Great article. Very well written. Very straight forward and clear.
I completely agree with this article. It is truly amazing to know all the things
Elizabeth has been through, and yet she has such strong faith, and attributes
her ability to cope with it all because of that. Definitely a "best"
There are extremists of all different kinds of "shatterproof beliefs."
The notion that it exclusive to religious beliefs is erroneous, though a great
many atrocities in this world are "shatterproof beliefs" that mention
some form of deity. There are always opposites, especially in religion. There is
the good, pure, and meek - and then there is the aggressive, obsessive, and
controlling - Both can be housed under the same named religion. Pure religion
seeks not to control. One of the greatest pieces of doctrines I've learned as a
lifetime Mormon is "Teach correct principles and let them govern
Thank you for recognizing Ms. Smart and the great influence of a religion, even
her religion that's been critized by both so called Christian and non-Christian
Well put. Not only she moved forward but as a parent, I know I wouldn't be able
to move forward too if my kid was behind. She not only helped herself, she
helped her family. She is an extraordinary woman and her parents are good ones.
They taught her well.
I am in awe. Elizabeth is a remarkable woman.
Religion's influence.... *'Ex-seminary principal Michael Pratt
pleads guilty in sex case' - By Sara Israelsen-Hartley, Deseret News -
06/02/10 *'2 leaders of church charged in teen's rape' - By Lana
Groves, Deseret News - 08/18/10 'MAGNA Two leaders of the religious sect
Church of the First Born and the General Assembly of Heaven were charged
Wednesday with the rape of a teenage girl in 2005 after telling her they were
following instructions from God.' *'Victims: child sex abuse is
crime against humanity' - By Nicole Winfield - AP - 10/29/10 'ROME
People who were raped and molested by priests are gathering in Rome this weekend
to launch a petition...'
I believe that most Christian religions would never condone this kind of
behavior from a member of their church and claiming that they were doing it in
the name of religion. So the Catholic church didn't molest boys, the Mormon
church didn't molest Elizabeth, sadly people from those churches have done these
kinds of things. Now, if a church condones it or looks the other way, then they
are to me as much at fault. I really liked how this article points
out how some people will do wrongs in the name of religion, but also because of
the strength of religion, those wronged can overcome the trauma.
@PaganReligion is not bad. However, people who misuse religion are bad.
There are bad people in the LDS Church no doubt. Michael Pratt is a good
example. That does not mean the LDS religion itself is bad. I for one am of
the opinion that the world is a much better place because of the LDS Church.
It did not take long for the resident left-wing atheist to use this article to
attack all religion whatsoever. He (or she) apparently intends, like the rest of
the left, to use any excuse whatsoever to attack religion.Pagan
ignores the irrefutable fact that in every one of the proposed examples, it is
the violation of religious principles which led to the harm. In every case, if
the perpetrator had followed true religious doctrine's, no harm would have ever
occurred.Pagan also ignores the fact that the whole reason that Ms.
Smart is doing as well as she is is because of her devotion to religion. It is
the very place from which she receives her strength and comfort.In
short, the absurd attack against religion simply proves that religion is a
Here we go again, paganette. No point, just rants and cut and paste headlines. I
guess it was a good thing not to have recieved any religious influence, p. I
guess only people that had any contact with religion are criminals. p, I'm glad
you follow the D News, but I would watch it because it does occasionally report
Seems the usual haters are attempting to make it appear that religion has some
special propensity to cause problems.Well, it does...if we define
religion broadly as belief systems. Look at those "religions" (or
belief systems) that eschew any belief in deity to see what harm a belief system
can do.Since 1900 the religion or belief system known as communism
has murdered some 75 million persons.Since the early 70s some 38
million people have died from malaria that might well have been prevented save
for a ban on DDT. The religion or belief system of extreme environmentalism
places more value on plants and animals than it does on the life of a poor
African living in a malarial climate.On the flip side, about half of
all persons in Africa who have AIDS/HIV are being cared for by the Catholic
Church. In this nation most of our best universities and hospitals were started
by men of faith.I'm still looking to find the great charity work
done by groups of atheists.
