A
anon82300119
Guest
There’s a strong Mormon influence in the West that began in Utah and spread from there. Arizona also has a lot of Mormons. California has the most.
- Status
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Last edited:
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
To get all nerdy on ya.adamhovey1988:
There’s a strong Mormon influence in the West that began in Utah and spread from there. Arizona also has a lot of Mormons. California has the most.
2010 numbers.
1% of Californians are Mormons. That’s about 373000 Mormons.
58% of Utahns are Mormons. That’s about 1.6 million Mormons.
A
anon82300119
Guest
Thanks for the correction. I meant to say that California had the most outside of Utah. I read 771,000 as of 2017.
H
Horton
Guest
There are parts of Idaho, mainly Eastern Idaho, where there are huge populations of LDS. In Rexburg, home of BYU Idaho, the population is 100% LDS, in many more small communities the population is 90% to 95%. The bigger cities (for Idaho anyway) tend to be more diverse.
While Northern Idaho was settled mostly by German farmers who were Catholic, Eastern Idaho was settled by Mormon farmers.
While Northern Idaho was settled mostly by German farmers who were Catholic, Eastern Idaho was settled by Mormon farmers.
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
Thank you for telling me.
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
Yeah, I’ve noticed when I look up State offices for Utah, because I love to learn, that it seems that they are almost entirely Mormon. I mean there are exceptions, but I feel like people are only supporting those politicians because they’re Mormon, now this is not a political post, I just noticed that.
A
anon82300119
Guest
Mormons own the Utah courts. There is a lot of Mormonism in bed with Utah government.
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
It seems kind of disproportional to me, even with the high amounts of Mormons.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
People vote for who they are in agreement. But yes, in UT there is a lot of Mormon to Mormon preference in politics and business. There is also a lot of counter cultural votes, especially in Salt Lake City proper.
Last edited:
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
I remember seeing something saying that Salt Lake City was like only 35% Mormon now, keep in mind, in the rest of the country a larger city ( well, large by Utah standards, and also larger by population than any City here in South Carolina.) being 35% Mormon is a huge amount of Mormons
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Yeah, to a lot of rural Mormons, who live in a homogenous 99% Mormon community, SLC is the center of their church that has been infested by non-Mormon and apostate evil.
Mormons in SLC tend to be cliquey, being friendly to non-Mormons until they figure out they aren’t going to convert. Also, always trying to convert your children. It takes vigilance to keep the Mormons away from your kids! My daughter received three Book Of Mormons as “gifts” before she was 18 years old. One from a girl at her teenage high school job who would just not leave her alone, and she had to quit in order to get away from her.
Mormons in SLC tend to be cliquey, being friendly to non-Mormons until they figure out they aren’t going to convert. Also, always trying to convert your children. It takes vigilance to keep the Mormons away from your kids! My daughter received three Book Of Mormons as “gifts” before she was 18 years old. One from a girl at her teenage high school job who would just not leave her alone, and she had to quit in order to get away from her.
Last edited:
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
When I was 18 years old, I was a Buddhist, before that I was also a Buddhist, and before that I was pretty much agnostic. I was pretty apathetic towards religion, at least Western religion when I was a teenager, if you would have given me a book of Mormon I probably would have said thank you, and then explained why I don’t believe it. By that point, I had actually read the book of Mormon, because I read it when I was just a little kid, because I’ve been able to read most of my life including when I was a little kid, I read some of it at the dentist’s office so it’s not like I didn’t know anything about it. My oldest little sister, who is 27, and my older sister both used to have copies of the Book of Mormon but I do not know what happened to their copies. I think if you gave me a copy of one nowadays, I would just use it to debate. Keep in mind, my sisters both got their copies when they were children, and we lived in Illinois. My dad, used to talk to Mormon missionaries that came to our house he never became Mormon, never wanted to become Mormon wanted to become Catholic, but as far as I know he never got the chance. I really do find Mormonism fascinating, because it’s just so American.
T
Tarquin
Guest
(gazelam, post:22)
"One of the principles that governs the LDS Church is “Common Consent” . . . Both local and general officers are presented to the pertinent congregation for acceptance. A similar process happens with LDS scripture. The last time this occurred that I’m aware of was in 1976 when the revelations that later became D&C section 137 & 138 were canonized as LDS scripture. . . . The Adam-God doctrine was never presented to the Church for acceptance. … "
Was the ceremony for making your call and election sure presented to the Church for acceptance?
Was the implementation of the fast offering presented to the Church for acceptance?
When 137 was “presented to the Church,” was the Church informed that 137 was only part of the vision? Did the Church have the opportunity to give “Common Consent” to an honest representation of the vision, or were they led to believe that 137 was a vision in its entirety? Does “common consent” given to proposals that are incomplete or misleading make the proposal more truthful? Of course it doesn’t. And “common consent” in the Mormon Church is not voluntary consent to an issue, but an act of self-defense, to prevent criticism and possible excommunication. Look what happens at the people who every now and then, when a “vote” is asked at a General Conference, vote “no.” Historically their votes have never been counted at all. (I saw one more recent gathering, in which the speaker did say “a majority” rather than “unamimous,” but that was an atypical shock.) And when there is a vote contrary to the wishes of the Party Leadership, the truthful voter is immediately removed, letting everyone else know what will happen to them if they ever dare to cross the High Priests of Mormonism.
"One of the principles that governs the LDS Church is “Common Consent” . . . Both local and general officers are presented to the pertinent congregation for acceptance. A similar process happens with LDS scripture. The last time this occurred that I’m aware of was in 1976 when the revelations that later became D&C section 137 & 138 were canonized as LDS scripture. . . . The Adam-God doctrine was never presented to the Church for acceptance. … "
Was the ceremony for making your call and election sure presented to the Church for acceptance?
Was the implementation of the fast offering presented to the Church for acceptance?
When 137 was “presented to the Church,” was the Church informed that 137 was only part of the vision? Did the Church have the opportunity to give “Common Consent” to an honest representation of the vision, or were they led to believe that 137 was a vision in its entirety? Does “common consent” given to proposals that are incomplete or misleading make the proposal more truthful? Of course it doesn’t. And “common consent” in the Mormon Church is not voluntary consent to an issue, but an act of self-defense, to prevent criticism and possible excommunication. Look what happens at the people who every now and then, when a “vote” is asked at a General Conference, vote “no.” Historically their votes have never been counted at all. (I saw one more recent gathering, in which the speaker did say “a majority” rather than “unamimous,” but that was an atypical shock.) And when there is a vote contrary to the wishes of the Party Leadership, the truthful voter is immediately removed, letting everyone else know what will happen to them if they ever dare to cross the High Priests of Mormonism.
Last edited:
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
I’m enjoying this map by the way. It’s funny seeing blue in the state I live in when most of its covered in a sea of red. Little bits of green, yellow, and orange too. I don’t see any gray though.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
It is interesting.
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
The thing is, that even though I’ve met Mormons, and have interacted even with missionaries, I don’t really know that much about them other than “Utah, Jon Heder, parts of Idaho”. I do know some of the beliefs, but that’s not the same as knowing Mormons. I live in an area that is overwhelmingly fundamentalist Protestant. if they were horrified by the massive amounts of Catholics coming here (which, to be fair, they probably are), I can only imagine how they’d feel about Mormons. I do find it interesting how the map said that Traverse County, MN has an equal amount of Lutherans and Catholics. Knowing what I do about Minnesota, I believe it. Anyway, Mormonism is just so, strange to me. Then again, if I would have grown up with it, maybe it would not seem as odd. I grew up near and around Mormons, even knew some missionaries (my mother used to give them coca cola), but, I guess if you’re not entrenched in it, it’s easy for it to look weird. Oddly, I’m typing about Mormonism, and I just spilled my coffee. Make of that what you will.
Last edited:
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Years ago, I tried to read the Book of Mormon, but I tired of it because the “before Christ” part of it has all these strange names that are hard to remember; like reading a Russian novel or a history of Japanese politics in the 1930s. Going to the “new testament-like” part, so much of it just paraphrases that actual New Testament. So I gave up on it.
I then read a book called “D & C”, at least that’s how I remember it. It’s really disturbing. Tells what is going to happen to all the “Gentiles” (non-Mormons) someday during a great tribulation; that Mormons are to drive out all the “Gentiles” from the “promised land” and so on. Really awful stuff.
Both books are really harsh.
That was it for me.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I live in a sea of red also. SW Mo.
Intersting, though, to see that Kansas, next door, isn’t. Lots and lots of Catholic counties. Just a few Catholic parts of Mo; basically St. Louis metro area and a few counties south of there.
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
I used to live in Illinois, and one of the counties I lived in is blue, but a lot of the folks I knew were from Arkansas and Missouri, with a few exceptions, they were all Baptist.
Last edited:
- Status