You learn something new every day; what did you learn today? Submit interesting and specific facts about something that you just found out here.
[deleted]
TIL from 1838-1976 it was legal to kill Mormons in Missouri.
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
So in 1976 killing Mormons was perfectly legal in Missouri?
That can't be right, did anyone do it around that time and get away with it?
No for multiple reasons. First of all murder is a federal crime as well. Secondly, the case would have gone to trial, and the judge would have ruled that the state constitution of Missouri takes precedence over any such law from 1838. In actuality, neither of those matter, because OP misinterpreted the article. This is not a law but rather an executive order to government agencies. It has nothing to do with common murders against someone who happens to be Mormon.
I feel like this is really an issue of state's rights.
Damn federal government coming in to tell me I can't kill Mormons! First the slaves now this!
Librul snowflakes getting their feelings hurt over a little murdering!
you sarcastically say that, but we literally have people going around claiming it's okay to hit people because 'they are nazis'. It's the same train of thought. Label a group as x and then use x as an excuse to deprive them of their basic rights and protections.
polygamy is also federally illegal, doesn't seem to stop the Mormons from marrying 60 year old men to 4+ teenage brides at the same time.
Fucking liberals
Murder in general is not a federal crime. The US Code lists a handful of very specific circumstances under which the federal government would have jurisdiction over a murder charge, including: attacks on the US government; killings committed during federal felonies; murders related to drugs; murders related to child exploitation; murder for hire; murders crossing state lines; and a few others.
Murdering Mormons in Missouri might fall under federal jurisdiction hate crime laws, but most murders are not federal crimes.
Pretty sure there is a portion of a national park where murder is not illegal.
No there's a portion of a national park where it is not immediately obvious where the trial would be held (because one state has legal jurisdiction of the park but this portion is in a neighboring state). That doesn't mean the trial wouldn't happen.
It does actually: IF i recall correctly, the jury in that case needs to be made up of people Form a certain piece of land where literally noone lives, and since you a right to a jury, there's a problem
No. It is not. There is no federal "murder statute" because unlike the states, the federal government does not have general police powers. Now, if you traveled across state lines to commit the murder, or moved the body across state lines, thats a different matter.
The federal government cannot prosecute a crime unless it crosses state lines or involves a federal agent or federal facility. A random person in Missouri murdering another person in Missouri could not be prosecuted by the federal government.
A person must be tried under the laws which were in place when the crime was committed.
Not 1976 it was illegal. 1975 on the other hand...
Yeah, prior to that, you had to take them out of state to off them.
its still legal to shoot native americans from the back of a covered wagon with a hand cranked gatling gun in North Dakota if they ride off the reservations on horseback.
so far none of the local drunks have found the stash of covered wagons with mounted gatlings in the them.
1976: Public Defender: "even if my client did kill the man it would have been perfectly legal as the man killed was a Mormon. It may be an old law but it checks out" 1977: Old law gets taken off the books
This would actually work. A person must be tried under the laws which were in effect at the time the crime was committed.
I read this in Lionel Hutz's voice.
And, back in those days before game conservation laws, there were no limits; you could take as many as you could shoot. Hunters had stacks of dead Mormons as high as the train cars, bundled up and ready to ship home for drying and tanning. Here in Indiana, you can only bag a pair of gays per season (although there's still no limit on atheists - kill all you want)
http://i.imgur.com/RnaXWVg.jpg
80's nuclear apocalypse humor is back in style.
Thanks Donny.
Around here it's two game wardens, seven hunters and a cow.
That's the maximum the game laws will allow!
The synthetic atheist skin has really killed the demand for genuine ones.
I prefer free-range, organic, non-GMO atheists myself. Synthetic atheists give me heartburn.
We had an atheist head mounted over the fireplace in the house I grew up in. Had to take it down. Grandma was allergic to atheist dander.
If I am not mistaken you can also shoot as many anarchists as you want because they are considered a pest.
Edit: I think that televangelist are in season in Texas right now as well.
Maybe it is worth a trip to ol' Texas after all. Gotta gets me one of them TV folk!
You need to be validly hunting something else at the time though.
r/shittyaskhistorians
Atheists are an agricultural pest, not a game species.
Comment deleted by user
Grumpyclump advocating murder again...
As is tradition
It is known
A great day for Missouri, and therefore the world.
it's not too late to bring it back
can we rope Scientologists and Jehovah witnesses in as well, sort of like a bundle deal.
