“She is currently in a consensual, committed lesbian relationship behind bars with a woman scheduled to get out soon. She's planning on getting out and getting pregnant and sharing her life with her partner. seriously.”
lexigram on Mar 2, 2013 at 02:36:14
“Because Jodi has to be in a relationship, and in her current home, she has to be a lesbian. Whatever it takes.”
“This is where I take issue with the coverage of this. I do NOT believe she was "breaking down," I think she's been rehearsing this moment for years now. That interpretation ignores her lack of tears and other body clues that indicate she's acting as if she feels remorse.
The way the press frames the dynamic there by saying the prosecutor "broke" her is facile and only serves Jodi's interests. She's not upset at all, she's going through motions she believes will save her life. I wish they would ask her to look up when she's "crying." seriously, no one actually cries like that, they may hide to a degree, but to never look up or make eye contact is not normal. Maybe the press is burned out on this case just like the jurors are.”
“Did anyone actually see tears? I did not, but did see something that looked like a smile behind her hand. It looked like she was hiding behind her hair and hand to give the impression of crying, taking copious amounts of tissue. Her face didn't look like she had been crying: reddened eyes, swollen nose, etc. I really wish the judge had not allowed her to hide behind her hair and hand, because the body language was very important for the jurists to hear.”
barskin on Mar 1, 2013 at 19:06:12
“Yep. I think their were grins goin' on back there. If there were real tears, does anyone things she's be trying so hard to cover herself up?”
Ingrid Lynch on Mar 1, 2013 at 18:36:43
“If she cryed ,it was for herself. She is breaking down , after all these weeks of defending her position..”
flairhagerstown on Mar 1, 2013 at 18:03:50
“She was not really crying, when she took her hand down, you could see she was not. When the judge recessed her attorney went up to her on the stand and he could be heard saying"keep that up." Of course he meant the pretend crying. I don't know how the judge could not have heard him say that.”
“Sorry, but all campaigning is like this. i'm not a fan of Romney or his religion, but you can't pin this particular thing him. unfortunately we live in a country where it costs billions of dollars to get elected and most of us don't really count.”
“I stumbled on the story of the Nauvoo Expositor researching genealogy and found it truly moving. In short, a group of Mormons at Nauvoo grew concerned after Joseph Smith (J.S.) announced his presidential candidacy in 1844. Secretly practising polygamy, he denied it publicly. He abused power as mayor of the city, avoiding extradition for crimes in Missouri, and secretly taught about a Theocracy, with himself as President/ King.
After attempting to resolve these issues privately, the group published the Nauvoo Expositor. They declared their joint loyalty to Mormonism and the Constitution. They complained that Smith wielded "ecclesiastical control over civil and business affairs." They risked their lives because as Americans they felt obliged to reveal a politician on a path to usurp separation of church and state. Their side lost.
Their publication was declared a public nuisance, the press ordered burned, by mayor/ prophet J.S. Those printers were labeled apostates, still called heretics and “schizmatics” by the Mormon church. The writers of our first amendment held free speech as essential to democracy, protecting it for citizens because free speech can check corruption. For Mormons, though, the man who ordered the press burned was their hero, the same man who saw himself as head of church and country at the same time.”
moregood on Nov 4, 2012 at 22:07:58
“Lori, There is absolutely no reference in LDS history of Joseph Smith 'claiming' to be "President/King".”
“This is American history of Mormonism, free speech, and separation of church and state. Now we have Mitt Romney, and you'll forgive us if we wonder about difference among you or if, similar to the Prop 8 in California, you will contribute because your elders tell you it's good for your salvation. We know about your multimillion dollar advertising fund. Surely you’re coached about how to appear non partisan. Surely you have focus groups and polling re: public perception of Mormons. So we know it won’t be “from the pulpit." Heaven forbid another 8: The Mormon Proposition debacle. We will watch for softer directives manifested in funds, because with the advent of the internet we've learned often you say different things than your actions speak.
Presses today are not so easily burned. But Mormon internet presence often minimizes reader participation. Facebook and Youtube Mormon pages often have comments blocked. So you’ll pardon us if we don’t always trust the public face you present, one that doesn’t allow questions or dialogue. Yes, this would include emails that are released/ leaked to the press. We only have your actions (funds, public prayers and fasting, etc) to look at, but we are watching. Speaking of which, it would be great if Romney would release his bundlers list, like John McCain did last election, so we could have a look at his financiers.”
“I'm not a Romneyite, but he is correct. The fact is that we already do have socialized medicine. When we have a mandate that patients can NOT be turned away, that law applies to everyone. Personally I think this is fine, but again, Romney is correct, it's inefficient and wasteful. Look at the federal budget, and look at your local hospital budgets. Providing health INSURANCE with preventive care is much, much cheaper.
To all you who say just cut them off, don't provide services, have you honestly thought this through? I don't know any of these people refuse to work and want the government to take care of them. I do know lots of folks who can't make enough money to provide shelter, food, transportation, utilities and health care for their families.
