From the Mormon Hatemail Bag….

If you happen upon the url,, please be aware you have been TRAPPED, misled, and filled with half truths and dumb interpretations. is actually run by an ardent Mormon named Joshua, and he figures you will discover, by reading his Web site, that in fact, Mormons DO NOT suck. He doesn’t offer much to prove this, and honestly, I agree. Mormons are great. I love Mormons. Some of my very favorite human beings are Mormon. I personally find the religion silly and baseless, but hey, to each his own.

That said, Joshua thinks it’s perfectly all right for him to run a Web site for the express purpose of touting his religion as the only true thing, and yet is UTTERLY offended that I have the very GALL to do the same thing… Uh, sorta. After all, I am not touting any “one true thing.” But other than that, it’s really similar. How can he not see that?

Name: Joshua
Message: What a dumb website… Can you imagine a website called \”Trapped by the Jews\”??? Filled with half truths and dumb interpretations, your website serves as nothing more than a sick display of religious bigotry and arrogant self-promoting in an attempt to exploit a religious group.

Here was my email response to Josh.

Dear Joshua,

Where ever is your sense of humor? It’s not a “literal” trapped, and in fact is a tongue-on-cheek play on a very old, very campy film, also titled TRAPPED BY THE MORMONS.

Sick display of religious bigotry? I think not. In addition, where are those half-truths? And the dumb interpretations? It’s easy to spout out angry euphemisms, but can you back it up with fact? I think not. You’re just mad because I am not one of the “faith promoting” mass Mormons, like yourself.

Open your eyes. You’ll see there is an entire world out there, and it’s filled with a few people who don’t take themselves so seriously. And quit comparing yourself to the Jews. It ain’t flying. Oh, yeah, and while you are at it, quit BAPTIZING them, too. They have their own religion, thanks, and I sure haven’t seen any of them trying to baptize all of YOUR relatives.

Love and kisses,


Well, let me tell you, he did NOT appreciate my response. No he did not.

Here’s what he had to say then.

What a childish retort. If you’d like to baptize my relatives, feel free. Since I know you don’t have the authority of God to do such, it don’t bug me. I’m more mature than that.

And the comparison is valid. You wouldn’t dare mock other religions, only Mormonism, because you’ve been suckered into Anti-Mormon stupidity. Like the half-cocked complaint about the error in the Ward Directory… Clue, those can have printing errors and aren’t always up-to-date. If they were, I am no longer a member. Why? Cause I am not in there at all!!! So my missing entries trump your errored entry.

I could take weeks knocking over every dumb claim of yours, but why? Your a bigot.. And religious bigots are the worst kind because they grasp ANYTHING negative they can. So my points would be lost.


Common sense and common decency are lost on Josh. And of course, he isn’t BOTHERING to discount ANY of my so called “half truths” and “religious bigotry,” because he CAN’T. And he’s rude, too.

Here was my response back to him.

“You are arrogant and one of the worst kind of idiots. You think you are right, and have the AUTHORITY of God to back you up. The Jews and the blacks will LOVE reading your comparisons.

But dearheart, ethnicity and color are NOT a choice. Religion? Now that is. You missed that somewhere along the way. And it is not a valid comparison.

You are about as mature as a toddler. You’re pissed off and you will yell and shout and scream and stamp your feet until you get heard. You feel that YOU can knock on every door in the world and tell EVERYONE that they are wrong and you are right, but you don’t accord me the same right.

And me? I am happy to spotlight all of your idiocy for the world to see, because I’ve found that people like you do more damage than a million anti-Mormons could ever do.”

But before I could even get THAT sent, he sent me THIS email:

The worst part? You profit on your bigotry. You take tired old anti-Mormon themes and push them out as “truth”.

But hey.. I am an aspiring writer. I want to write a book about white women being trapped by blacks. How they force the white women to eat watermelon and cornbread and how they rape them each night to try to turn them black in a secret plot to breed white people.

How bout I call it “Trapped by the Niggers”?