Inbefore someone adds muslims, jews, african americans, latin americans, irish americans, italian americans, lgbts, asians, canadians, the british, californians, democrats, bernie sanders, russians, clintons and of course, the reptilians.
You leave the reptilians out of this!
For sure. Somebody gots to do the killin'.
Contact your congress-person NOW.
The blood book of Mormon.
Name another religion or group that you would feel comfortable saying this about please
There's a commonly expressed thought that, when posting a joke online, no matter how obvious a joke it is, someone out there will not sense that it was an obvious joke and take it seriously. But then you think, "Surely there is some level of absurdity where you don't have to tag something a joke."
Then I see posts like yours and wonder if there really isn't a level of absurdity that qualifies.
Got it. My bad. Am a Mormon and there are still people who feel that way about mormons. Missed the joke.
I highly doubt there are any people of sound mind that really think a law should be passed making it legal to hunt Mormons. I mean, Vegans -- sure, everyone can get behind that. But Mormons ought to be relatively safe.
Reddit is a crappy place to be as a Mormon. Source: Am Mormon
Earth is a crappy place to be as a Mormon. Source: Was a Mormon.
Do you not see the really obvious holes in the Joseph Smith story?
It does bug me how frequently I see people tag a comment: Sarcasm or /s.
Like, wasn't that obvious?
Comment deleted by user
Second.
Literally all of them.
deleted 0.6354 What is ^^^this?
Anyone who puts religious dogmas in front of human decency needs to go.
Islam... Wait, so it's ok to mock every Christian religion but not Islam? Give me a break.
Nazis
Any one that does door to door proselytizing.
I'll pick religion
I knew this. Cuz I've payed attention in church history
I'm sure they also covered the part where it was Sidney Rigdon who declared a War of Extermination months earlier.
Gotta check the Broble, see if that's ok.
you stole my comment
you will pat dearly for this
Just don’t let him pat too much. Once is good, twice is okay, three times is acceptable, but any more than that and things get weird.
It's okay in Japan, anyway.
Shit!? It's not legal anymore? Um, can I borrow a shovel?
Comment deleted by user
Comment deleted by user
You may have missed the main plot of that one. :/
This guy doesn't watch enough anime.
So are you Andrew Shue or Jonathan Silverman
Andrew McCarthy
SHIT
The ultimate taboo
You probably did it wrong.
You have to bury your own.
That explains my grandfather's taxidermy collection
ITT: people who think killing people for their religious beliefs is smart
I've mostly heard people claiming they were at war with the state?
They where not. People hated the Mormons because they had the most prosperous settlement in Missouri. The people of Missouri hated the Mormons, so the governor passed the law to gain popular support for more terms. The excuse of war is mostly based of the fact that the Mormons had large militia groups that where organized after Mormon settlements kept getting attacked. The militias were put into place because the Feds and the states refused to do anything about it. The Mormons had a shit time out east.
Oh nuance. People hated the Mormons because they bragged that when the second coming would occur, all the land and property in Missouri would being to them. The Mormons also frequently used their economic bloc to their advantage. Then the danites looted a town. Naturally, the Missourians weren't too happy and fought back. It escalated into the extermination order them Haun's mill.
But, I guess you can say they hated them for their religion and economic power. It's just saying that was makes the Mormons sound like innocent victims (though at Haun's mill, they were)
See: Danites, Salt Sermon, Thomas Marsh's affidavit
See now I'm mostly hearing about asshats all around, and that sounds more like good old fashioned humans at work to me.
I'd say it was a bit of a mix. The Mormons were outsiders immigrating in to Missouri. Even today most people don't like immigrants moving in to "their" area in large numbers. Beyond the economic bloc there was also the issue of the political bloc. Mormons had the numbers to control a variety of local and soon state elections. Slavery was also an issue, as Missouri was a slave state, and most Mormons were more aligned with abolitionists. Mormons felt like this was their promised land and that it would all be theirs soon.
The Mormons were pushed from one county to the other over the next few years starting in 1833. Their property was often confiscated and/or damaged. They didn't have any protection other than what they provided for themselves.
The Salt Sermon (which mostly dealt internally with some Mormon land owners) and Danites all came after this period, in the summer of 1838. Danites were basically a response by Mormons to defend themselves after 5 years of being ran from town to town by armed mobs. The defense also turned to retaliation which then leads to a state militia to fight the Mormons.
In then culminates in a series of small skirmishes, the extermination order, and Haun's Mill Massacre. The Mormons end up surrendering their arms to the state militia which again leaves them defenseless, this time to an even more openly hostile people.