Do you want to be the one to send home a child with a broken arm because his parents can't afford the $1,000.00 the treatment will cost? What about all the unemployed adults ineligible for unemployment ? Should their breast cancer go untreated, do they deserve to be paralyzed by their stroke? Should the baby with the ear infection just suffer and reap permanent hearing loss? These are the real stories in emergency rooms today. Your proposals are unrealistic and short sided, not to mention lacking compassion. That quality prompting the emergency room mandate in the first place: a virtue long associated with what it means to be an American.”
pciorlandosales on Sep 24, 2012 at 19:49:32
“Under Romney you would get a voucher (we do not know how much or what it can be used for). In the process there are no restrictions on the health care insurers raising rates. There is no mandate for refusing for pre-condition dismissals. Under the O-Care plan if you have to visit a doctor or emergency room and you have no insurance you will be debited by the IRS from your tax return for the fine/penalty. The fine/penalty is proposed to be 1,000-1,200 dollars. You are not billed separably or in addition to that fine for the care you received. Also under O-Care students already are able to be held under their parents insurance plans until the age of 26. Basically Romney is giving up a voucher (for who knows what or how much). And not changing the system other than that. He is turning the fiscal responsibility over to each and every state, beyond that voucher. We are talking about fiscal responsibility in the millions and in some cases like California even more! When these states are already cutting budgets and working on a thread bare fiscal system. You will pay ... trust me you will pay ... it may not be on the Federal level. It may be on the state level in the form of add on property taxes but the states (even under Romney Care) will have to come up with the money somehow.”
JShankel on Sep 24, 2012 at 19:41:55
“Well, thing is, health care isn't just emergency service. They're not going to give you a mamagam or prescribe preventative care. And emergency rooms aren't "free." They cost thousands of dollars a visit which you are required to pay. They just won't withhold service if you don't. Dinging your credit is sufficient.”
Jun 22, 2013 at 18:35:05
“no, they don't. This is a problem, you think it's normal. It is not. It's scary to wonder where racism lurks, like here.”
Gail Cornelius on Jun 22, 2013 at 19:20:29
“It's hardly scary, the rappers use that word ALL THE TIME in their music. It's scary that we as Americans can't wait to jump on someone for something they did ages ago. Based on the story maybe the girl initiating the lawsuit is GREEDY.”
“The prophet that ordered the governor of Missouri shot. The prophet who had sex with 14 year olds. The prophet who ordered his congregants to steal. The prophet who committed adultery with numerous married women. These are all well documented facts. Please, we allow you to persist in your faith in this man as a prophet. We can NOT accept labeling those who question his qualifications for sainthood "apostate." This is the Huffington Post, btw. People around here read things. Some of us don't want a leader who believes in such an obviously corrupt religion.
I'll GLADLY provide references to all the above allegations. Many of which come from your own LDS sources, by the way. Joseph Smith was a second generation flim flam man, water witching type. Lots of references for this, too. Mormonism is a travesty, a huge fraud foisted on millions of people. Yes, other religions probably are too, but none with so recently and widely verified evidence.”
jedinites on Oct 7, 2012 at 13:14:54
“Please provide proof that Joseph Smith had sex with 14 year olds. Not references because anyone can write anything, just as you have. Proof is needed to believe this. And how DARE millions of people have foisted upon them the encouragement to serve, give, love, worship, and do good. HOW COULD THEY!!”
“"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Seems pretty clear to me.
Well organized, absolutely. Violating law re: tax exempt status is another thing. A law that exists to keep the two separate: church and state.
This is from the IRS :All IRC section 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches and religious organizations, must abide by certain rules:■ their net earnings may not inure to any private shareholder or individual,■ they must not provide a substantial benefit to private interests,■ they must not devote a substantial part of their activities to attempting to influence legislation,■ they must not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office, and■ the organization’s purposes and activities may not be illegal or violate fundamental public policy ”
True2TheFaith on Sep 25, 2012 at 22:01:37
“It is clear, very clear. So you agree that we can read the Bible in schools, have school prayer, pray at graduations, display the 10 commandments in public places etc. Glad you are on board.
Well aware of what the code says and the LDS church doesn't even come close to that line. But we have Clinton, Obama, and all the other Dems go straight to the pulpits of the Black churches and campaigning. When you cry for their exemption to be taken then you might be taken seriously. Until then, you have no clue about the COTUS or the IRS code.”
“My mistake, I thought you were referring to southern UTAH! Just now figured you're talking about Bible southern states. Local laws do not wait for church proclamations. Period.That's where I think the ignorance comes in, as in ignoring facts. You continue with your smugness, claiming to be better than me and others. Me= "victim" You= "positive self-starter"”
True2TheFaith on Sep 25, 2012 at 22:23:32
“There are no dry counties in Utah. LOL!
The fact is the LDS church is controlling no one. It appears you still have the victimhood down really well. Never claimed to be better than you but hey, why worry about facts or truth, right?
“I know people in those dry southern areas, and Mormon is the law there like the rest of the state.
5. Exactly, that was LDSRevelations' point.
Maybe you're not a victim, but you do a nice smug self-righteous and ignorant act. .”