May the Lord protect and defend you.May He always shield you from
shame.May you come to beIn Israel a shining name.May you
be like Ruth and like Esther.May you be deserving of praise.Strengthen them, Oh Lord,And keep them from the strangers' ways.May God bless you and grant you long lives.(May the Lord fulfill
our Sabbath prayer for you.)May God make you good mothers and wives.(May He send you husbands who will care for you.)May the Lord
protect and defend you.May the Lord preserve you from pain.Favor
them, Oh Lord, with happiness and peace.Oh, hear our Sabbath prayer.
Amen.Sheldon Harnick. "Sabbath Prayer." Fiddler on the
Roof.___"The Son of God suffered unto the death, not that
[girls] might not suffer, but that their sufferings might be like His."George McDonald, Unspoken Sermons. First Series. Cited in C. S. Lewis, The
Problem of Pain (1940; New York: Macmillan, 1977), vi.
Wendy has reported well on Elizabeth's faith and on the positive influence that
religion has had in her life. But we must make an important
distinction here. Wendy mentions it herself: "quasi-religious." As we know, "quasi" means resembling but not actually being.
This is a very important distinction because it means that by definition,
religion itself was not the source of negative influence on Mitchell. Mitchell was influenced by some concept OTHER than religion. He then took
religion and distorted and transfigured it into something that it is not. He
then used this false representation of religion in order to disguise and
rationalize the non-religious concept. Elizabeth, on the other
hand, has in fact been influenced by religion (or, she has allowed it to
influence her). Therefore the situations of these two people are
not at all analogous. By no means do they represent opposite sides of the same
(continued) It could be argued that the non-religious concept which
influenced Mitchell is itself a religion. That may well be. But at least in
the sense that it is being used in this article, I do not believe that religion
has both a positive and negative influence, that influences one positively and
another negatively. Instead, it's influence is and can only be positive. If
there is a negative influence, it is coming from some source other than
This is a very insightful article that highlights the different ways that
religion has influenced the world. Thank you for this thoughtful article!
All I know is that I saw Good versus Evil... and Good prevailed.
Religion is easily expropriated for illegitimate purposes such as was done in
the Mitchell case. Why? Because much of it is man-made, all of it ethereal and
tenuous, and the author rarely if ever shows up to set things straight that have
@John Charity Spring:"In every case, if the perpetrator had
followed true religious doctrine's, no harm would have ever occurred."The perp was merely trying to follow the religious principle of plural
marriage... a principle found in a variety or today's religions. The problem
is, his methodologies was extremely gross.
Wow. Three replies to my 3:33 p.m. post. Must have hit
a sore spot. So glad the moderator isn't allowing any personal
attacks. Sarcasim off. I never said religion was bad.
That was projected onto me by others. I simply posted what some
religious leaders do with thier authoirty. How does that mean I am
against religion or I am a 'hater?' Believe what you wish. However this article had 1 paragraph and 2 lines about the wrongs of
religion. And then, followed it up with almost 2 pages of examples
of how religion is good. That's about as 'fair and balanced' as Fox
News. 'I'm glad you follow the D News, but I would watch it because
it does occasionally report on religon.' - ute alumni | 4:21 p.m. Dec. 22, 2010
Not that I expected something different from a paper, funded by a
religion... but thanks for supporting my point ute alumni
re: Pagan | 3:33 p.m. Dec. 22, 2010"Religion's
influence...."You neglected to mention the Crusades. re: Belching Cow | 4:05 p.m. Dec. 22, 2010 "@Pagan...
Religion is not bad. However, people who misuse religion are bad."Religion is man made. Misusing religion is bad but blind complicity is worse.
re: John Charity Spring | 4:11 p.m. Dec. 22, 2010 "In short, the absurd attack against religion simply proves that religion
is a positive good."Really? Because, X which may be good is
attacked then X is good. Talk about flawed logic. Does that mean
Vitamin D is phenomenal because of it has benefits yet some experts are
skeptical how much should be applied?
The whole Catholic Church is not bad because some priests were bad. I would
suggest that the incidence pedophilia, sex with minors, etc. is far less common
in the LDS Church than the general population. As for Mitchell one might not be
criticized too much to say he is Evil.
'I would suggest that the incidence pedophilia, sex with minors, etc. is far
less common in the LDS Church than the general population.' - What in Tucket? |
10:24 a.m. 'Woman who had sex with therapist sues LDS Family
Services for negligence' - By Aaron Falk - SL Tribune - 10/28/10 Oh.
Well, I guess it's ok then. 'You neglected to mention the Crusades.'
