What’s This Mormon Thing?

Hostile Anti-Mormon posts subject to editing or deletion

Does Behavior Matter? More Hate Filled Evangelicals

Posted by JLFuller on August 19, 2008

For some time now, there have been groups of anti-Mormons who parade in front of the Temple, the Conference Center at conference time and protest at the dedication of Church buildings around the country. They engage in highly confrontational, in-your-face tactics at our events and claim they are just informational. OK, I accept they have doctrinal differences with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. They say they are only interested in informing the LDS membership and others of errors they perceive in our Church and believe their methods are justified. Apparently they think they have some role in deciding what others are allowed believe. In any event, I fail to see how such confrontations can do anything but alienate others. Then again I don’t think they intend to bridge any divides. 


One such group, Mormon Research Ministries, says they consider the term anti-Mormon  offense and liken it to a racial slur. Evidently they see themselves as some kind of victim. But  thier verbal violence and in-your-face confrontations make a mockery of legitimate victims of religious persecution. They prefer the term critic as though they were providing peer reviewed commentaries. I suggest anyone who observes this group’s behavior will conclude the term anti-Mormon fits – regardless of what they want us to believe.


This confrontation tactic is not a new strategy. It is in fact an old one. We have seen it elsewhere such as anti-war demonstrations as well as by such groups as NOW, Code Pink, the Black Panther Party, The Nation of Islam and others. Even the American Nazi Party used this tactic in their 1977 confrontation of Jewish survivors of the Holocaust. So both radical ends of the spectrum have found the tactic useful. Groups in the mainstream find other more constructive ways to express opinion and differences with others.


Recently at the Mormon Miracle Pageant event in Manti, Utah, anti-Mormon women dressed up as Joseph Smith’s wives and paraded in front of attendees as a way of expressing their views of Joseph Smith and his polygamist beliefs. I can’t comment on the accuracy of what they attempted to convey and I suggest they can’t either. I don’t think any one knows the whole story. To this writer it appears MRM had a nickels worth of opinion and wanted us to believe it was a dollars worth of fact. MRM writer Aaron Shafovaloff told me the resource they used was Todd Compton’s In Sacred Loneliness although in reading Compton I found he denounces the very methods MRM uses.


Compton says “… I also dislike Mormon history that systematically censors out anything “positive.” Mormon history is filled with wonderful people who have performed authentically Christ like actions. There are many stories of heroism and sacrifice. While some church leaders have been authoritarian and controlling others have been warm and inclusive. Anyone who continually hammers on only the negative is guilty of censorship and cover up, just as is the person who censors out the negative. Both write unrealistic and unbelievable history. Furthermore, the person who includes only the negative can be guilty of sensationalism and the low moral atmosphere of yellow journalism.”   www.lds-mormon.com/compton.


I don’t know if the message MRM wants to convey holds water or not or how much is accurate and how much is contrived or taken out of context. I have doubts about the accuracy because MRM does not provide the other side which is a sign their intent was just to spread more propaganda. In fact, when it comes to LDS theology and history we  see only negative comments and articles coming from MRM. So when they present a piece I have serious doubts about its legitimacy. They certainly are not balanced and, to my way of thinking, are not credible. I find it too hard to get past their behavior to seriously consider what they say. I think a lot of people are like me. It certainly is not in keeping with the Savior’s way of treating other people. Mormons believe creating conflict is Satan’s way and that Christ rejects it.


But, right or wrong, there they were. Their method was intended to be provocative and so it was. As I read the reports of the event and saw the photos taken, I couldn’t help but think that these were likely fine people. But a lot of fine people are poorly led. The issue I take with them is not their doctrine or belief about Joseph Smith, Brigham Young or anyone else. I object to the blatantly offense manner they choose to express themselves and their beliefs. Let them believe what they will. But how do attendees protect themselves from these openly hostile behaviors? This was a family event with small children, elderly and invited guests to a beautiful, spiritual event intended to praise God and honor Mormon forbearers.


MRM’s blog MormonCoffee.com has pictures and commentary of the event.  Shafovaloff reports on the event if readers care to follow this link – www.blog.mrm.org. As in many of these staged events the outcome is often predicted in advance to have been a “roaring success” according to those who put it on. However those not connected with the event often have a different view. I wonder if it is even worth the effort. It certainly rallies the troops, and I suppose such expressions raise money and keep some people’s interest up.  But isn’t that like preaching to the choir? What kind of person is impressed with behavior like this?