They finally get run out in the winter/spring of 1838/1839, having to abandon most of their property and fleeing in wagons and on foot through the snow to Illinois.
The Mormons certainly weren't without fault, but it's hard to see this as anything but an ugly instance of xenophobia and a completely mismanaged situation by the state leaders that allowed things to get way out of control.
I agree. I suppose I was only stating one case as a counterbalance to the false claim that the Mormons were completely innocent. I'm also posting from my phone and therefore trying to keep it brief.
Your summary is quite good. Thank you.
Oh yes, but you leave out key stuff facts like always. Like how this entire conflict began when a mod of 200 men refused to let Mormons vote and attacked Mormons when they refused to let their constitutional right be depraved of them. This then lead to mobs attacking the Mormons, something the Mormons had experienced before and as stated in the Salt sermon refused to experience again.
Didn't Christ teach to turn the other cheek?
Besides, I hardly believe either side is blameless. The point I am making though is that most Mormons will try to claim persecution and being innocently harrassed purely for believing differently. Haun's mill certainly counts as a case where the Mormons were innocent victims, but other than that one incident, both sides were equally to blame.
The Mormon people would also attack citizens and people who wronged them. For example, the mountain meadow massacre. This is all coming from my Mormon Sunday school class though so who knows.
Mountain Meadow Massacre happened over 20 years later. While there were issues on both sides, the fact that the state government had an extermination order against the Mormons gives you some idea that they were in a tough spot.
The state was in the western frontier at the time, and was basically a lawless society.
Mormons originally settled in Independence, but a mob tarred and feathered two church leaders, destroyed their printing press, and drove them out of the county. The state did nothing.
The Mormons began settling in a different county, but hostilities rose there too. Mormons were forcefully prevented from voting, so they retaliated, destroying some houses. This time, Joseph Smith and other leaders were arrested, and an extermination order was given. Mormons were driven from the state, some were killed.
Historians call it the "Missouri Mormon War" but it's not like anyone declared war on the other. It's just-- a bunch of violence happened.
I mean that sounds like how it would go down. Good ol' Missouri, eh?
I don't see why its necessarily not smart.
Evil? Probably
But killing people over their religion can be a pragmatic thing to do if you're a monster. Take Hitler scapegoating the jews for example.
I've been watching too much Star Trek TNG and I'm hoping we don't destroy the planet before making it to that level of evolution
Well, they were at war. That's what war is, killing people.
The fuck? How were the Mormons at war you idiot?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1838_Mormon_War
Was the law ever used in a trial?
Missouri doesn't fuck around
Can we do this for scientologists?
Are you guys being serious about this or not?! Who the hell thinks it's alright to kill anyone because of beliefs....
Governor Lilburn W. Boggs, because politics, ignorance (he believed the hearsay and didn't bother to fact-check) and whatever other reasons. He issued the Extermination Order, which said that the Mormons "must be exterminated or driven from the state." I had no idea it lasted that long on the books, though.
More likely he received Joe Smith's pamphlet of the Salt Sermon where Sidney Rigdon had declared a War of Extermination against LEOs attempting to serve arrest warrants for the many crimes of the church leaders.
He heard rumors that the Saints were attacking Missourians, but it was actually the mobs attacking the Saints.
The "Saints" were also sacking nearby towns to fill their Bishop's Storehouse.
I'll need a source on that.
True it's messed up, but the Mormons used to basically try to forcibly take lands from Missourians in the name if religion and would have small militias to fight townsfolk if they didn't "comply."
I could be missing some points but hopefully so I don't seem like I'm talking out of my ass, but that's the basic just from various reading I've done over the years. Though much less recently.
That is horseshit. Missourians did not like Mormons coming in and buying land and changing the political landscape. Mormons voted different than Missourians and elected some of their own. Missourians did not like that so they would then pull together chickenshit mobs and come in at night, raping women and young girls and murdering the men and burn their property to try to get the Mormons to abandon their lands and move out of Missouri. And the coward Governor Boggs helped create legislation to make these actions legal against Mormons, calling for all Mormons to be exterminated; that was the actual wording he used. The Mormons banded together to protect themselves because after Governor Boggs opened the door to kill Mormons, the impotent President Buchanan refused to stop the murders and rapes either. They were protecting their lives, families, property, and religion. As a Mormon, I am well versed in this history as it pertains to my people, beliefs, and religion.
Also, Mormons threatened people who were leaving the Mormon church. Look up "Salt Sermon" sometime.
