Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Why were the Mormons Driven From State to State?


The Real Reason the Mormons Were Driven From State to State by Rocky Hulse

       July 4th doesn’t hold a candle to July 24th in Mormonism. What’s so special about the 24th day of July with respect to Mormonism? This is the day that the Mormon pioneers were led into the Salt Lake Valley by Brigham Young after they had crossed the plains, having left Nauvoo, Illinois more than a year earlier.
     The front cover of the July 29, 2012, edition of the Mormon Church’s “Church News,” shows a picture of President Henry B. Eyring, 1st Counselor to the current Mormon Prophet, Thomas S. Monson, waving to the crowd from the convertible he was riding in as the Grand Marshal of the annual Pioneer Day Parade in downtown Salt Lake City. Pioneer Day is so revered in Mormonism that the day begins with a “Sunrise Service”: “Elder Steven E. Snow of the Seventy was the featured speaker at the annual Days of ’47 Sunrise Service in the Salt Lake Tabernacle, the event that traditionally begins the day’s festivities in downtown Salt Lake City, where Prophet Brigham Young and the vanguard group of pioneers arrived in 1847 and founded the city.”(‘Was it so long ago?’, Church News, July 29, 2012, pg 3)

     Why were the Mormons forced from Illinois, and Missouri before that, and Ohio before that, and New York before that? Ask any Mormon and they will immediately tell you it was because of religious persecution. Mormons are taught this by their Church and truly believe this; however, is this true? The simple answer is: No. Was “religious persecution” involved? Undoubtedly. But the real reason that the Mormons were forced from the State of Illinois, and the other states before, was the absolute abuse of the law by their leadership. The reason the Mormons were run out of the State of Illinois was that the citizenry could simply tolerate no more the refusal by the Mormon leadership to obey the laws of the United States, the State of Illinois and the County of Hancock.
     When the turmoil surrounding the Mormons being expelled from the State was happening, the voice of reason was the town of Quincy, Illinois, which was known for giving the Mormons refuge when they were expelled from Missouri. On the front page of the July 24, 1844 issue of the Quincy Herald Whig, just under 30 days after Joseph Smith’s murder in the Carthage Jail, is an article that clearly defines the total disregard for the law by the Mormon community. This article is more than a year and a half before the Mormons were expelled, and gives defined instances of the abuses of the law that were being committed in Nauvoo. These abuses were the reason that the Governor of Illinois put in place his order for the Mormons to be removed from the State. For the Mormons to claim that religious persecution was the reason for their removal vice the truth that their leadership was in total defiance of the law is a rewriting of history to garner sympathy from an unknowing public and an active attempt to hide the truth; persecution plays well in the press, defiance of the law doesn’t.




Front Page Quincy Herald Whig, July 24, 1844

     The following is a quote taken from the July 24, 1844 front page article of the Quincy Herald Whig, which lays out clearly some of the abuses of the law that were being exercised by the Mormon Leaders in Nauvoo, in direct defiance of the laws of the United States, the State of Illinois, and the County of Hancock:


THE MORMONS.