Nation of Islam’s (Lewis Farrakhan) Million Man March of a few years ago claimed to have over a million participants. But the National Park Service who monitored and licensed the event reported a significantly smaller number of less than half that. In Farrakhan’s case success was defined according to someone’s preference rather than the actual outcome. Who knows whether this MRM event was a success? I suppose it depends on how you define success and who you think was listening.


All this brings me to the point I try to make on this blog and wherever I comment or participate in a discussion. I ask if we are getting closer or farther apart? Does the discussion lead us to becoming more Christ-like? So I ask it here too. In the case of the Manti event, is the divide between LDS and the protesters narrower or wider and whose interest does it benefit, Satan’s or Christ’s. 


I have offered Shafovaloff the chance to say what he wants in response to my piece. In fact I sent him a draft of what I said here so he would know what to respond to. I think that is only fair given I mentioned him and his site by name. In the past, others have claimed that the end justifies the means. They believe they have a duty to educate unknowing Mormons about some unsavory behaviors, as they see them, and that such behaviors are indicative of the falseness of our religion. They think Mormons are oblivious to the failings of the people who preceded us. We are not. When it comes to Joseph and Brigham, I don’t think we have the whole story. In fact I am sure we don’t. We don’t know enough to judge. I don’t know and I am OK with it until someone with gravitas and says otherwise. I want to hear the other side before I draw conclusions. Until then, these stories are only half-told.


So, in answer to my question, does behavior matter? Of course it does. There is a threshold which legitimate discourse must meet to be considered worthy of discussion. That is, participants must respect the premise enough to consider all sides of a question and practice a modicum of restraint in arriving at conclusions. MRM’s behavior is analogous to inviting oneself over a colleague’s home and forcing themselves verbally upon him. Honest, responsible people do not behave this way – or so it seems to me.


39 Responses to “Does Behavior Matter? More Hate Filled Evangelicals”

  1. mormonsoprano said

    An excellent post. There is a code of decency that all human beings must abide, or terrible consequences occur. Interestingly, it is those same folks who choose hate tactics who forever are loudly defending their actions as their right to “freedom of speech”. But then deny others those is cvery same privileges. At the very least, it shows extreme immaturity and selfishness.

    In the end, we are all human beings who share the same planet. We cry and suffer. We laugh and rejoice. We worry over our children and our aging parents and our economy. We struggle with our finances, and physical illness, and personal relationships, and a million other worries. We have joy and fun and peace with friends and family, and we weep when they are gone. How sad it is then that any individual thinks another individual is less than human, and less deserving of respect and rights of belief and worship than themselves. These are the very thoughts and beliefs which breed war, holocaust and global suffering; these thoughts justify violence, and incite people to irrational and criminal behavior.

    There is no excuse for intolerance and disrespect. It is unconscionable for human beings to thrive on conflict, anger, bigotry, and hatred after all our world has suffered because of it. Intelligent people everywhere should be able to look back, and learn. Obviously, as you have pointed out, this is Satan at work. Sadly, Satan uses them like puppets, and abandons them when they are of no use to him anymore. Nothing good will ever come to a person for these behaviors. Ironically, their efforts and actions will only fortify the faith and determination of the very people they persecute.

    Life is short.In the end, we are all going to die. I imagine it will be much better if we can look back upon it all with peace that we helped others out, spread a little kindness, did something to make the world a little better and a little brighter and a little more tolerant for the next generation. Yes, our behavior matters. It is critical, and we will be held accountable for each choice.

  2. Aaron said

    Jack, this is what I wrote to you originally in response to the original form of your blog post draft.

    1) To indirectly associate us with the American Nazi Party, etc., is sad, because it shows you are out of touch with the character, motives, and message of evangelical Christians trying to reach Mormons. It also seems pretty low. Just because you disagree with our message and medium doesn’t mean you should paint us with such an associative brush.

    2) Remember, the medium and the message are in a big way married, as one shapes the other. Our message is an invitation, an authoritative call to repentance, and an educational teaching. That you don’t agree with our message will inevitably affect your disposition toward our medium.

