You are viewing uam

Previous Previous Next Next
Profile
The Voice - Reader's Forum
User: uam
Name: The Voice - Reader's Forum
Calendar
Back September 2008
123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930
Links
tags
    The Voice - Reader's Forum - Correction on Polygamist article
    Send letters to thevoice@uamont.edu
    uam
    theweevil
    Share
    Correction on Polygamist article
    I feel the strong need to correct a horrible error in your article of this week's Voice. You reference the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and provide a link. The FLDS church has no ties whatsoever to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or Mormon church, other than the name. They are not recognized by the Mormon church and their beliefs and practices are not accepted by the LDS church. It is completely separate. Especially in an area of the United States where there are not many members of the Mormon church, misrepresentations like these can do serious harm to those who choose to practice these beliefs. Please make sure that you have all your facts straight before you print an article like this. Thank you.

    The point that I was trying to make in my other email is that a distinction between the FLDS sect and the Mormon faith probably should be a little more clearly drawn. It seems like there has been a major fault in that. Even the major national outlets from CNN to Fox are saying that these jokers are the Mormons and they're not.


    David Vaughn

    View the article here: http://thevoice.uamont.edu/5-20/op-ed/polygamist
    Comments
    From: theweevil Date: April 15th, 2008 06:52 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Response to Correction

    Dear Readers,

    We apologize for the mistake made in the Polygamist article that ran in the Op/Ed section of Vol. 5, Iss. 20. We have removed the link.

    However, in the future, if you would like to send a complaint, response, comment or any other correspondence to The Voice, please send it to the editor at thevoice@uamont.edu, not The Voice adviser. The adviser merely advises and does not publish the paper. The editors are in charge of producing the paper, and we would be more than happy to address any concerns you have.

    The Voice reflects student work produced within a journalism practicum, and is meant to be a learning process. Fortunately, college provides a learning environment for mistakes to be made and owned up to. The article has been updated to reflect these corrections.

    We regret any inconvenience caused by our mistakes.

    Sincerely,

    Brooke Burger
    Editor-in-Chief
    The Voice
    From: (Anonymous) Date: April 15th, 2008 09:03 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Response to Correction

    I think this article was written for some sort of shock value and if this was the case, you got it! It is absolutely absurd for the heading to read Polygamist Ranch Shows Downside of Organized Religion. Please! A cult is far from organized religion. Whether you are a Buddhist, Mormon, or Baptist I think anyone would take offense to the misleading title alone. This most certainly was a mislead article that did not focus on the appropriate topic! Why did you not focus on what happened to these girls? I am really shocked that this came from someone seeming to be otherwise intelligent!
    From: (Anonymous) Date: April 15th, 2008 09:47 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Mr. Vaughn

    I understand that you feel strongly about the correction on the Polygamist article, and as an American Citizen you have that constitutional right. But I do believe that Mrs.Harmon was not trying to make an attempt to tie Mormon's Religious LDS and the Fundamentalist LDS. But the facts are that FLDS is an denomination of Mormon religion regardless of your strong feelings. Before 1890, Mormons practiced PLURAL MARRIAGES or more than one spouse relationships. The LDS ended their practice in 1890 due to political pressures of the United States and personal feelings towards abuse. The LDS excommunicated anyone who continued this practice and that's how the FLDS was created from off-shoots of the Mormon sect. I will be glad to give you some evidence of this as I always do with my readers.

    History of the FLDS
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter_Day_Saints

    Here's another one for Mitt Romney's family history
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Romney

    If you have any questions or issues with our commentary please e-mail the voice or e-mail me at CSN5130@uamont.edu and I will be glad to discuss the issues with you.