Most Mormons leave out all the criminal stuff they did that prompted the extermination order. It makes them look back. Also, Gov. Boggs was almost assassinated while in office, and a lot people back then blamed the Mormons for that.
Comment deleted by user
And yet it scared people who had left the Mormon church so much that most grabbed their families and left town. The Mormons kept their property. Rigdon followed on with a threatening sermon on July 4th. The Danites formed and began their violence. Everything was ramping up, and it wasn't because the Mormons were just peaceful little sheep.
In short, the Mormons started conflicts all the time. They just don't bother to put that part in the history they teach their members.
So, it's like when Trump said some "second amendment people" should fix something, that wasn't a threat?
They were founded by a felon that defrauded people out of money.
As an Exmormon I know the history as well and can say the the Mormons aren’t blameless. Oh and if you are Mormon you shouldn’t be using language like ”horseshit” as the prophets have spoken against harsh language and loud laughter. Shame on you.
Exmormons are worse than super-evangelical mormons. It's like it's their life's mission to take cheap jabs and make holier-than-thou comments. I'd rather have the mormkn elders hassle me every day than to hear how "woke" exmomos are.
Wow.
It isn't like the Mormons were nice guys though. Then gunned down an entire wagon train just trying to pass through.
As far as religions go, the Church of LDS is pretty close to the "you gotta be shitting me" side of believability; just a tad bit more believable than Scientology.
Believe it or not, the non-Xenu parts of Scientology are basically plagiarized works from Wundt iirc and that's why a lot of the meditative things work for anxiety relief and other minor problems because it's just rebranding conventionally accepted methods of self-improvement through meditation.
The Mountain Meadows massacre was way after things like the Hans Mill massacre, and executive order 44. That's like saying Pearl Harbor was justified because we dropped the atomic bombs...
How does 17 people being killed in Missouri relate to 140 Arkansans being murdered?
How does 17 people being killed in Missouri relate to 140 Arkansans being murdered?
Or, as a Mormon, you have a biased understanding of it's history?
I read this and tried to research more from both ends of the conflict and I just have a hard time believing that it went down in that way. I appreciate your reply. This thread has been so ruthless...
I can just imagine someone saying "Time to put them out of their Missouri."
From 1838-1976 it was probably also legal to kill anyone who made this pun.
Calm down Annie Wilkes
I'm Mormon and i'm offended. Nah jokes this was the past lmao.
What does the book of mormon teach about black people and the people of south america - asking for a friend.
Also - how close this video is what mormons actually believe? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3BqLZ8UoZk
2 Nephi 5:20-25 from the book of Mormon:
EDIT: That video clip is from a movie called the Godmakers. It's not entirely inaccurate, but not really representative. I recommend instead some short humorous videos by Brother Jake. They are satirical videos by a former Mormon named Jake, but are completely consistent with church teachings. Think how SNL did a Sarah Palin skit and used her actual speech word-for-word.
Ironically, in this case, the Mormons were anti-slavery and the Missourians were pro-slavery
wow thats racist shit.
What's worse is it took NCAA schools saying we're not going to play BYU for them to recant that and say black people could hold the priesthood. When it looked like BYU status as a NCAA school(a big source of revenue) was threatened divine revelation came to the heads of the LDS saying that those parts of the Book of Mormon were not accurate. This didn't happen until the 1970s too.
Money is the one true god of humanity.
Wow. And now there are all the ethnically diverse billboards for LDS.
I don't think they ever "recanted" anything regarding these passages of the Book of Mormon, but they did change the policy on who could hold the Priesthood. There's not even really a repudiation of the policy that Brigham Young started. They often will point out that he stated the policy would be reversed in the future.
There is this official statement: https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng
The most recent stats I found as far as revenue: "BYU brought in $22.4 million in the 2012 season, posting a $7.41 million profit."
If BYU is like any other school, much or most of that profit went to subsidize other sports at the school. BYU football isn't making the church rich. I would argue that what it does provide is visibility. BYU football is on ESPN every week during the season.
Oh come on now. It's not that bad. Let's let Brother Jake explain!
definitely racist
The Book of Mormon doesn't teach anything about black people. The Book of Mormon takes place somewhere in the Americas, not Africa.
The Book of Mormon teaches about some groups of people that left the old world in ancient times and were led by God to the new world. There were prophets here who also taught of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ visited these people after His death and resurrection. Eventually, though, the people became wicked.
So we believe that they are among the ancestors of the natives of the Americas.