    3) Our goal is, among other things, to convert Mormons out of Mormonism into a saving relationship with the Jesus Christ who was always and eternally fully God. We don’t tend to take advice from Mormonism’s defenders on how best to do this. We listen to God’s word, to the Spirit, to the counsel of ex-Mormon Christians, etc. Imagine an LDS mission president calling MRM to ask for advice on how to best convert ardent evangelicals out of evangelicalism and into Mormonism. What kind of counsel do you think we would give him?

    4) Be careful not to put the Spirit in a box. What the Spirit leads people like us to do will probably surprise you.

    5) The illustration was in many ways tame and contextualized. People come to the pageant expecting people in costumes representative of Mormon history. The kind of meaningful conversations that ensued were incredible. Unless you were there as a significant observer, be careful before you make sweeping judgments.

    6) The Mormon history we have to tell is not a comfortable or positive history. It is inherently embarrassing. For me to expect defenders of Mormonism to find the display positive or faith-promoting or pleasant is unrealistic. But that said, some Mormon laymen actually found positive value in the presentation:

    7) As we are all immersed in our own culture, it is sometimes good to come up from the water we are immersed in for a fresh breath of air. Our postmodern and pluralistic culture has turned perceptions of what used to be seen responsible, public religious criticism and engagement into something to be afraid of. I recommend reading the Old Testament prophets with an eye to the way they were led by the Spirit to engage their culture in a very counter-cultural, shocking way. Be careful not to cast aspersions on the Holy Spirit as you cast aspersions on what the we evangelicals have been led by the Spirit to do.

    8) Don’t think of assertive, religious engagement and criticism as something that needs to be abandoned in order for tolerance and kindness to be practiced. Instead, understand that the context of active, assertive religious engagement and even criticism is the kind of context where humans can best display Christ-like tolerance, patience, and love. Jesus taught us to love our enemies, not to resort to passivity, passive-aggressiveness, or pretend there that the white elephant in the room really isn’t as serious and big as it is.

    Grace and peace in Christ, who justifies the ungodly like me by faith apart from works (Romans 4:4-8),


    • JLFuller said

      Thanks for the reply, but, like everything else I read from your group, you are trying to smoothe over your abominable beahvior. You can not and placing it under Christ’s banner makes a mockery of His sacrifice. He is very clear that boorish behavior is anti-thetical to His gospel. The one thing that makes me hopeful about you though is that you have come back to try and address the issue again. However the problem is behavioral not theological.

  3. Aaron said

    Also, you should probably directly link to the relevant video:


  4. Aaron said

    JLFuller, you still haven’t “approved” my two comments for public display, hence no one else can see them.

  5. JLFuller said

    You will notice that I allow you as much space and freedom to post your opinions as you could ask for. That same courtesy is not extended on the MRM website.

  6. Aaron said

    Well if I wanted to post a 5000 word essay, pasted from another site, that wouldn’t be reasonable now, would it? At the present time we at MC we allow for eight comments a day.

    Take care,


    • JLFuller said

      It seems to me that the limit was 3 per day but it is a moot point for this old country boy. But let me talk just a bit again about why that is so.

      MRM is a mean spirited anti-Mormon group of people who talk about things they know little about. They deride and degrade things that are sacred to others and have no respect for people they disagree with. That makes members of this group and their fellow travelers unreliable sources for people who want a balanced point of view. That means that only people who are looking for ammunition with which to prosecute their already anti-Mormon views will find your site useful. Mormons are treated with disdain and derision and do not find a welcoming place at MRM. And if that was not enough, you consider your abominable behavior as a service to others. Sir, you do not serve Christ. You are His enemy.

  7. JLFuller said

    Aaron said
    “Be careful not to put the Spirit in a box. What the Spirit leads people like us to do will probably surprise you.”

    I am sure Aaron was thinking Holy Spirit when he made the comment above but I think in reality it is a different spirit. We have seen this kind of thinking and behvaior before in people who believe they are wielding the mighty and holy sword of vengence laying waste to God’s enemies. Consider the middle ages and the religious wars around the world even today. The thinking goes like this: “I know I am doing God’s work so whatever I do is under God’s mandate therefore I can do and say what I want.”In modern sociological terms it is called non-arrestable criminal behavior. In its most advanced form it is known as sociopathic behavior – that is, knowing one is hurting others but not caring about it.

