptical of all things religious I become. In your Romney post you said something I didn’t understand, about how (if I’m interpreting it right) Mormon’s “have to be right.”

    Could you expand upon that a bit? Romney’s speech was a well-crafted political document designed to appease mainstream Christians and deflect inquiry into Mormon doctrine. The spookiest part was the near-Orwellian sentence, “Freedom requires religion …” It’s spooky because a lot of people apparently loved it. And it really doesn’t mean anything. It merely sounds cool.

    Like

  10. azteclady says:

    It doesn’t sound too cool if you don’t profess ANY religion, though.

    Like

  11. Richard says:

    It doesn’t, azteclady? According to whom?

    Like

  12. azteclady says:

    If “freedom requires religion” then what happens when you don’t have religion? It does seem that according to Mr Romney, you can’t be free if you don’t profess *a* religion. Or am I getting this wrong?

    Like

  13. Richard says:

    azteclady, if what Romney said was correct (freedom requires religion) then I would agree with you. But unless you and I have wildly different definitions of the word “religion,” the statement to me just doesn’t make sense. Do you consider a fundamental Islamist to have freedom? He doesn’t, especially not freedom to think or believe something different than the rigid tenets of his “religion.”

    It’s quite possible we do have very different perspectives on what religion is.

    Like

  14. azteclady says:

    Richard, the statement does NOT make any sense whatsover to me. That doesn’t mean Romney didn’t mean exactly what he said. And it definitely doesn’t mean that religious fanatics of several different stripes won’t rally to support him precisely because that statement implies that people HAVE to have a religion (which each one of them can easily assume must be his/her own) in order to “be free”–and in this case “to be free” would likely be translated to mean “be a true american.”

    In other words, I agree with your first post: that phrase is Orwellian. I don’t agree with sounds cool, though.

    Like

  15. Richard says:

    azteclady, I think I managed to misinterpret your first post. Thanks for straightening me out. You express your thoughts very well.

    Like

  16. Nathan says:

    To Natalie,

    “…WE REALLY JUST WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE to believe the way we believe.”
    “…What you have listened to here is discontent among the masses of those who WISH TO BE LEFT ALONE…”

    These are your words, pulled from one of your posts. Natalie, we also wish as you wish; to be left alone.

    I believe you are, as you say you are, desirous of a more harmonious co-existence between members of the LDS church and those who are not, or who have chosen to leave the church. You said so.
    “…Since I am a big advocate of ex-Mormons and believing Mormons finding common ground…”

    Although you are at liberty to write what pleases you, this reader believes that your means prevent the end you desire. In another posting, you showed this by asserting that, “…there is a HUGE gap between Mormons and non-Mormons, and that divide will NEVER be bridged…” You are correct. That gap will not be bridged as long as there are blogs like this one on the internet. After all, “…SPOTLIGHTING just who ISN’T what you are is stupid, rude, and downright nasty…”

    I couldn’t agree more. No one likes to be spotlighted for holding different beliefs, but people of all faiths are guilty of it. It doesn’t matter if one is LDS or a member of one of the many other religions that exist in the world today, it’s not fun to be on the receiving end. But spotlighting can be stopped, one person at a time.

    What is certain is that there will always be those who will take the lower road. They will act arrogantly, superiorly, and will give little. That is their decision. We can choose differently. It is not about who is right. You stated, “…It IS about proving what I believe to be true…” and, “…I do not understand how you cannot see that it is the MORMONS who are in the wrong here!”
    Lets make it not about proving, but about sharing. You don’t like it when LDS people try to prove why you are wrong, but that’s their fault. We can choose not to follow suit.

    If your intent is to persuade people to believe as you do, by pinpointing similarities, then there are certain kinds of remarks that will not help.

    “…it also served to point out just WHO WAS NOT MORMON, so the rest of the masses could avoid them like the plague…” You know that this is a gross exaggeration.

    “…Mormons think they are special…” Why shouldn’t they? So are you!

    Furthermore, try to understand that there are beliefs that others hold sacred. It is not your place to judge whether those beliefs are valid. You have chosen to leave the LDS church and that is your decision. But please do not ridicule others for their decision to stay.

    “…I’ve made it my personal mission to protect the terminally stupid from themselves…” Again, that’s not your place.

    “…That (burning in the bosom), people, is heartburn. There is medication for that…” To you it may be heartburn. To others, it’s sacred.

    “…if you have even ONE OUNCE of a crack in your mind that isn’t completely steeped in all things Mormon, and through which a little light shines…” To you LDS folks may seem brainwashed, but please don’t insult people’s intelligence.

    “…I’m curious which “idiot” you are blaming for starting the “bad reputation” for Mormons. Joseph Smith? Brigham Young? Just curious, because you don’t name the idiot you are accusing.” We know well that you do not revere Joseph Smith and Brigham Young as prophets. There are others that do, so please refrain from derogatory name calling.

    “…EVERYONE knows how to spot those poor suckers (missionaries)…” A sucker is not someone who gives up two years of their prime to preach something that they hold dear. At least respect them for that.

    You stated, “…I can DECIDE for myself what is right…” So may others, without fear that their beliefs will be irreverently displayed in a forum such as this. LDS individuals make mistakes, just as you do. “…I make mistakes. I acknowledge said mistakes…” They don’t know everything, just as you do not. “…I don’t know the complete situation…” To you it may sees as though they don’t understand what you understand, “…I really think that some people don’t get it…” My point is that you may never understand why LDS people do what they do. “…I will never understand…” The decent thing to do then, would be to accept it, move on, and refrain from referring to LDS beliefs as “Mormon delusions”.

    Again, you have every right to believe what you do. You may write whatever you will. But my hope is that you will stop and think about it before you write it. Many people dislike your blog because you treat their beliefs and their lifestlyle lightly. “…the one thing he kept doing, over and over, was reciting the FLAWS of the other religions…” That is your statement, yet it is what you do to the LDS faith. It is no wonder that you receive the comments that you do. In addition, you often treat the person making the comments as if they are less intelligent than you are. True, you do not deserve the abuse that they give you. They are in the wrong many times. But as I said before, we can take the high road.

    Finally, as a wise man once said, “Be the change that you want to see in the world”. You can start right here on your blog by treating others with the respect that you believe you deserve, not by berating them because of their faith.
    “…The truth is, if you are a deep thinker, you will question Mormonism. And if you are a follower, you will accept and embrace it…”
    That is not the truth. That is your belief. The reality is that when you find a deep thinking member of the LDS faith, they will tell you that they questioned first, received some sort of prompting that they should take action, and then accepted and embraced it.

    “…This, Ruth, is an alternative viewpoint. Wow, amazing. Those exist? Yup…”

    And please accept my apology for any grammatical errors, as I know that you often use poor grammar as a tool to discredit your reader.

    Like

  17. azteclady says:

    I can’t help but butt in here.

    Nathan, I don’t think Natalie wants people to believe what she believes–in other words, she’s not proselytizing for “THE CHURCH OF NATALIE.”

    Once you get that, you’ll see that a lot of what you quote above is Natalie’s frustrated response to people who don’t seem to be able to get that one fact straight.

    Like

  18. Natalie says:

    No Nathan, you do NOT want to be left alone. If you DID, you would not send out missionaries across the world, claiming you have the ONLY TRUE THING. When you stop that, then I shall believe your words.

    And you are right, Azteclady. But Nathan will undoubtedly not see it.

    Like

  19. Natalie says:

    By the way, Nathan, thanks for reading so “religiously.” LOL. While I realize your purpose was to discredit me, it really didn’t work. But hey, no one can say you didn’t do your homework.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s