    Thank You sir and have a nice day

    Mr.Chad S.G.Newton
    From: theweevil Date: April 19th, 2008 03:46 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Correction

    My name is Carolyn Hart; I am an adult education teacher at UAM-College of Technology Crossett. I am also an English teacher. I do not always read the VOICE (for which I'm very sorry!!),so I'm not familiar with either the article referenced in your email or the error. I am familiar, however, with the everyday ethical issues that journalists face, and I greatly appreciate the honest way you have dealt with this issue. Learning experiences can be difficult, but beneficial. Thank you for fine job you all are doing.
    From: davidhvaughn Date: April 23rd, 2008 06:29 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Correction

    Ms. Hart, I feel like the situation was dealt with swiftly and fairly by the voice and I stand with you in applauding their determination in rectifying the misunderstanding, and that's all it was. It was not malicious at all.

    DHV
    From: (Anonymous) Date: April 19th, 2008 05:31 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Mr. Chad Newton

    First off, Wikipidea is NOT always right. I know that as a journalist, that the use of Wikipidea is unethical. And I also know that Dr. Sitton does not consider that site as a source. And I personally take offense to you using that as a source for your so-called-information.

    If you want to know more about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,(LDS or "Mormons") then why not go to the church's official website and gather information their? The information found at LDS.org. that information is from the official heads of the church.

    If you want to know more about polygamy and the church position on please go to this link:
    http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=bbd508f54922d010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&index=16&sourceId=9887ec6f164b2110VgnVCM100000176f620a____

    And to get the correct information about the church position’s about the recent events in Texas place go to: http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/news-releases-stories/senior-church-leader-appeals-to-media-to-make-distinction

    And finally, what in the world does Mitt Romeny have to do with the article? I believe in Susan Harmon article did not mention him! So there is no need for the link? I don't think so.

    If you are going to say things about the LDS religion, I wish you would get your FACTS strait as you have a fatal error! If you are going to say something about the LDS church, do your research: go to the official website at www.lds.org, talk to some who is a member of the church. I know that on campus there are members of the church and would love to answer your questions about the faith.

    Finally, The LDS church is in no ways form or fashion associated with the FLDS church.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: April 20th, 2008 06:27 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Mr. Chad Newton

    Dear Anonymous.

    I am well aware that wikipedia is not 100% accurate, nor is a lot of other sources. Nothing is always 100% accurate I can say that your sources is not 100% accurate, but everyone has an opinion, and I will not hold it against you. The reason I brought Mitt Romney subject is because of his grandparents fleeing The United States to Mexico due to the plural marriage practice his grandparents were involved in. Nobody is not just going to get up and leave the states unless they are involved in some type of illegal activity. I'm not saying they were directly involved, but I can say something illegal was going on. I know very well the Mormon church's position on plural marriages and they are totally against it. I did not say the FLDS were direct affiliation with the LDS, I said they are an off-shoot of the LDS before the 1890's. I hope you have a nice night Anonymous.
    From: davidhvaughn Date: April 23rd, 2008 06:23 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Mr. Chad Newton

    My name is David Vaughn and I am the one who penned the emails that were submitted to the readers' forum. I feel I need to address a couple of things.

    "I did not say the FLDS were direct affiliation with the LDS"

    "But the facts are that FLDS is an denomination of Mormon religion regardless of your strong feelings."

    These are two of your quotes from your two responses. Which one is it? And if you can even get your OWN facts straight, why should I or anyone else believe anything else you put on here? I'm not saying I don't, I'm just saying you've slit your own throat on this one.

    You are correct, sort of, about the history of polygamy in the US. It was not illegal in the US until 1890. When it became against the law, they stopped practicing it. It's as simple as that. Mormons were not the only ones practicing polygamy in the US, but they were the most widespread. And without taking up entirely too much space on this thread giving the entire reason why (and since you're only interested in half-truths you'd probably dismiss is anyway), they did it out of necessity. The men were being killed off at an amazing rate and the families that were left behind needed a leader. Therefore, those who were willing and financially able to took on multiple families and wives.

    "Nobody is not just going to get up and leave the states unless they are involved in some type of illegal activity."

    Another bizarre yet intriguing piece from your previous post. First of all, it doesn't make much sense grammatically and, secondly, it's completely unbased and, well, idiotic. People leave the states all the time, and have for a long time, for a number of reasons from fortune seeking to jobs to missionary work to any number of other things. I feel that you have done enough from your own posts to ensure that anyone who reads your stuff won't take you seriously so I'm not going to try and discredit you. You've done that sufficiently on your own.

    You're obviously not interested in doing anything but dogging your version of the history of the LDS church. I'm not going to engage you anymore in this. Good night Mr. Chad Newton
    From: (Anonymous) Date: April 29th, 2008 05:38 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Mr. Chad Newton

    Mr.Vaughn,

    It seems sir that you have some time on your hands and have nothing else to do but argue with people with a different opinion. I never dogged the Mormon Church or it's religion. Sir you are taking this story very personal and it disturbs me that you are obsessed with arguing with me, unfortuantley I do not have the time or the place to argue. I run a tight and busy schedule. I will admit, I myself do not know everything about religion. The same can be said about you not knowing everything about religion. The Voice is a interent news publication. And in one section of The Voice it has Opinions/Editorials, that means the commentary that is written are expressed opinions by the writers.

    "People leave the states all the time, and have for a long time, for a number of reasons from fortune seeking to jobs to missionary work to any number of other things."

    A lot of things you mentioned in the previous post, I've taken into consideration before I responded with my last post.

    I understand that you are offended and upset about the commentary and that's fine by me because this is what this country is all about, everyone that can express their opinions without punishment.

    Sir you can insult me, discredit me, disdain me, character assasinate me, whatever you can do to help you sleep better at night. You can dream of beating the crap out of me, I do not care. Believe it or not Mr. Vaughn I am not religious, but spiritual, yes. So as far as religion goes, I do not care what all religions do within their place of worship and residence as long the religion does not harm(except a couple of religions) innocent lives. I understand that you are upset because you are a member of LDS and I understand you have to defend your religion, I can respect that. I'm not here to start a beef of a rift with the LDS, actually I'm not much of a bad person once you meet me, maybe difference of opinion, but not a bad guy. Maybe you can write for The Voice, you can be a strong commentator.

    In my commentary I do go overboard but at the same token I want people to pay attention and listen. Well good luck on the finals and I hope this is the last time we have this conversation, it is getting quite old.

    Chad Newton
    From: (Anonymous) Date: April 29th, 2008 10:55 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Letter to the Editor Concerning Polygamy Article

    The official stance of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as stated by Wilford Woodruff in an address Oct. 6, 1890:

    "Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that 40 or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy.

    I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either 40 or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

    One case has been reported, in which the parties allege the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.

    Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

    There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-Day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land."

    I invite all persons who may have a question to listen to what one has to say who has studied the subject, not just websites where information is posted without being checked by learned professionals, but by common man, who, on many accounts, has been proved wrong.

    Before the enactment of polygamy, many Church members in Missouri incurred persecution. They weren't just verbally reprimanded, but tarred, feathered, thrown in prison of false charges, and run out of town at gunpoint. When the LDS members remained in Missouri, many were killed, such as Han's Mill. They then traveled to Illinois and settled in Nauvoo, a city they built out of swampland on the Mississippi River and turned into a bustling, beautiful city. But once again run out of this city they worked so hard to build. Many of the men were killed in these times, and women couldn't own money or land during this time. So many women had nothing if they didn’t remarry. Also, only Church leaders were allowed to do polygamy, not every member was told to do it.

    Yet, there is something wrong with everything the LDS Church does. The practice of polygamy, even though it was done away with in 1890, is still a very hot topic among those who wish to prove the Church wrong. Saying the LDS Church and other denominations with distant ties to the LDS Church are the same, is like saying a Baptist, Methodist, Mormon, Jehovah’s Witness, Catholic are the same. The fact of the matter is that, we are different. But we all worship Christ and his teachings. Christ wants us to love our neighbor, not tear him down.

    All I ask is that you become educated on a subject; don't dismiss someone's view just because you don't agree with it. You might not see it as right, but try to understand them. Find out as many angles as you can, then give your opinion, not just Wikipedia, but LDS views and views of today's top scholars. Before judging someone, go to the source, get their view, find a contrasting view, and when you present something, present both sides to help everyone get the full view.