     “The recent death of Joseph Smith and his brother, by lawless violence, while confined in jail, has been justly reprobated by the public voice, as well in the county of Hancock, where it happened, as in the state of Illinois generally, and in other parts of the Union. No man, so far as my knowledge extends, has been found to justify that rash and guilty act, however much he might believe that the crimes of the prisoners had deserved punishment at the hands of the law.
     But it seems to me that public sentiment, as is often the case, is in danger of re-acting with so much force to overbear what, for want of a better term, I shall call public reason.  In other words, our feelings have been so much revolted by this instance of anti-Mormon violence, that we sympathize with the Mormons alone; we are strongly set against their opponents: we forget the past conduct of the prophet and his followers; we lose sight of the causes which led to the catastrophe, and the Mormons are becoming in our eyes a peaceful, law-abiding people, while their dead leaders assume the semblance of innocence and martyred victims. This is by no means an unusual revulsion in public feeling. But it is necessary to a just understanding of a question which may at no distant day be of the highest importance to ourselves, that we arrest this current sympathy, and calmly examine the actual position of things, before we are hurried away from the ground we have heretofore occupied.
     I need not review the history of the Mormons in this and other states. From the many and conflicting statements published, enough may be gathered to satisfy us of these facts: that they have everywhere been troublesome neighbors; and wherever they have established themselves they have bred difficulties, where none before existed; and that, taken as a body of people, especially if collected in strong settlements, they have always manifested a disposition to resist or evade the general laws of the state when applied to restrain their action. Such is the testimony against them in other states, and such is our own experience of them in Illinois.
     The causes of this insubordination and turbulence on their part are neither obscure nor uncertain; they are to be found in their peculiar tenets of faith and principles of government. Other religious sects are as enthusiastic as the Mormons, as devoted to the worship of the creed of their choice; but they form no distinct, civil, or political community; they are all (however variant from one another in religious opinion) citizens of a common government, and all recognise the supreme obligations of the constitutions, state and federal, and the laws made in pursuance there of. Each man looks to those laws as the measure of his duties and his rights, and is prepared to sustain their authority against all who oppose it.
     But the Mormons have heretofore proceeded upon a different system. The aim and object of him who called himself their prophet was to collect about him a people devoted to his will and obedient to all his commands. To this end he pretended to be inspired by God himself, to be favored with frequent revelations, and to announce to his followers, from time to time, the commands of the great Jehovah. To make his influence over them more direct and powerful, they were gathered, as much as possible, into communities, separate and distinct from other citizens; and, if people of a different persuasion have settled among them, they have been too few and weak to make head against the authority of the prophet. The Mormons, thus associated and thus taught, have been the blind, fanatical, unreasoning followers of an arch impostor. They have fed his luxury with the contributions of money and property. They have pampered his pride and the lust of power by their obedience and adulation. And, more than all, they have set up his will as paramount to the laws of the land, and have shown themselves on more than one occasion ready to support him by force in his opposition thereto. What else indeed, could be expected? The word of God, say they, is of far greater obligation than the word of man. God speaks by the mouth of Joseph—man speaks by human laws. Shall we not, therefore, rather obey God than man?
     Time will not permit me to exhibit the many illustrations of what I have stated above, which will readily occur to all who were familiar with the conduct of these people in Hancock county for the last three or four years. It is true that the grant of powers in the charter of the city of Nauvoo has furnished them with a pretext for some of the usurpations and encroachments of which they have been guilty. But it was but a pretext, and a flimsy one; it could not and did not deceive the designing men, who used it as a cloak for deliberate tyranny; it could not have served the purpose of deceiving any community not enslaved by the debasing influence of superstition; nor was that city charter necessary for the accomplishment of these purposes. Had that pretext been wanting, others would have been found. The ground work existed in the hearts of the deluded people; it was easy for the hand of their ruler to raise upon it his edifice of fraud, vice, and tyranny.
     Who does not know the fact that one short year since Joseph Smith, when arrested by the authority of the governor of this state, upon a demand made by the governor of Missouri, discharged himself from custody by a mock trial upon habeas corpus before his creatures, the city council of Nauvoo, he himself being president of that same city council, as mayor of the city!
     Who does not know that this successful defiance of the laws of this state, and of process emanating from its highest executive authority, is but one instance out of many. Let me enumerate a few of them. The authorities of


Nauvoo have assumed and exercised the power—

     To establish a recorder’s office for the record of deeds, independent of that provided for by the state laws in every county.
     To grant marriage licenses, independently of the state laws requiring them to issue from the clerk of the county commissioners’ court.
     To try cases of slander and causes the jurisdiction whereof is vested exclusively in the circuit courts of the state.
     To punish by fine and imprisonment persons guilty of speaking words disrespectful of Joseph Smith, and other alleged offenses, which if cognizable any where, belonged exclusively to the circuit courts.
     To arrest and annoy peaceable visiters to the city, by vexatious confinement and examination, under pretence of regulating its police.
     To discharge persons from arrests upon civil or criminal process from any court of the state, by writs of habeas corpus emanating from the city council.
     And they passed an ordinance prohibiting any civil officer to serve process from the state courts in Nauvoo, unless it was countersigned by their mayor, under penalty of fine and imprisonment, which the governor of the state is forbidden to remit by his pardon!”
(emphasis mine)
   

 Ask yourself: “If any group of people in the United States today, committed the offenses that the Mormon hierarchy did in Nauvoo in the 1840’s, would it be tolerated?” The answer is
clearly: NO!
     The question isn’t if the Mormon pioneers suffered tremendous hardships in these migrations from state to state: Of course they did! The question is: “Why were they driven from state to state?” The Mormon Church will continue to hide the truth, creating a false history in order to deceive unknowing Mormons.


© Copyright 2002 Mormon Missions Midwest Outreach, Inc. All Rights Reserved. —Permission is granted to reproduce, provided content is not changed and this copyright notice is included.


4 comments:

  1. Seriously, you cannot do better than that one!

    ReplyDelete
  2. My father, who is Mormon, was shot twice during the battle of Khe Sanh. My grandpa, a Mormon, was hit by bullets from a German machine gun during the Battle of the Bulge. I served four years active duty in the United States Army. For you to write "July 4th doesn’t hold a candle to July 24th in Mormonism." Shows what an enormous asshole you are.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Answer me one question: What day in Salt Lake City boasts the city's grandest parade, July 4th, or July 24th?

    ReplyDelete

Rocky and Helen Hulse

Rocky and Helen Hulse
Defending Christianity From Mormon Doctrine