On 4/2/2009 5:52 AM, TIM RICHARDSON wrote to CHINACAT:

-> I have no problem with taking down violent, murderous criminals masquerading
-> as religious devotees, 


And that's what the LDS was seen as at the time. Right or wrong doesn't
matter. The perception does.

For a further exercise, though, let's see what the consequences might have
been if that church would have been left alone and the practice of polygamy
been legal under a first amendment right.

Defense of marriage act. That one that proposes a constitutional amendment
to restrict marriage to ONE man and ONE woman (as it is written).  Not
possible, even under a state law because it would be a violation of first
amendment protection of religion. Which would open up same sex marriage
when you consider that there are a number of gay churches.

Of course it would also open up all the other silly things that you accuse
the legalizing of same sex marriage of doing, like human/animal
marriages...as long as there was a religion behind it. (And if scientology
can now be legally accepted as a religion, I think anybody could develop
one that would bring all their  fetishes to play.)

As for Quarrella, yes, he most certainly did point out that if you wanted
to see a true violation of church and state you only had to look at the
treatment of mormons for a really egregious one, and that under the first
amendment it never should have been allowed to happen. I happen to agree. I
also think that until David Koresh actually made some overt violent action,
his group should have been left alone. Stockpiling weapons isn't against
the law under the 2nd, using them, of course, IS. Here in the south efforts
are made to stop the snake handlers...one fundamentalist sect that
-doesn't- proselytise. It's a waste of tax money on a violation of the 1st.

As for Steve's disgust with that church, it came from being married to a
former mormon who was constantly being harassed to leave him and come back
to the fold. 

 
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a