    It is a tool Satan has used very succcessfully throughout history and he continues to use it today. It is why people who read this comment immediately recognize the behavior. It has an inante sense of truthfulness. It resonates. I suggest it comes from a time long ago, albeit in a little different form, when we all first heard the words and felt the sting. In those times, the strategy was to seperate God’s children from their Father in order to prevail. Today, the strategy, in one of its current forms, is seen flying Christ’s purloined banner but it is empty of Christ’s message in favor of a new one. The new message intends to seperate and divide by pitting one group against another. But it really isn’t new. It is the old “new” message. It was effective then and it is effective today. It seperates rather than brings people together.

  8. Aaron said

    I’m sorry you feel that way, JLFuller. I want to thank you, nevertheless, for being forthright and not passive-aggressive.

    I consider it a sacred duty to be an ideological iconoclast for the welfare of Mormons and for the sake of truth. I do hope Mormons can feel more hospitality though.

    Take care,


    PS If you’d ever like to chat over Skype, my username is “aaronshaf”

    • JLFuller said

      Defintition: Iconoclast is a noun “1 a person who attacks cherished beliefs or institutions. 2 a person who destroys images used in religious worship, especially one belonging to a movement opposing such images in the Byzantine Church during the 8th and 9th century. ” Oxford Englsih Dictionary.

      This person, a secular-humansist, attacks religion. Are you sure you want to be included in with this group of people? I for one think it is not appropriate in your case but I have a feeling you think it is someone weilding the indignant sword of God vanquishing His enemies. But I can see where some who profess to be Christians can make up their own defintion just as they have with the terms “cult” and “anti-Mormon”.

      An iconoclast might be considered a visionary seeing things others don’t see. That doesn’t fit either. You just keep re-hashing the same old twaddle that has been around for over a century. Iconoclasts, in the secular world, are “individuals who do things that others say can’t be done,” according to Gregory Berns, MD PhD and neurosurgeon who studies and writes about such things. Again, that doesn’t quite fit what I think you are getting at. Just verbally abusing folks you disagree with is as old as time. You add nothing but disharmony and detract from the truth. The truth is that Christ wants all of us to be respectful and cordial even to those with whom we disagree.

      So Aaron, you are not an iconoclast at least according to the definitions I have found. It appears that only you think you are. It appears that propogandist, as I have previously observed elsewhere in this blog site, still fits. But it is your ideas about what is acceptable behavior that I confront not your humanity or worthiness as a Christian as you understand that to be.

  9. JLFuller said

    If you think my comments are based on theological differences then you are wrong. Expressing differences in understanding is expected. But the manner in which they are expressed and the venues where they are expressed are choices of behavior. The Spanish Inquistion was about power to demand compliance. It was not about religion. Just as rape is not about sex, your groups behavior is not about religion it is about power to forbid another group the right to religious expression. Hiding behind the cloak of your understanding of Christianity does disservice to those people who look at your internicine war against Mormons as indicative of all the bad things they see and hear about Christians everywhere. We Christians should be practicing what Christ admonished us to do especially in our treatment of each other. You and I can have seperate opinions concerning the nature of God and other theological ideas but our treatment of each should be a commonly held sacred pact. But you folks have taken to berating and demeaning others as a part of your belief of what Chrisitan service is. I find that unfathomable. Non-Chrsitians look at bully type behavior and are repulsed.

  10. Aaron said

    “it is about power to forbid another group the right to religious expression”

    I’m not sure where you get that. I am sorry you feel that way. All things considered you sound very angry at me. I happen to believe that it is very important at this stage in history to let a plurality of religions peacefully co-exist. I like what John Piper has to say in his talk, “Jesus Christ: The End and Ground of Tolerance”. We can be tolerant (i.e. non-violent, etc.) in co-existing with other religions because it is Jesus Christ who will authoritatively and finally be intolerant (i.e. violent) toward sin and death upon his second coming.

    The religious kingdom-war Christians ought to fight ought to be an ideological and spiritual war, with words and prayer and stories and ideas and art, not with guns and bombs.

    “our treatment of each should be a commonly held sacred pact”

    I think it is very helpful to see our relationship in terms of tacit covenants or pacts or lack thereof. I commit to no covenant or pact that requires me to withhold harsh, penetrating, demeaning, devastating criticism of false religious worldview systems, and I reserve the God-given freedom to use (with personal spiritual discertion) a wide array of modes of communication. Including biting humor and sarcasm. 😉


    PS This conversation is dragging so my participation will likely wane or cease.