The cartoon is part of a longer movie called The God Makers. Produced by some evangelical Christians against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it has been denounced by other Christian groups, and even by prominent ex-Mormons as grossly misrepresenting Mormonism.
Here's a line-by-line analysis of the cartoon by a believing Mormon.
This was proven false by the DNA and linguistic history of the natives to north and south America. The book is demonstrably false on these claims. Your book is flawed, your founder was a criminal and a liar.
This is the downside of starting a religion after we started writing shit down really well.
I dont care how many people denounce something. People denounce drawing pictures of Muhammad and that has no baring on anything.
It actually can't be proven true or false based on DNA. Those that arrived over ten thousand years ago would overpower any DNA that was later brought over.
Genetic drift makes proving it false impossible, and the Founder's effect makes it impossible to prove true.
It sounds like you've already made your mind up though about the video, and weren't really asking how accurate it is? You're right, it doesn't matter how many denounce it, but what does it say when it comes from those least likely to do so?
But if you don't want to read the analysis I linked, then here's a tl;dr--
imagine the video was made by the same people, but about atheists. It would be like, "Atheists believe that there was nothing and then nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned to dinosaurs."
(Which was actually an image I used to see get shared.)
Obviously, this is a poor description for what atheists believe. Push it a little more to be more offensive, like, "atheists teach that man is descended through demon mutant monkey rape."
That's what the video is like for Mormons. Distorted so much that it doesn't reflect reality at all.
And then imagine Ken Ham (raging creationist) coming out to denounce the anti-atheist video as grossly misrepresenting atheist beliefs. Maybe you still don't care, but it sends a pretty big statement just because of the position of who's saying it.
I seriously doubt you would have gotten away with killing a Mormon especially in the 1960s and 1970s.
It was the 1960s where many places in the south, a white man could get away with killing a black man. Why not a Mormon?
Because they are white too. Can you show a case of a mormon being murdered in 20th century Missouri and getting away with it?
I can't answer the second question. But people who kill others for the color of their skin are doubtful to be also reasonable towards not killing others for their religion.
That's easy to show. Show me 2 murders of Mormons in 20th century Missouri. Even murder, at the most extreme crime that PD's spent most to investigate, is solved about 50% of the time (current stats, assume older stats are even worse).
So if 10 Mormons were murdered, 5 mighta gotten away with it.
(not cause they were mormon, but because detective work is hard)
Okay let me rephrase that. Show me a case where executive order 44 was utilized as a successful defense argument in the murder of a mormon in 20th century Missouri.
I'm sure the near constant incest and rape on their part didn't help matters.
sprinkle a book of Mormon on him and let's get out of here
Say what you will about mormons, but they have definitely faced discrimination and hardship.
So did Catholics in America. So did the earliest Christians.
Just like the FLDS are and have... think about it. Why were they ran out? Could it be for the same reasons the FLDS has their leaders in prison? Much like Joseph Smith was alway put in prison/jail.
That's like saying "Nazis were shot and Abraham Lincoln was shot. Coincidence?"
Just because we're persecuting evil now doesn't mean the LDS church was evil and was persecuted lawfully. And Joseph Smith was put in prison on false accusation every time, it's kinda what happens when you're trying to bring forth the work of the lord in a world that hasn't seen it for nearly 2 millenia.
Lol. Ok...
Except for when he went to prison for ordering the destruction of a printing press that was printing a newspaper that exposed he was practicing polygamy.
Probably say the same thing about Flat Earthers in 200 years.
Scientologists, RLDS, the Oneida Community, Catholics, Adventist, and Jehovah's Witnesses faced discrimination and hardship too. Probably just about any minority group has or will face discrimination.
It's a really shitty thing in life.
You have to remember that Americans of those times (1800s) were of the genocidal persuasion.
Was it legal to grill Mormons? Did they check the Broble?
Fair enough.
Citizens of Missouri, the time has come, execute Order 44
Iceland repealed it's law legalizing killing of any Spaniards from the Basque Country in 2015.
Uh you have to understand that the law was in response to an armed conflict between the state and the religion. Mormons believe that the garden of eden is in Missouri(seriously) and had a zionist belief that those who held that land were their enemy and that they would inherit it by being righteous.
Mormons at that time had more in common with the islamic extremists of today than the other Christian groups of the time.
More in common with Muslim extremists? Did Mormons rape and behead people who disagree with them? You are an asshole.
Also read up on the Danites or Avenging Angels. Although there is a lot more myth than facts about them, they definitely did exist and help cause the Missouri Mormon War. Anything past that is where things get murky.
