I am now offering SISTERWIFE, my very first book, as a free e-book, downloadable from my site.

SISTERWIFE is the “ripped from the headlines” story of a polygamous cult in Central Utah, with many parallels to recent real-life events. Presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith and polygamous roots, the Warren Jeffs saga, and the popular show BIG LOVE have all raised interest in polygamy, and this book touches on the Mormon faith the way Joseph Smith taught it.

Prophesied to be the catalyst in a modern-day Armageddon, Kelsey Waite flees a life in Utah, freeing herself from a polygamous lifestyle and abusive father. She is forced to return to the state, and face her demons–and the charismatic cult leader who believes she is destined to be his second wife–when her daughter is kidnapped.

Feel free to download, print, or forward to anyone else you think would be interested in this romantic suspense story.

Bestselling author Katherine Sutcliffe said, “From the first page, SisterWife defies you to put it down….The parallels to the case of Elizabeth Smart are frightening.”

Please visit my site for more information, or visit the page directly,
www.nataliercollins.com/sisterwife.php

One of the most INTERESTING aspects having a blog like this is the number of people who come on here and comment, and then
say “I am not a Mormon, but don’t you think it must be true?” Uh huh. No.

However, sometimes the “I’m not a Mormon but you suck,” tactics are a little different. Our newest and “goodest” friend “Bob” has this to say about me and all our Trapped denizens. (Note: I find it important to note that Bob, based on his email address, is either in junior high or high school. For that reason, I would ask that anyone commenting on this post NOT use profanity, despite the fact Bob himself was pretty darned profane. (Oh, and he needs to use spellchecker, too. Spellcheck, Bob!)

Name: bob

mormons do not beleive in pologimy. Poligimists beleve in pologimy

Wow. How profound. But you are wrong. Mormons do believe in polygamy, and in fact, it is a tenet that is still taught, although not usually to young Mormons such as yourself. They save that stuff for later, when you are more firmly entrenched with little hope of EVER extricating yourself. The milk before the meat theory.

“Bob” also said:

screw u all for saying mormons are bad. Catholics are racist as heck and molest kids. i wonder if michael is catholic. scientologists r nerdy sci-fi geeks or gay. Babtists are redneck hicks and bang there cousins, as well as other relegion. If u dont want to live in utah the doors aren’t closed. feel free to get the fuck out. I am not a mormon, i just can’t stand ur pregidous shit. infact if u hate mormons, and other relegions leave
thank u bitches

First of all, Bobby, I didn’t say Mormons are bad. I like Mormons. I’ve said it many times. I don’t agree with the tenets of the religion itself, and the abuses that go down in the “name” of that belief system, but Mormons themselves? Most are cool.

As for the rest of your comments… Good God, is this the state of our youth? Is this what we have created? Furthermore, are they TEACHING spelling and grammar in our public school system?

I emailed “Bob’s” school district and provided them the comments and the email address from whence they hailed, not because they made me angry. They did not. They made me sad. I think Bob’s parents need to know what Bob is saying and doing when he is supposed to working on homework or chatting with his friends. Or even worse, using his school computer to disperse the “look over there at them” theory of religion in a particularly disgusting, racist and abusive manner.
~~~~~

FYI, note to commenter Wayne, who wants to be heard. I read your comments, and frankly, don’t feel they deserve to be addressed. This is not the “Christians Rock and Mormons Blow” blog. The argument that so-called Christians are throwing stones is irrelevant and does not fly, because those “Christians” are non-existent. I cited Richard Packham’s information because it was thorough and complete. His personal belief system really has nothing to do with it. On this blog, I do not approach Mormonism from a Christian standpoint.

Richard’s being an atheist is irrelevant.

There was an interesting Letter to the Editor in today’s Salt Lake Tribune. Written by practicing Mormon Tom Williams, the letter questions the “cost” of Mitt Romney’s run for the presidency. Not the actual dollar cost, of course, by the cost to the church itself.

Tom said:

Am I the only practicing Mormon who’s not excited about Mitt Romney’s run for president? It’s not like his first order of business will be a $10,000 tax credit for all Latter-Day Saints. (But imagine what that would do for the missionary effort.) In my mind there’s very little to be gained from Romney’s candidacy, and a great deal to be lost.

What does Tom mean? Well, he’s being realistic. He says:

First of all, Mitt Romney cannot win the Republican nomination. The Christian/evangelical bloc of the Republican Party will see to that.

Yes, Tom, you are right. That’s a given. Frankly, some of those “Christians” give me the heebie jeebies, especially when they are off doing meth and having gay sex when the congregants aren’t looking, but hey…. I love Christians. Most of them are just trying to live Godly lives, according to admirable tenets. Many Mormons are like that, too. I’m just not fond of hypocritical right wing nutjobs, no matter what religion they espouse.

But then Tom goes a bit astray in his letter, when he says this:

I’ll tell you what they’ll do. There will be discussions of LDS temple ceremonies, temple garments, polygamy, priesthood restrictions on blacks, blood atonement, Adam-God theory, etc., etc. They’ll bring up every anti-Mormon bullet point you’ve ever seen, and probably a few you haven’t. There will be quotes taken out of context, distortions of doctrine and kernels of truth buried in landfills of inaccuracy

Uh, Tom, shouldn’t these “bullet points” be REQUIRED for any thinking person to consider? Considering they WERE taught, and they ARE tenets, are you really saying you don’t think they deserve discussion? These things are awfully hard to defend. Perhaps THAT is why you don’t want them noted.

Frankly, if you’re going to look at a religion, are you just supposed to say, “Gee, those Mormons look happy. Think I’ll join them. I will ignore that man behind the curtain, and his six wives.”

Some of the Jim Jones family looked happy, too, even right before they were drinking the cyanide Kool-aid. Shouldn’t you, as a thinking person, LOOK INTO the “controversial” doctrines you are spouting off about in above quote? And in fact, would you not want your children, should they be considering joining another religion, to look a little DEEPER than happy faces?

Adam-God Doctrine IS hard to defend, because a man believed to a be a prophet, Brigham Young, taught that Adam was God, and God was Adam. No distortion there, Tom. It’s really that simple.

The problem with this teaching is that it was disavowed by President Spencer W. Kimball in 1976. And that’s okay. But Mormons teach that their PROPHETS are speaking with God. So where did Brig go astray? How do we decide WHEN he was speaking with God, and when was just being a man?

Who gets to make that claim? And how could we possible know it’s true?

Consider the Mountain Meadows Massacre, something Tom also mentions. There is LITTLE doubt that Mormons were involved in this horrible event. Even Mormon historians do not deny that. There is some quibbling over whether or not Brigham Young was directly involved, but given his violent and strong-handed approach to running the Mormon Church, I have little doubt he was involved.

Consider that Brigham Young ALSO taught Blood Atonement. That is, some sins are so grevious to the Lord, that they can only be atoned for by the spilling of the sinner’s blood. Brigham’s belief was, the way to love thy neighbor was to kill him, so he could atone for his sins. No, really!

Now take a person in this congregation … and suppose that he is overtaken in a gross fault, that he has committed a sin that he knows will deprive him of that exaltation which he desires, and that he cannot attain to it without the shedding of his blood, and also knows that by having his blood shed he will atone for that sin, and be saved and exalted with the Gods, is there a man or woman in this house but what would say, “shed my blood that I may be saved and exalted with the Gods?”

All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers or sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood?

I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain, in order to atone for their sins. I have seen scores and hundreds of people for whom there would have been a chance (in the last resurrection there will be) if their lives had been taken and their blood spilled on the ground as a smoking incense to the Almighty, but who are now angels to the devil … I have known a great many men who left this church for whom there is no chance whatever for exaltation, but if their blood had been spilled, it would have been better for them, the wickedness and ignorance of the nations forbids this principle’s being in full force, but the time will come when the law of God will be in full force.