Well, that one just astounded me. I barely know what to say, except, LOOKOUT. The furor will fly after those stupid remarks. I think I will send a copy of Josh’s email to the Church HQ, so they can see what kind of missionary work he is doing.

On the heels of Josh’s angry email, came yet ANOTHER one. From someone else.

Name: Nathan
Message: I almost feel sorry as to how misinformed you are. Your twisted ideas of my church make me sick. The only thing in your way is that you can\’t see past what you can\’t prove. If you prove everything, whats left to believe in?

Dear Nathan,

Silly, silly boy. Please, tell me what I have twisted? As usual, you won’t. Mostly because you CAN’T. As Joshua cannot, so he resorts to angry, childish, bigoted responses.

See, I am not BIGOTED toward Mormons. I JUST don’t believe that their religious MANTRA is true. In fact, I think it’s a load of crap heaped on them by one of the world’s greatest con mans. Of course, Joseph Smith Jr. was aided along by a few circumstances, such as the anger he incited in the locals by marrying lots of women among other things, and his death was actually the impetus for the church’s growth and success. If Brigham Young had not taken the Saints to Utah, isolated them, created his own little theocracy and ruled like a king, well, Mormonism would probably have died right out. But out in the desolate land of Utah, it flourished and thrived.

And people that didn’t agree with Mormon beliefs were treated just about like I am being treated by Josh and Nate. I haven’t twisted any beliefs, and as is usual, examples are not given.

Particularly interesting to me was Nate’s comment, “If you prove everything, what’s left to believe in?”

Uh, shouldn’t you believe in the things you CAN prove? Are you saying that you prefer your belief system to be unfounded and unsubstantiated and easily debunked? And if something CAN be proved, then it isn’t true or logical, and you won’t believe in it?



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.

32 Responses to From the Mormon Hatemail Bag….

  1. Joshua Skains says:

    Funny, even filling out this comment form, it says that my email address will not be published, yet your pathetic enough to publish my private email address in some childish response. I have notified your website provider as well as my attorney. You need to grow up some.


  2. Joshua Skains says:

    Also, please note that Natalie was never given permission to publish my comments. I expressed to her my thoughts and her immediate action is to publish my private email in an attempt to cause me harm. Now who is the evil one here? Who is the toddler?


  3. Cele says:

    Wow, that is a lot of hatred burning up his soul. Sad. But then hatred, racism, and prejudice usually always is.

    I have to say this comment made my day I will find myself chucking through the evening over it, and I’m sure he has no idea what he just said…

    Particularly interesting to me was Nate’s comment, “If you prove everything, what’s left to believe in?”


  4. Cele says:

    Oh and Joshua, while your email address isn’t published, the fact you sent her an email makes it her property…dude get real…cause you harm? Your words. Or to offer you an old proverb… “Keep your words soft, you may have to eat them.”


  5. Natalie says:

    Josh has been threatening me right and left, via email. Too bad he really isn’t familiar with the law. And he’s not very Christ-like, let me tell you. I do not remember EVER hearing Jesus call someone a dumbass….


  6. supercb1 says:

    Hummm he is quite funny Natalie…..or and I think I recall from my seminary days Jesus may have called Judus a dumbass….I will have to look for my old textbooks…LOL


  7. Natalie says:

    One of us needs to grow up, and it isn’t me. I fascinate you, Josh, because you just can’t QUIT emailing me or posting on my blog.


  8. Andrew says:

    Joshua, Stupid AND Angry is no way to live. Ask your bishop for permission to 1)Read something beside “faith promoting material and 2) Think about the fact that actual sceince has debunked mromonisms claims – ther is absolutley no way Mormonism is the only true church – it has way to many holes. Why have faith in an organization that outright makes the claim it is the only truth yet actual science can prove it’s claims false.


  9. Todd says:


    Science hasn’t “proven” anything. At most, it’s made things more interesting.