Don't think they raped them (unless you count Utah polygamy, which frankly I would), but they did kill people. Look up "Salt Sermon" sometime.
Yeah, they did murder people look up the Mountain Meadows Massacre. They ambushed a wagon train. Killed all the men and tried to frame Native Americans when they thought they might get caught and then Brigham Young designated a patsy when that was seen through. They then took all the children as slaves and years later when the children were set to be recovered they sent outrageous ransoms for boarding costs for the years said children were slaves. Mormons today are fine people but back then they had more in common with the extremist groups of today than other Christian groups of the time. Murdering civilians and having slaves sounds much more like ISIS than any other Christian denomination at that time.
Comment deleted by user
Got a source on the punishment of the perpetrators? To my knowledge, only the point man was punished.
Yeah only one of the perpetrators was executed for it, John D. Lee. His first trial resulted in a hung jury, 6 Mormons voting not guilty and the 6 non-Mormons voting guilty. There was a bit of an uproar over the hung jury with lots of antiMormon anger. His next trial was with 12 Mormon jurors who did find him guilty and he was executed in 1877 at the site of the Massacre.
Fun fact: Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) and the Udalls who are also senators and representatives (D-CO and NM) are descendants of his.
And weren't documents leaked from the church that showed that he was a patsy on top of all that.
Only one person was punished for it and none of the families who took the children in as slaves were punished.
Murder. yes. Rape.no. they only raped believer's especially if they were teenaged.
The Mormons just gunned them down.
Ah, my birth state. So...progressive. Or used to be? Bet the Mormans are ecstatic about owning Utah. Adequately far enough from Missouri.
When we got to Utah, it was still part of Mexico. We left the country.
To be fair, Mormons were persecuted in many states, and usually over land and their religious beliefs. Don't let the Missouri Mormon War fool you, because they fled to Illinois and then Utah, and both states also had a Mormon War. If I remember correctly, it was Misspuri bounty hunters that killed Joseph Smith after he had been taken captive by another group they were fighting. For a time, they established a recognized colony in Illinois and the governer gave them s bunch of weapons and a couple of cannons, so they built a fort. The power void after Joseph Smith dying caused the group to split, but many went on to Utah. There was plenty of hatred and bloodshed on both sides, such as the Mountain Meadows Massacre where a Mormon militia slaughted unarmed families bound for California and then claimed Native Americans had done it. There is a lot of he said/she said and finger pointing throughout everything, but I think it's best to note how stupid humanity is for killing eachother throughout time over such petty things as religion and fear of people who are different.
Also, still live here!
To be fair, the Native Americans did help. What was it... They evacuated children under 8, had the militia kill every male member of the wagon train, and had the Native Americans kill the women and children over 8. Of course, that was the story. I believe a recent discovery of a mass grave revealed powder burns on the skulls of women and children over 8, meaning that the militia also had a hand in slaughtering them.
Don't forget adopting out all of the kids under 8 to local Mormon families in the hopes of covering it up.
Oh, yeah, because kids under 8 could totally fend for themselves, or could be sent back across the plains all alone. The only reason was to cover it up /s
They killed the kids over 8 because they knew the kids would remember what happened and because of the sin beliefs. I'm so glad the group decided to keep the kids under 8 alive by taking them in. That was so generous of them.
You mean kidnapping, and then charging the Feds for childcare.
"Persecuted". Heh.
Yeah, because things like the Hans Mills massacre and a law allowing people to murder Mormons totally isn't persecution. When they're leader is tarred and feathered, and then assassinated, that's not persecution. When they're settlements are destroyed, that's not persecution. I would be interested in knowing what constituted persecution if none of that fits the bill, but then again, talking to somebody so ignorant isn't what I want to waste my time doing.
All because they were minding their own business and singing hymns.
Why would anyone persecute Mormons for doing nothing?
(Spoiler alert for the 99.999% of people who don't believe they have Force powers: Mormons were up to some shady ass shit. Bank fraud? Yep. Little girls? Yep. Other people's wives? Yep.)
You can't go down the street shitting in everyone's yard and scream persecution when they object.
Is this what people mean by Make America great again?
Can someone maybe hook a guy up with a list of places and situations where killin' is still OK?
I've heard this rumour that man is the most dangerous game etc etc, and TBH, I've been itching for a little redditor va 9gagger death match for a while now
Comment deleted by user
pretty sure it'd be OK about Scientologists, too.
(or those goddamned Lutherans)