True2TheFaith on Sep 25, 2012 at 11:55:55
“Thanks for the chuckles Lori. Mormons have no influence in the South and their Dry laws. Mormons are not Evangelicals who rule in the South But love your victimhood!
#5. Local laws ALWAYS reflect the will of the majority in the area. No one's life is being controlled at all. Nice try though.
Funny how it's always someone who disagrees with people like you who are the self-righteous and ignorant ones.
Tell yourself whatever you need to to get through your day. I choose to have great days every day. ”
“This is one example of my point about the Internet. Mormon policies re: public information are hard to manage in this modern world.”
arcanumseeker on Sep 24, 2012 at 09:30:41
“Yes, the proverbial cat's already out of the bag, so to speak. They get away with not discussing the issues by saying they are Sacred. Like other Religions don't have Sacred Beliefs, yeah right. When a Religion is not upfront and honest about their beliefs, then those beliefs should be thoroughly scrutinized. Mormonism and Scientology are two peas in a pod that give out their True Beliefs out in degrees. Both Organizations charge members for the privilege of that information. Mormons who do not pay their tithe do not get a Temple Recommend.. No Temple Recommend, No Info.”
“One of the finest examples of patriotism in our history is in the publication of the Nauvoo Expositor. I stumbled on the story researching genealogy and found it truly moving. In short, a group of Mormons within the original church at Nauvoo grew concerned about a number of things after Joseph Smith announced his candidacy for president in 1844. Secretly practising polygamy, he denied it publicly. He abused his power as mayor of the city, to avoid extradition, and secretly taught about a Theocracy, with himself as President/ King.
After attempting to resolve these issues privately, the group published their concerns in the Nauvoo Expositor. They declared their loyalty to tenants of Mormonism and the U.S. constitution. They complained that Smith wielded "ecclesiastical control over civil and business affairs." They risked their personal safety to reveal those secrets, but as Americans felt obliged to reveal a politician who was on a path to usurp separation of church and state. Their side lost,.
Their publication was declared a public nuisance, the press ordered burned by Joseph Smith as mayor of the city. Those printers were labeled apostates, still called heretics and “schizmatics” by the Mormon church. The writers of our first amendment held free speech as essential to democracy, protecting it for citizens because free speech can check corruption. For Mormons, though, the man who ordered the press burned was their hero, the same man who saw himself as head of church and country at the same time.”
“We are a secular nation, our consitution calls for a separation of church and state, that's why we look at potential leaders to keep the two separate as well. Seriously, how can you not know that? We're talking about an elected official in our federal government, with a professed religion that historically calls for a Theocracy, and has used church ranks to influence legislation to the tune of millions of dollars and umpteen man hours.
You're not a victim of any bias, nor is Romney. This is America, and we all have rights to our beliefs. Everyone on the planet has beliefs, whether they are codified or not, and there are really no people without "core convictions" as you say, but some are more easily disuaded from those than others, depending on circumstance. You don't hold the morally absolute position you claim, and you don't have the right to impose your values on others, that's what our consitution says. We look for leaders who can uphold that constitution.”
True2TheFaith on Sep 24, 2012 at 16:44:10
“Lori, what is a secular nation? What does that really mean? If you can show me where the phrase "separation of church and state" are in the Constitution then we can start to have an intellectual conversation.
You do realize that a phrase in the Constitution actually states that there is no religious test for public office, right?
The argument is that people like you want people with religious beliefs to check them at the door to fit into your definition of "secular nation". It's the manner in which people want to remove God from things political and public and that's not the case with the Founding Fathers. They spoke movingly of God and Christ in their discussions in starting this nation and they prayed daily for His guidance.
The Constitution doesn't say anyone has to check their beliefs at the door to participate in the public/political world.
Don't be upset because Mormons are well organized and can mobilize at a moments notice. What's the difference between the mobilization of Mormons and the mobilization of SEIU, ACORN, AFL-CIO and all other unions that support Democrats? Is it okay for them to bus people to the homes of executives that they disagree with and terrorize the innocent children at home?
Citizens are free to lobby their elected officials based on any belief they choose. If a majority of the voters agree then it usually becomes law.
I don't claim to be a victim at all. I'm just stating that if you”
cja2882 on Sep 23, 2012 at 14:02:58
“Thank you. Personally don't care what religion if any someone practices until what they believe gets pushed over onto me. And if his religion dictates him to do that or risk excommunication which will he choose? Don't know that I care to find out.”
This is American history of Mormonism, free speech, and separation of church and state. Now we have Mitt Romney, and you'll forgive us if we wonder about difference among you or if, similar to the Prop 8 in California, you will contribute because your elders tell you it's good for your salvation. Not "from the pulpit," we will watch for softer directives manifested in funds, because with the advent of the internet we've learned often you say different things than your actions speak.
Presses today are not so easily burned. But Mormon internet presence often minimizes reader participation. Facebook and Youtube Mormon pages often have comments blocked. Added to which there's always the "sacred secret" trump card to pull out as a final closed door, and voting booths are private. We only have your actions (PACs and campaign funds) to look at, but we are watching.”