- Hank Pym | 10:14 a.m. Good point! My bad. :)
To "Pagan | 10:37 a.m." do you care to explain what the news articles
you cite actually have to do with the story or the other comments.You should realize that athiesm has killed and harmed more people in modern
times than religion has. Just ask the millions killed during the Communist rule
of Russia, China, or Cuba.
'To "Pagan | 10:37 a.m." do you care to explain what the news articles
you cite actually have to do with the story or the other comments.' -
'Redshirt1701 | 10:56 a.m. If you can't figure it out, I can't help
you. But thanks for citing your facts that '...athiesm has killed
and harmed more people in modern times than religion has.' You know,
like articles. From two months ago.
To Pagan: Stalin who is devout atheist killed or hurt millions of individuals.
Hitler who some want to pass off as a Christian is much like Stalin, killed
millions in just 13 years.Mao who is an atheist as well killed
millions of chinese. So yes, your citations are small in comparsion to what
these men did, all in the sacreligious of atheism. Constantine was an atheist
before he took Christianity and then only under his terms. Most of the Roman
Emperors were atheist as was Gingas Khan. So in all reality atheism has killed,
maimed and destroyed more people through history than any religion ever has.Hope you are happy with that.
John CharityMaybe waving terms like "irrefutable" and
"true" around is part of the problem. Mitchell certainly wasn't
violating his own religious doctrines. Which particular religious doctrines,
I'm curious, are "true"? Yours? Would those be the same ones that
formerly regarded African-Americans as inferior and plural marriage as
preferred? The ones that deny civil rights to Gays?And when we
start believing that any set of religious doctrines can be "true"
without a generally acceptable mechanism for testing them, how then do we
distinguish the religuous doctrines of people like Mitchell from yours?
re - Bill in Nebraska | 12:14 p.m"in all reality atheism has killed,
maimed and destroyed more people through history than any religion ever
has."Bill... I cannot even begin to explain how illogical your
statement is.None of the people you named killed for religious
reasons. And they didn't kill for atheistic reasons. They killed because they
were power-mongers, and because they could. None of which has anything to do
with religion or a lack thereof. You assume they did it because they were
atheists (if they were in fact atheists). That is a very flawed assumption.The basic tenets of religion are good. The intolerance of people that
do not believe, or are different, is where the problem lies. And I think that
is because the guidelines for each religion are not considered a guide for
living your own life - they are considered by many to be rules by which everyone
must live.Every time an Islamist kills a non-believer, or a
christian critisizes gays or anyone different, it is that person judging someone
else based on their religious beliefs.If only all religious people
would follow the rule "thou shalt not judge".
I stand all amazed at the hypocrisy of many comments.The same people
who say "individuals doing wrong does not make a religion wrong"......will then say "An atheist (Stalin, Mao, etc.) did wrong, so
atheism is wrong"!??Religionists are eager to take credit for
people like Smart, but distance themselves from people like Mitchell. But both
are a product of Mormonism, and anyone who denies it is a deceiver.Our goal should be to move toward a moral and civil society.Believers invoke their god into public debate on the false assumption that
they have the market cornered on morality.There is no evidence god
exists, and less evidence that god is "moral". Even a malicious god
can create, perform miracles, and appear to people.Unless his
morality can be objectively established, god cannot be the arbiter of discourse
on the moral society.Scripture provides evidence: God commands
assassination of the defenseless without due process; god orders Israelites to
commit genocide; god destroys people then threatens survivors if they do not bow
to him (3 Nephi 9:1-13).Haters, please show where official atheist
scriptures or doctrine espouse or justify such horrible things!
This is a classic case of God works for good in all things for those who love
him, and of What the Devil and man meant for evil, God used for good, and a
great account of an example of the triumph of the human spirit over the evil in
this world. In my law practice and some other privileged and
confidential contexts, I have unexpectedly had close contact with an awful lot
of survivors of mostly incestuous sexual abuse as children. Having some
exposure to solid religious principles is one of the things that correlates
strongly with and apparently contributes materially to psychological survival.
The ones with strong religious background also tend, in my experience, to make
better employees. Elizabeth is one of the finest young people of whom I
have heard. She would be one of the people on my fantasy list of those with
whom I would like to meet and talk. I hope that, without invading her privacy,
we will continue to hear about her living her precious young, God-given and
preserved, life, including, but not limited to, what use she makes of her unique
combination of talents, skills, life experience, etc.