Talk:Jackson County, Missouri

Untitled

Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

Latter day saints

Someone added, and some one else removed, without explanation this para. "This county is where, some time in this millennium, every faithful and able-to-travel member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will gather to await the Second Coming of Christ. This is also where the Saints will build up the New Jerusalem, or Zion, after the Great Destruction." Rich Farmbrough 10:57 8 April 2006 (UTC).

That is proselytizing by a special interest. Jackson County was not founded by LDS so an entry is not warranted. Very inappropriate. You would also have to add the significant cross dressing history of Jackson County, spawned by the Priest of Pallas parade in the 1880s and lasted for 25 years. How is the LDS history in Jackson County any more significant? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.87.173.104 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 22 February 2009

The LDS settlement in Jackson County in the early 1830's provoked numerous acts of violence directed against them by local vigilantes and others, which ultimately culminated in their wholesale explusion from the county in November of 1833. Latter Day Saints are a major American religious group, having originated in New York, and Jackson County (and Independence in particular) forms a very important part of their theology (as the "Center Place" of their early utopian vision, called "Zion"--a vision to which several of the smaller groups still subscribe). Several Latter Day Saint groups are headquartered in Independence, and the Community of Christ Auditorium and Temple are two of the more notable structures in eastern Jackson County. I would say that all of this makes their history rather significant indeed; at least as much as the cross-dressing or Priest of Pallas parade referred to above, if not more so. - Ecjmartin (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Westport vs. Westport Landing

I note that the article refers to the establishment of Westport Landing in 1838 and goes on to describe Westport Landing as "today's Westport". The article on Westport, linked from here, also describes Westport as having been founded "on the Missouri River." I believe that both of these statements are incorrect, as Westport the town is centered on the intersection of Westport Road and Broadway, about 4 miles south of the Missouri River; Westport Landing was established precisely to provide a landing on the Missouri from which goods could be transported to the town. Westport and the Town of Kansas/City of Kansas/Kansas City remained separate municipalities until 1896, when the expanding Kansas City absorbed Westport into itself. The area that was Westport Landing is today's River Market. I have edited this article accordingly. As for my qualifications to edit this, check my user page. Marketstel (talk) 15:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

"Breakaway" LDS Churches

The usage of "breakaway" to describe non-Utah LDS churches is inappropriate for this article. Both the Community of Christ and Temple Lot churches, together with the Restoration Branches, Restoration Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, "Elijah Message", Fettingite and Cutlerite churches (just to name a few) each consider themselves to be the legitimate continuation of Joseph Smith's original organization, and the Utah LDS church to be the "breakaway". In the interests of NPOV, I have reworded this article to eliminate such references altogether. - Ecjmartin (talk) 20:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I see that the term "breakaway" was added after my earlier deletion. I reiterate what I wrote in February, that usage of this (or similar) term(s) is highly inappropriate in this article, due to NPOV issues. I have deleted this word accordingly. - Ecjmartin (talk) 15:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The entry should be removed altogether about LDS. It is promoting a special interest. Very disturbing that LDS extremists have taken over Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.87.173.104 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 22 February 2009

LDS "extremists" (or any other kind of LDS) have not taken over the Wikipedia at all. Mentioning the Latter Day Saint portion of Jackson County history is not promoting a "special interest" in any way, but rather relating an important aspect of this county's history. Personally, I am not a Latter Day Saint of any stripe, and do not agree with their beliefs at all. But even if I were a Mormon--or a Pentecostal or an atheist, for that matter--the issue here is not promoting (or opposing) any religion, but rather an important part of Jackson County's history that should NOT be omitted from this article. - Ecjmartin (talk) 00:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits to "Latter Day Saints" section

User We R LDS recently made some good edits to this article, though I believe that a lot of the material he/she included was extraneous to a basic article on Jackson County. Though very interesting stuff, it's a bit "too much" for the overall scope of this piece; may I suggest that it be incorporated into a separate article, perhaps entitled "Latter Day Saint Views on the Garden of Eden," "The Latter Day Saint New Jerusalem," or something similar? - Ecjmartin (talk) 02:58, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I was hoping you would have a look and offer what I call "tweaks" in my edit summary. I accept all of your edits, I agree that the section -- while interesting and informative -- had literally become "too much" (too lengthy and complicated) for inclusion there, and I agree that perhaps another article might be created for the info and themes you deleted from the article on Jackson County. For anyone who may do that in the near or distant future (such as myself) here is the diff containing the information which Ecjmartin modified (with my consent). I do want to stress though, it is really irritating to non-Utah LDS "Mormons" residing in what we feel is a "New Jerusalem" to see our beliefs either or ignored or grossly mischaracterized. There are a number of fellow RLDS who urged me to please correct the Wikipedia record, that "We RLDS" and almost all LDS too, aren't here because we figure it's where Adam and Eve roamed naked, we're here to learn about and build "a New Jerusalem" (as mentioned in Book of Mormon III Nephi and Ether Chapter 13 etcetera). We R LDS (talk) 03:21, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

On an impulse, I just did some online research and found a couple of surprising connections between Jackson Countian Harry Truman and Mormonism, one is that Truman's maternal grandfather Solomon Young was a friend and business associate with Brigham Young (the two met in Salt Lake City years before Harry Truman was born in 1884)[1][2], and in the comments section for the book "Harry S. Truman and the Founding of Israel" LDS scholars are not-coincidentally enthusiastic about Harry Truman's role in establishing the modern State of Israel, another "Zion" or form of a new "Jerusalem." A number of Mormons/RLDS feel that Harry Truman's presidential administration perhaps corroborates the identity of Independence as a "Jerusalem" in the New World. This is some information which might be appropriate to a separate Wikipedia Article "Jackson County Missouri and the Latter Day Saint movement" or suchlike. We R LDS (talk) 04:00, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, and thanks for understanding the spirit and purpose behind my recent edits to your material. I agree with what you say about the need for the Wikipedia record on this subject to be modified. I think that an article encompassing Latter Day Saint beliefs about Zion, past and present, might be useful. In fact (this just occurred to me to look; I don't know why it didn't before!), it appears that such an article already exists: Zion (Latter Day Saints). The general article on Zion also contains a short summary on the subject that refers the reader back to the first article I mentioned above. I'm bogged down in some other projects at present, but might I suggest that perhaps you check out the Zion (Latter Day Saints) article, if you haven't already done so, and consider adding your information there? The entire article seems to be presently composed from an exclusively Utah LDS viewpoint; I think adding a separate section to explain the specifically RLDS approach to this doctrine (not to mention the smaller sects; I was a Cutlerite once, and we never mentioned the Adam and Eve thing, but believed strongly in the New Jerusalem concept!) might be useful, especially when you consider all of the different RLDS approaches that have emerged over time (Fred Smith's vision, the contemporary mainline-RLDS vision vs. the Restoration Branch vision of Zion, etc.). I think it would make for interesting reading, and that particular article seems to be the place to put it. I, for one, would be very interested in seeing it! Cheers, and good luck! - Ecjmartin (talk) 11:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC)