If someone was raped in 1703 and the rapist was venerated by a religion, I would protest. My empathy for the victim in 1703 would be no less than my empathy for a woman raped today that I might hear about in the news. A human suffering deserves my empathy, for that suffering and injustice transcends time. And just as I would seek justice against a rapist today, I seek justice for what Smith did to those young girls by saying on this blog that praising a man that coerced and manipulated young girls as he did is wrong. To my knowledge, Smith did not rape these girls but his tactics were manipulative and predatory (see below).
Mr. Hatch argues in his post:
I think Mr. Hatch should be championing such an action himself, but again, to each his own. Mr. Hatch has the right to not care and not be upset so much, but then he should not criticize those of us who do care and are outraged, especially since history shows that it is only those who care and are passionate that ultimately affect change.
In a way I sympathize with his encouragement to move on from Mormonism; which I agree should be the goal for the sake of the person’s own well-being. I am becoming less impassioned myself as the years go by. I get that. This blog has been my attempt to do right and reveal the truth. Mr. Hatch has a right to be less impassioned too. Yet I don’t think a former Mormon openly revealing the truth should be disparaged either. To each their own. We all deserve to transition at our own pace.
Here's to the red pill.