  11. GB said


    “I commit to no covenant or pact that requires me to withhold harsh, penetrating, DEMEANING, devastating criticism of false religious worldview systems, and I reserve the God-given freedom to use (with personal spiritual discertion) a wide array of modes of communication. Including biting humor and sarcasm.” (emphasis mine).

    And yet Jesus said (Matt 7:12) “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them:”

    A Christian is to treat others the way he would like to be treated. Aaron do you graciously accept “harsh, penetrating, demeaning, devastating criticism” from others? If not then you are not in line with true christian behavior.

    • JLFuller said

      Aaron is a member of the Mormon Research Ministries in Utah. They are a nasty bunch of religious zealots who hate Mormons and particulalry Joseph Smith. Based on their behavior, they believe hostile and aggressive confrontation of those they disagree with is “Christian” service. Their founder I believe is an excommunicated former Mormon. Most of their membership take their marching orders from this hate monger. If you read what his followers say at Mormoncoffee.com, it appears they all pretty much adhere to this behavior. There are many excommunicated former Mormons and a great many kids who post there. The posters appear to be mostly a kiddy fringe group with a smattering of over 21 types. Its hard to tell for sure. Aaron is one of their leaders.

  12. GB said


    I have spent some time there of late, and actually that is how I found you (in a round about way).

    I have found them as you have said. I also have noticed that they are very sensitive about taking criticism or answering probing theological questions. I have even gotten Aaron to immediately shut down a thread by honestly asking questions that I haven’t been able to get answers from “evangelicals”. Questions that I would definitely have to have satisfactory answers to before I would even consider the possibility of leaving the church.

    Apparently they won’t answer them because they can’t. And they don’t like those questions floating around MC because the mere asking of them somehow exposes deep, perhaps even fatal flaws in their theology.

    Frankly I can see why they say that Mormon posters don’t last long there. The things and attitudes exhibited there are too often dripping with vitriol and hatred and are definitely UNChristian!!

  13. Aaron said

    GB, I have had some great harsh criticism of various kinds thrown my way in life, and it has been very helpful. I know I have pride in me, so I can’t always promise to accept it like I should, but in principle I would hope that people would dish it out my way when it is warranted.

    Their founder [Bill McKeever] I believe is an excommunicated former Mormon.

    Not true. JLFuller, you might want to examine some faith-promoting rumors you’ve been hearing (and spreading).

    GB, you haven’t faired well on the Mormon Coffee blog because you resort to personal attacks and inappropriate, off-topic rabbit trails. Other Mormons have been successful in asking questions and interacting on the blog, so I suggest you follow their lead. As I have often offered, if you would like to ask any off-topic questions, etc., contact me on Skype so we can have an audibly recorded Skype conversation to post for everyone to benefit from. I’m giving you an extraordinary venue to let you make your voice heard, only to have it repeatedly turned down, so I assume that there are other issues at play here.

    Grace and peace,


  14. JLFuller said

    If McKeever is not an ex’d Mormon then I will correct my statements in the future. I will allow your comments to be posted too.

  15. GB said


    Aaron is just afraid to allow an honest and open exchange at MC. I found his “rabbit trails” comment humorous. That is all MC is! LOL 🙂

    The truth hurts Aaron so much that he takes it personal and calls it a personal attack. LOL!

    He often flags me for doing the same thing he has done. Don’t they call that hypocrisy?

    Kind of groups him with the scribes and Pharisees. 😉

    • JLFuller said

      Anyone who says he reserves the right to be rude and abusive in the furtherance of his ideas isn’t interested in learning anything or bridge building or otherwise improving relationships.

  16. Aaron said

    GB, the problem with your rabbit trails is that they have been particularly marked by personal attacks. You generally have shown yourself to be an unnecessarily divisive person.

    But hey, if I have ever come down too hard on you, why not make up for it by taking an opportunity to publicly chat with me over an audible venue?

    Consider using tokbox.com or Skype.

  17. Aaron said

    Since I assume you’re equating “rude and abusive” with my assertion that I reserve the right to openly criticize Mormonism, even via humor and sarcasm, doesn’t that mean the God who inspired the critical humor in Isaiah is not “interested… in bridge building or otherwise improving relationships”?