    Any questions e-mail me at Weevilsax@yahoo.com

    Jason Bowen
    From: (Anonymous) Date: April 30th, 2008 12:51 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Mr. Chad Newton

    It is not that we are taking it personal. We are trying to say and defend something that is very dear to us. Something, we know to be true. And as a memember of the church, we stand up for what we believe in. So when things come up about our religion we stand up for it and we do not let others say things that are not true about it.
    Mr. Newton, we are by no means trying to argue with you, we are simply trying to stand up for what we know to be true!

    B.Pickett
    From: (Anonymous) Date: April 30th, 2008 05:50 pm (UTC) (Link)

    THis is COLT

    It seems to me that some hysteria has caused some problems. Mr. Newton added some healthy diaglogue to the subject and Mr. Vaughn took it personally. Yet Mr. Vaughn has the audacity to suggest that it is Mr. Newton that people would not take seriously. As I read the posts I observe that Mr. Newton witheld from engaging in ad hominem attacks. In contrast, Mr. Vaughn filled his posts with personal attacks. Anytime I see this kind of writing it is the attacker that I don't take seriously. I don't take serioulsy a person who responds with emotionally driven venom.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: May 5th, 2008 08:03 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Mr. Chad Newton

    I've been wanting to comment on this thread, and now I got the time I think its dead. Anyway I’m going to post my two cents.

    I feel like I’m pretty open minded when it comes to religions. Most the people that have commented on this thread and know me can attest to that fact. Fact is a pretty good word for the responses to the article because no one is using any. It’s all emotional responses that are clouding your judgement.

    Where in Susan’s article does she mention the LDS church? The problem arises in the word mormon. Try as you might, but the FLDS are mormons. Just because your church doesn’t recognize them doesn’t change that fact.

    I don’t know of any denomination of christianity that recognizes the LDS church as christians. Just because no one else recognizes you, does that make you any less christians. Think about it. How is the LDS church any different than how Jews think about christians and muslims for branching off by adding more text to their holy doctrine.

    The entire church I went to when I lived in Arkansas did not recognize Catholics are true christians, only Protestants. Missionary Baptist and Southern Baptist don’t recognize Free-Will Baptist as true baptist.

    Don’t even get me started on other religions like Islam. I think the only religion that excepts every single sect is Judaism.

    Just because you may not recognize them doesn’t change how they view themselves and that is truly the only thing that matters.

    You were offended by the article before you even read it. If you would of read it with any kind of reading comprehension, the point of the piece was about radicalism of religion, not religion in itself.

    Kevin Sims, ex-Sports Editor for the Voice
    From: (Anonymous) Date: May 14th, 2008 07:34 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Kevin Sims

    I am getting really tried of everyone saying the FLDS are mormons. I just recently had to call the local news station in Dallas and correct them, because they called they also called them mormons. (This is fatal error on their part).

    Just, like Jason, David and myself have all stated, they are not mormons. And I would appericate if everyone would stop staying that they are, because the FLDS are not mormons.

    Kevin I take offense to what you have said! So let me state this again, the FLDS church are not MORMONS! Will you please get your facts straight!

    But, what makes me even more upset is the fact that you said this "I don’t know of any denomination of christianity that recognizes the LDS church as christians. Just because no one else recognizes you, does that make you any less christians" First off, Mr.Sims, Mormons are christians, and before you make some comment about us not being this way you better go do some research on LDS.org. We are christians, we believe in God.

    Correction, Susans article was corrected before to many other people saw it as well as a very well follow up article was written.

    Will you please do your research, like start by asking a mormon! And to the rest of who is reading this thread. Mormons are christians, and the FLDS are not, I repeat are not MORMONS!

    Brittany Pickett
    From: (Anonymous) Date: May 15th, 2008 04:36 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Kevin Sims

    How is calling someone not a christian, Christ like? When actually, the Mormons, believe in Chirst and worship him.

    15 Boll Weevils commented | Leave a comment