This is loving our neighbour as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it. Any of you who understand the principles of eternity, if you have sinned a sin requiring the shedding of blood, except the sin unto death, would not be satisfied nor rest until your blood should be spilled, that you might gain that salvation you desire. That is the way to love mankind. (Sermon by Brigham Young, delivered in the Mormon Tabernacle, Feb. 8, 1857, printed in the Deseret News, Feb. 18, 1857; also reprinted in the Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pp. 219-20)

You know, Tom is right. That stuff is hard to defend. No wonder he doesn’t want Mitt to run. Although I’m a little confused with his claims of distortion. Tell me, how do you distort the above quote? It simply isn’t necessary. It says it all.

Good try though, Tom.

Utah has been shocked and sickened this week by a shooting spree at trendy Trolley Square, Five people died. Four more were and are injured. The shooter, a young Bosnian refugee named Sulejman Talovic, 18, also died after he was confronted and shot by police.

These shootings at Trolley Square that occurred Monday, February 12, have been declared by some to be “the worst massacre” in Utah history. This, of course, is not true, as is evidenced by the post just before this one. That post refers to the Mountain Meadows Massacre. You will note by the date that it was POSTED before the Trolley Square Shootings occurred.

Odd coincidence.

More than 130 innocent men, women and children were slaughtered in the MMM.

On Monday, five people died.

I am not trying to take away from the horrible events on Monday. Utah is known for rallying around victims of ALL stripes, but it hasn’t always been that way, mostly because there has NEVER been acknowledgement of/and apology for one of the darkest days in Mormon history.

September 11, 1857. I would ask Utah to reflect on the somber events of this week, and consider how the relatives of the 1857 massacre must still feel, even now.

An apology for that dark day in Utah Mormon history is in order.

Okay, he wasn’t really a serial killer. Serial fornicator, maybe. He found all KINDS of ways around that whole monogamy thing, and personally, I think he was more devoted than Joseph Smith, Jr., himself. I also think he was more uptight and possessed absolutely NO sense of humor.

Maybe I’m wrong. Mormons, feel free to write in droves and tell me how NEGATIVE I am, and how Brigham Young was really just THE HAPPY FAIRY. I can see him in a tutu with a little wand with a heart on the end. He probably used it when he was adopting all those grown men and sealing them to himself in temple ceremonies. I am NOT MAKING THIS UP.

Anyway, there is a new film coming out which ALREADY has Mormons stripping off their garmies and pulling up the big girl panties, because, whoa nelly, is it going to require some big girl panties to tolerate.

September Dawn is the story of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, featuring some serious talent like, oh, Jon Voight, and Terence Stamp as Breed’em Young. I, of course, do not really think this is a coup. Until the day Johnny Depp plays Joseph Smith, Jr., I am just not buying in.

Sorry.

At any rate, September Dawn is not something Mormons are looking forward to, and in fact, it is already getting some negative press in Utah. No surprise.

It portrays what might be the darkest day in LDS History–oddly enough, September 11. But September 11, 1857. More bad timing for Mormons. The Mountain Meadows Massacre saw the death of 120 men, women and children at the hands of Mormons and Paiute Indians.

Many historians believe Brigham Young directed the act. Others deny his culpability, but the bottom line is MORMONS MURDERED. And thus, an apology is really in order here. But one has never been issued. In fact, at a dedication of the site in 1999, President Gordon B. Hinckley said, “All who knew firsthand about what occurred here are long since gone. Let the book of the past be closed. Let peace come into our hearts.”

Gordon? No. COME ON. There really isn’t a lot required here. We are all well aware that you were NOT THERE when this occurred. In fact, no one who WAS THERE is alive. We aren’t expecting a personal apology and an acceptance of guilt. But the facts are pretty basic and honest, and there is NO DENYING Mormons were involved. Even worse, it pretty much looks like Brigham Young, who in my opinion was the HITLER of Mormonism, had a VERY DIRECT INVOLVEMENT.

Whenever I am looking for a quote to prove just how WRONG Mormonism is, guess who obliges? Yup, Brigham. The man was sexist, racist, and a bunch of other “ists” that I have yet to discover.

Breed’ump had JSJR (Joseph Smith, Jr.) disease, otherwise known as foot-in-mouth as opposed to FOOT and MOUTH. Of course he didn’t realize this, because he was CONVINCED of his divinity.

“I am here to answer. I shall be on hand to answer when I am called upon, for all the counsel and for all the instruction that I have given to this people. If there is an Elder here, or any member of this Church, called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who can bring up the first idea, the first sentence that I have delivered to the people as counsel that is wrong, I really wish they would do it; but they cannot do it, for the simple reason that I have never given counsel that is wrong; this is the reason.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 16, page 161.)

“I know just as well what to teach this people and just what to say to them and what to do in order to bring them into the celestial kingdom…I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 95.)

An apology would be so simple. An acknowledgment that people diied, at the hand of “Saints,” and that is was wrong. Instead, we have the constant revisions and rewriting of history and denials.

This does not heal. And the scab, never healed, will be torn off by this movie.

Should be interesting. Let the “negative” and “bitter” comments and emails commence.