  18. JLFuller said

    I absolutely and totally disagree with that. Christ set the standard and you don’t follow it.

  19. Aaron said

    What God acting Christlike in Isaiah when he ridiculed idolaters?

  20. JLFuller said

    What you said was “I commit to no covenant or pact that requires me to withhold harsh, penetrating, demeaning, devastating criticism of false religious worldview systems, and I reserve the God-given freedom to use (with personal spiritual discertion) a wide array of modes of communication. Including biting humor and sarcasm.”

  21. Aaron said

    Right. That’s because even in scripture God exercises biting humor and sarcasm against idolatry. Deeming such things as sinful effectively deems God sinful.

    • JLFuller said

      if you continue to use hostile and deliberately divisive rhetoric and demeaning the LDS Church then you are done here. Speak respectfully or find another venue.

  22. Aaron said

    I am assuming “respect” here is defined as that which does does not speak negatively against another religion. Therefore, do not openly speak negative of the Mormon Church lest you be branded as disrespectful.

    • JLFuller said

      Respect means speak about ideas or events and not personalities unless in an historical context. Do not say anything that unreasonably raises the heat index beyond what normal idea clashes generates. I know and accept that you take exception to LDS theology and I take serious umbrage with MRM behaviors. I have made my position clear and why I think so and MRM types have made theirs and why they think so. Continuing to do so can only be because you intend to be offensive. If you want to discuss ideas that is a different story. But continuing to just hammer away using the same old rhetoric adds nothing and I take it to be taunting and meant to be demeaning.

  23. Aaron said

    The very ideas we are discussing involve what kind of interaction is appropriate. For example, see the second comment I left.

    • JLFuller said

      If you mean “2) Remember, the medium and the message are in a big way married, as one shapes the other. Our message is an invitation, an authoritative call to repentance, and an educational teaching. That you don’t agree with our message will inevitably affect your disposition toward our medium.” then I don’t think we are in sync. Prostelizing is not allowed on this site or any that I am aware.

  24. GB said

    “. . . an authoritative call to repentance . . .”

    Wow!! Is that a hoot, or what!!! 🙂

  25. JLFuller said

    Aaron’s heart I am sure is in the right place. Its his thinking that is dislodged. Remember – thinking drives behavior. Bad behavior is a direct result of bad thinking which is a direct result of bad ideas. Where do bad ideas come from? Bad leadership.

  26. GB said


    It is nice that you give him a benefit of a doubt.

    One thing is for sure, He his operating in fear. He is afraid of accurate terms (like anti-Mormon), he is afraid of a fair and open exchange. Right now he has me locked out from posting because he is afraid of what I might expose.

    He may “CLAIM” that I attack him personally (as if that doesn’t happen the other way around on MC, LOL!!!!), but the truth is he is afraid.

    • JLFuller said

      People who live according to the world’s standards, as MRM types do, will find themselves eventually going too far. The reason is they are fighting Satan’s battle. I don’t say they do it deliberately though. They just don’t know better. So keep that in mind. I try hard not to wrestle with pigs in the mud. Make your statement once and move on. Do it from the high ground. Better yet, just don’t go there. CARM is another place where such people find comfort.

  27. GB said


    I was invited to go to MC about a year ago by an anti-Mormon who had been harassing some LDS bloggers.

    I looked the site over and decided to ignore it because it is as you say. But about 9 months later I got bored and went there and started to expose some of the juvenile drivel for what it is, just for entertainment.

    As usual, it doesn’t take long before the antis get their panties in a bunch and use double standards to try to prevent their stupidity from being exposed.

    Antis are extremely funny creatures, if we ignore them, they claim that we won’t address their criticisms because we can’t. And then when we DO address their criticisms they claim we are attacking them.

    Over all, I have found them to be pathetic whiners and hypocrites. I don’t accept the premise that they are sincere because sincere people don’t continue in that behavior for very long. That is my take.

    God bless and keep up the good work.

    • JLFuller said

      Their whole idea is to bait you with some of their tired and worn out old rhetoric. They don’t want to talk – they want to fight. But, because they are our bros and sisters we are commanded to engage them when they ask legitimate questions. After all, there is the spark of Divinity in their eyes even though I think their behavior may eventually put it out. Just remember who their leader is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: