John, I so want to meet you, now! It was great to see your face. You are mature and articulate. There is a place outside of Brigham City that serves really good food, my Al-Anon sponser and I (also an active Mormon) are going to meet there sometime. It’s a ranch or something.

Although I think polygamy sucked too. Mixed emotions, but I’m with Mitt on this. He’s running for president, not prophet and he has the right to express an opinion. I do, why doesn’t he?

ECS, wake up, hon, didn’t mean to shock you by defending Mitt, but there you have it. I’m warming to him. If only he weren’t so handsome. If only he looked like Ed Harris.

John, I agreed with you re the temple thing, until I watched the show. Okay, I’m stupid. Is it official doctrine that Jesus will first come to Missouri? I might have answered that question with “I don’t know, is that right? where did you read that? We believe He will come to Missouri, we believe that article of faith, but I’m thinking He will come to Jerusalem first when the two prophets get killed and then He will visit around.”

“But, hey, you know, we could discuss this all day. George, if you would like to know more about the Mormon Church, I’d like to give your name to the missionaries. You seem really golden and alive with curiousity. And let’s get back to IMMIGRATION, HELLO!”

#3 ARJ, I agree completely.
Oh! Also #8 Daniel.

#6 ECS, I think he was speaking rhetorically in answer to a specific issue. We all say “I can’t think of anything more awful than . . .having bleeding hemorroids, or ..well, awful stuff.” It’s conversation. Of course there are more awful things. Maybe he can think of things AS awful, but it’s down there for him.

I might say “I can’t think of anything more awful than having your child abducted.” But I can think of things AS awful.

They’re all crazy. We’re all crazy. I cannot remember where I read this, but if I come across it and still remember it, I’ll post it, this really famous guy philosopher or something said, “If people knew what I thought about, they’d have me shot. Or not be my friend, something like that.” The only difference between me and George Bush and Bill Clinton is I KNOW I’m crazy.

#7 John Scherer, give me a break. Presidents always impose their beliefs on the masses. Look at what Jimmy Carter did.

Where’s insult in being called a liberal Mormon? It’s sort of how I describe myself. Actually, I get slightly annoyed if somebody calls me a conservative Mormon. Although that’s redundant. Actually, nobody has ever called me conservative. But if they did, I’d probably say “are you implying that I’m a conservative Mormon? you said as much, but you’re wrong.” And call them a bad word or something.

And point out that the phrase is redundant and they are morons.

#3 & #8 Daniel, I agree completely.

#11, Seth, see above. Did you guys expect him to elaborate at length on the meaning of the phrase “more awful than” and qualify? It was just a figure of speech. (As an aside, they won’t take me at the women’s shelter. They will take stuff and money, but they see that I have anger issues and peoples’ husbands would be being shot all over the place..no lie, true story)

DKL, this is what I’m saying. If I had to choose between having a sister wife, and listening to my husband’s wonderful but boring best friend speak in sacrament for the SIXTH time this year, I’d say, “honey, go for Pamela Anderson. And park her trailer in the back.”

I’m feeling sleepy, perhaps I can get a few minutes in. If I don’t lay down and have my eyes pop open like in Russian sleep torture.

And I have to take more tomorrow. The dumb doctor in the ER gave me really dangerous antibiotics but I’m not taking them. My next post, no the one after will be “doctors are human beings who can be very stupid, use your head.” I could be dying as we speak.

So if I said a bunch of stuff you already said, in #13-40, disregard.

Oh, I would just like to say (John this is why nobody e-mails me LOL) that I spent a pleasant hour interviewing John and if he is still speaking to me after I asked his brother for a quote on how he beat John up and made him poop in his hand as a child, I have a lot to tell y’all about John. And it ain’t all about mormons, either. But names will be dropped. Not Mormon ones, either….

Now you sound like Mitt, calling the statement “outrageous” for effect. Can you imagine anything more awful than a presidential candidate that makes outrageous statements?

I already explained why I was offended by his remark. And no I’m no timplying anything about you. Only summarizing those who I have seen express their offense at the remark.

Are you implying I’m a liberal Mormon? You said as much, but you are wrong. So, I’ll be overly sensitive, and you can be overly-broad in your categorization of people!

And plenty of abused women today feel there’s nothing worse than monogamous marriage.

Duh. If you notice, I didn’t make any judgements personally about polygamy. I merely stated that I believe that Mitt Romney isn’t alone if he actually feels what he said.

it’s Mormons who value their heritage. Mormons who believe in divine guidance of the Church throughout its history. Mormons who don’t feel like they have to explain away church teachings and history to the world in a vain grab for praise and worldly acceptance. Mormons who have reconciled that sometimes matters of faith cannot be explained in rational terms to persons who are not of faith.

Are you implying that those of us who aren’t offended by Mitt’s comments don’t give a rip about those things? Some of us just aren’t offended easily. Would you hold the same contempt for a person who can’t think of anything worse than withholding priesthood blessings from a person strictly because of the color of their skin? The priesthood ban was practiced longer than polygamy was.

When you get right down to it, what offends me even more than Mitt’s stand on polygamy (a minor issue, in reality), and yes, even more than his flip-flopping on vital issues (making him untrustworthy), is the attitude of LDS members who assume that because I am also LDS that I share their love for Mitt and assume I will be voting for him. I get emails soliciting donations, invitations to campaign meetings, and all sorts of stuff, based on nothing more than my LDS-ness. Assuming I will vote for Mitt because he belongs to the same church as I do is offensive to me.

And aside from offending, it also depresses me that so many LDS don’t even question Mitt or his varying positions. A lot of LDS check their brains at the door and get all ga-ga over electing a Mormon president, so that they forget to be objective and forget to use slightly more useful criteria in choosing the leader of the free world than where he goes to church.

I think almost any way he phrased the answer would have offended some portion of LDS members. Ducking the question is offensive to some, answering honestly offends others, using hyperbole for political ends offends others.

We’re not all going to agree on whether or not his comments were calculated, intentionally incendiary, or candid (but with slightly different word usage). I do think, when it comes to Polygamy, that there’s not one way to answer the question that doesn’t leave some LDS members offended or frustrated.