    Fundamentally, Mormons are not required to believe anything that isn’t true. So even if science was able to “prove” a belief incorrect, we’d absorb it and move forward firm in the faith that all will be understood eventually.

    We recognize that there is room for discussion in many of Mormonism’s beliefs. We actively discuss these things internally in an ongoing pattern of “search, ponder, and pray” in our own quest for truth and understanding. I believe that’s part of the plan, to individually work through the facts and individually decide which “voice” to follow.

    I personally welcome opposing points of view, such as is given throughout this blog. I find it amusing when conclusions are prematurely reached based on a partial data. Things are ALWAYS subject to interpretation.

    And, I like to agitate. It helps get people off the sidelines and into the discussion.

    I do agree with you 100% that stupid and angry is no way to live.

    Kindest Regards,


  10. Janie says:

    Wow! Joshua certainly hasn’t made me want to run out and contact the local ward and sign right up! Especially the “Trapped by the Nigger” comment. What a gentleman. What a “Christian!”

    If this is his idea of representing the Momon faith, I’ll pass. Thanks.


  11. Natalie says:

    Joshua, you’ve been calling me names since you started emailing me. You’ve been rude, derisive, arrogant and full of the devil. Kindergarden? It’s kinderGARTEN. Puhleeze. You can’t even spell.

    Now, Whory and loose? I don’t think “whory” is even a word. As I mentioned before, Joshua, you are NOT doing your church any favors.

    I admire Todd now more than ever. Even in his strong defense of his faith, and his derision, he does not stoop to this kind of behavior. He knows when to apologize, and he knows when to stand his ground.

    If you are going to be a “defender of the faith,” Joshua, you have a LOT of lessons to learn.


  12. Todd says:


    A couple of clarifications are in order…

    You admire me now more than ever? So on the spectrum of admiration, am I in positive territory yet?

    Are you distinguishing between my “strong defense” and my “derision” or equating them?

    And, let me just add that I hope you have a lovely day.



  13. azteclady says:

    Science hasn’t proven anything?



    How interesting.


  14. azteclady says:

    Oh dear, I’ve messed up the tags… lemme see if I can fix it


  15. azteclady says:

    is it fixed?


  16. Natalie says:

    Yup, it’s fixed. And for some people, there will never BE enough proof, azteclady. Sometimes, you just have to accept that there will never be a “reasoned” argument or rationale. People believe what they want to believe, and find ways to get around the hard spots.


  17. Natalie says:

    Just FYI, Joshua continues to harass me via email. I guess he’s regretting his ugly words. Oh well. Common courtesy would have gone a long way with me. But harassment? Not so much.


  18. Melissa says:

    Science is a body of knowledge. As more is learned, more data gathered, understanding deepens and beliefs change. And it’s a given that more will be learned and understanding will continue to get deeper, so therefore some people use that as “proof” that science doesn’t have any answers and can therefore be discounted.

    Well, I tell you. We’re living longer, living healthier, and experiencing better health care thanks to that imprefect, ever-changing science. Computers, airplanes, the Internet are all possible because of science. Everything we do and have has a basis in science. Even though it’s not “finished,” even though we don’t have all the answers, we’ve still done some amazing things thanks to the body of knowledge that is science.

    Science is about data. Testable, repeatable, concrete data. I have things I believe in that I don’t have scientific proof for. But I also have sense enough to question those things if science proves OTHER things that contradict what I believed. There’s faith, there’s blind faith, and there’s utter foolishness.


  19. Todd says:



    Let me make if perfectly clear, I am NOT discounting science! I’m only cautioning against drawing premature conclusions based on a possibly incomplete data set.

    We don’t have the science to measure faith or conviction or belief or sadness or happiness. We are starting to understand the science of the brain, but we don’t understand our own consciousness or sense of being. The expanse of the universe is seemingly infinite, and we can barely see beyond our own galaxy, let alone actually go there.

    In short, I’m all for science; but just like the blind men and the elephant, each one touching a different part of the animal and then comparing notes on what they felt, only to learn they are in complete disagreement. Reality may be viewed differently depending upon one’s perspective, or the size and breadth of one’s data set.



  20. JulieAnn says:

    Todd! I’m up for air for a second! How was your New Year?
    I caught up on some reading this morning–couldn’t sleep.

    You wrote: “Mormons are not required to believe anything that isn’t true.”

    Then: ” I find it amusing when conclusions are prematurely reached based on a partial data.”

    Wouldn’t another word for ‘partial data’ be “faith?”

    And upon faith is what members of your church base their beliefs.

    I see a disconnect in logic there.

    If Mormons are not “required” to believe things that aren’t true, then why oh why are they required to believe in some of the ‘partial truths’ aka ‘faith-based’ beliefs that masquerade as fact from your leaders and doctrine?

    (Personally, I like it when you agitate. It tickles :))




  21. Todd says:

    JulieAnn! My New Year is going well. I trust that your book is coming along well?

    To answer your question, I would not characterize “partial data” as “faith.”

    To me, data is nothing more than information. And, it is from information that I can formulate opinions (belief) and ultimately draw conclusions (knowledge). In simple terms, faith is merely acting in accordance with my opinions or belief. Similarly, wisdom would be acting in accordance with my knowledge.

    So, in a nutshell, I don’t base my beliefs on my faith. Rather, I base my faith on my beliefs, and my beliefs are based on my perception of the data.

    What is critical, at least to me, in this process is finding good data.



  22. Rick says:

    Hmm, interesting discussion here. I’d like to submit another angle to science based conclusions. It’s really all a matter of probabilities. With what we understand about a principle, and its repeatability, we proceed with faith that we will get a desired result.

    For example, science has taught us how to make light bulbs. We don’t completely understand how electricity works, but we know enough that we are quite confident that electricity will work to light our houses, run our surgical machines/computers, etc.; In fact, we trust it enough that we risk our lives that it will “work” when critical tasks are undertaken.

    Basically, we have enough repeatable data that we have extremely high probability that things will work. And now, we even release previously convicted prisoners for alleged murders based on (scientifically researched) DNA findings.

    So science is highly trusted by all of us. And in my opinion, it is the same science that can be used to test religious claims. When something is repeatable and consistent, passes basic double-blind, unbiased research studies, I will give it my attention.

    But mormonism is not the only religion that fails. Most do. I just believe that mormonism has done a better than average job of teaching its believers how to justify and rationalize scientific evidence against it.



  23. Todd says:


    I would argue that your conclusion, that mormonism fails, could be based on incomplete data or a faulty analysis.

    Further, a conclusion based strictly on scientific data could be faulty from the outset, because of necessity it’s based on things that must be scientifically measured. As I have tried to point out, science hasn’t developed methods to measure most (any?) spiritual things.

    For example, science concludes that God doesn’t exist. By every scientific measure, there’s no “evidence” or “measure” supporting His being. That conclusion, however, strongly contradicts my own personal experiences. Those experiences are a part of my data set. And while I can’t show that evidence to you, it’s part of the data that drives my belief and hence my faith.

    It’s plausible that mormonism has done a better job than average because it’s providing its believers with this spiritual data; despite the existence of scientific data that on the surface might appear contrary.

    Good scientific method would require the scientist to “rationalize” all data sets before drawing conclusions, lest the conclusion itself miss the mark. I would argue that a similar method should be used by believers to “rationalize” both the scientific (outer) and spiritual (inner) data. When there are conflicts, we should seek for understanding in a line-upon-line, precept-upon-precept kind of way.

    Kindest Regards,


  24. Rick says:


    Of course I would say that what you call “incomplete data” is in fact quite complete and quite repeatable and understood by objective analysis. Yes, what the believing member sees is enough “possibility” to satisfy their need for injection of “faith” to make their desired conclusion.

    And that’s okay. As I’ve said many times before, the life a mormon (or other religion’ member) leads is generally happy and positive. Society mostly benefits from you.

    But I will argue that “spiritual data” is also scientific. We know much more today about spiritual experiences than we did in the past. Spiritual feelings can be induced by certain environmental forces, and have been repeated with pharmaceutical studies. The best evidence for the lack of validity to a spiritual event meaning what most think it means (ie, “I was moved by the spirit to kill this person…”) is that the “message” is completely inconsistent, but arguably equally powerful between the recipients. IOW, if a radical Muslim believes they have witnessed “Allah” telling them to strap bombs to them and drive into a building, while an Israeli insists their God told them to kill the Muslims, the logical conclusion is that one or both “perceptions” are faulty.

    So by using simple deductive reasoning, “spiritual events” must be consistent to be valid (as being from a single higher universal power). I’ve yet to see consistency in any dogmatic religion, mormonism very included.

    But thanks for the thought provoking post!



  25. Todd says:


    Belief in a complete data set is illogical and irrational. We’ve barely scratched the surface in terms of data and knowledge. To suggest otherwise is indicative of your own need to reach a desired conclusion.

    The ability to replicate certain “spiritual feelings” by manipulating the environment or using drugs doesn’t even come close to satisfying the requirements of “scientific proof” that spiritual events are, shall we say, imaginary or self-caused.

    I’d be interested to hear your explanation for “spiritual feelings” that come “without compulsory means.”

    Even an “inconsistent message” doesn’t negate the validity of spiritual events, because your premise explicitly assumes a single messenger. Isn’t it possible that there are multiple messengers, with possibly inconsistent messages? Christian dogma certainly allows for that possibility.

    I won’t quote Moroni 7:12-13 for you.

    Perfect consistency in any religion; atheism, agnosticism, and secularism included; is highly unlikely anytime soon, because there are just too many variables. The dogma for Christians is to “come in the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God.” If we were already unified in the faith, there would be no reason to “come” to such unity; and hence the need for apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers.

    I do appreciate your thoughtful comments, though.

    Best Regards,


  26. Joshua Skains says:

    Lets clear some facts up:

    I hope it is known that the comment that I kept emailing her misses a lot of information. First off she was replying… It wasn’t me constantly sending email randomly and without provocation. The fact is I was demanding that she removed email that she did not have permission to publish. I was making a private comment on the fact I feel she is a bigot and is attacking a religion through her trash novels.

    The comment about blacks is obvious, but for the dense, it was to make a point. She is agressive on Mormonism because it is popular to attack. But she would dare take a stab at a “protected” group. That, in my opinion, makes her a bigot.

    Lastly, if she asked me permission to publish my emails, I might have even given it to her, but she initially published my private email address as well, which sparked my “flood” of emails demanding she fix the problem.

    Understand, she is giving you pieces of the story to make her side look good. The fact you folks so quickly bow to her side makes me wonder if there is a lot of hero worship.



  27. Stephanie says:

    Um, she doesn’t need to ask permission to post emails you sent her.

    If my mom sends me a sweater for Christmas, it becomes my property. I can wear it, I can unravel it and knit something new, I can regift it to someone else. Mom might not like what I choose to do with it, but it’s mine to do what I want.

    Same with emails. You send something nasty or disgusting, the recipient is free to delete it without reading it, read it and delete it, forward it to absolutely everyone in the free world, or post about it on her blog. It’s not libel, slander or anything like that. Exposing who you really are, sure. If it makes you look bad, that’s your fault. Don’t send nasty things to people who maintain a public presence. 😀 Doesn’t take a genius to figure that one out.

    Hero worship? Not at all. I enjoy Natalie’s writings because she exposes what so many people think is kosher to sweep under the rug. Milk before the meat, my rear end. Truth should NEVER be hidden.


  28. azteclady says:

    Hold those horses.

    “Joshua” is now claiming that Natalie published his/her/its private email address.

    Huh. IF that is true, she must have been rather quick to fix it, ’cause I didn’t see it, and I’m one of those people who check her blog list often during the day, so I think I would have seen it…

    Of course, what do I know, right? After all, I think Joseph Smith was a con artist–the first in a successful line of them.


  29. Natalie says:

    Joshua and all,

    1. Fact. I inadvertently published Joshua’s email address. When I cut and paste comments from the comments queue of my dashboard, it includes their email and ISP address. I did the cut and paste, and then when Joshua emailed me a few hours later realized I had not cut it out, as I always do. You can go back and check the past, if you need.

    2. Fact. Shortly after I realized I had published his email and full name, I removed it.

    3. Fact. Shortly after that, I sent an email apologizing to both HIM and the other email commenter, and let them know that the mistake had been fixed, and that it HAD been a mistake, and that I was not trying to expose him to ridicule. Joshua HIMSELF has done this, with his blog,

    4. Fact. The FLOOD of emails came AFTER I corrected my mistake. I could post THOSE emails, and prove it, if necessary. I received 18 emails after I corrected the mistake.

    5. Fact. In honestly, I responded to many of those emails.

    6. Fact. Joshua accused ME of starting the name calling.

    7. Fact. I proved him wrong, with the emails, WHICH I still have saved, which show he started the namecalling LONG before I called him an arrogant idiot, which, many might say, was deserved. (Want proof? Read the emails.)

    8. Fact. I have never met anyone who worshipped me. And that is as it should be.

    9. Fact. Joshua as the RiGHT to consider me a bigot. That doesn’t change the FACT that he is wrong, but hey, let’s give him that. He has been wrong in many things. It would just take a little look at his emails for you to ALL realize that.

    10. The bottom line fact. Joshua is a little immature, and a lot impulsive, and his attack has led to a lot of damage to his Church’s PR and “warm fuzzy” outer image.

    In fact, Joshua has proved what many before him have started to show, but then wisely walked away from. He has done no favors to the Mormon Church, because his attitude is an on-the-surface exposure of the realities of Mormonism. My God is better than your God, and it doesn’t matter what YOU do, because you don’t have the authority of God. How sad.

    How sad that YOU think your God trumps everyone else’s God. Why don’t we ALL share the same God.

    Why is that Joshua? Why is that Todd? Why do you NEED your God to be better than my God? Why is that so important? Furthermore, why is it just as important to me that my God NOT be better than your God? Why do I NOT need to best you?

    Maybe you should ask yourself that.

    Or maybe you should just cover yourself in ignorance and continue on.



  30. Todd says:

    Hey Natalie!

    I thought we were finally getting back to a respectful dialog, and there you go trying suck me into this little tiff between you and Joshua.

    So, for the record…

    I don’t think my God trumps everyone else’s God.
    I believe my God is everyone else’s God (which speaks to your query about sharing).
    I don’t need my God to be better than your God (they are one and the same, I believe).

    I’m here mainly to agitate the herd (or tickle as the case may be) and of course to entertain, amuse, and enlighten. I enjoy a healthy debate, with a little colorful abuse being hurled along the way to spice things up.

    Honest mistakes frankly and openly admitted should be quickly forgiven. I know I made one several years ago, and really appreciated it when I was let off the hook. 😉



  31. Dr. Shades says:

    Dear Natalie:

    All of us on are talking about Joshua Skains’ recent visit to your weblog. You might be interested in some of the comments made there.

    Would you be kind enough to look over the discussion and, better yet, give us your insights? The thread is found at:

    Thanks a million,


  32. David says:

    I bumped into Joshua’s website also and found the same compunction to comment there. Then I did a little checking and found this site. Joshua’s problem I believe is he never finishes anything, and I believe that goes for his personal, personal life.

    You have done a great job with your rebuttals. I find your wit is more wisdom in reality. I too went through the TBM stage and after thirty-five years in the “church” (small c), I am free and no more guilt, but plenty of “satisfaction” in my own life, and much happiness to boot. Keep up the good work – you’re doing fine.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s