Quaker's and Mennonites and their famous red flares on the back of their horse drawn carages....this religion is becoming another joke religion in America...at least the Quakers keep to themselves with their sillness, the Mormons dress kids up and put badges on them and pound on your door all day, trying to force you into their religion. No wonder the Quakers are more accepted in America than the brazen mormons....

all the fake missionaries in the stands at the BYU/SDSU game a few weeks ago.

So, yes, they are a bit of a spectacle.

I'm betting that you wouldn't recognize one if you passed him or her on the street. A Quaker would blend in pretty well.

Perhaps you are confusing them with the Amish.

God, I am old.....years ago when in Penn. I saw the horse and buggies with triangle signs on the back so cars would not hit them....I guess I show my stupidity when I didn't know the differences between Amish, Mennonites, Quakers...I do know this...none of them have never knocked on my door trying to convert me....

I think so.
I saw some pictures from the Book of Mormon Musical on Broadway -- the missionaries almost looked like a joke with their backpacks and wheeled luggage -- trying to look professional in their short-sleeve white shirts and bodacious ties. The problem was that missionaries really do look that ridiculous.

Morons are a proselytizing cult. Quakers and Mennonites (Amish are a more strict branch of Anabaptists than the Mennonites) are very small faiths in this country but they are not evangelistic like the Mormons.

The Amish want to be left alone and Quakers & Mennonites are both very pacifist and charitable. I'm in PA, the heartland of Quakers, Mennonites & Amish. They are not thought of as laughable here.

Please allow me to apoligize for using the words laughable...it was not the intent to belittle anyone or their religion..I was trying to say that most of the world feels the social or political inpact of these religious populations have little significant influence in the real world of today. I was trying to indicate, purhaps poorly, that the general populations see the Quakers, Mennonites, Amish as closed cult like religions that are generally insignificant.Mormonism is headed that direction. The differences I see is the others religions mentions walk the walk and not talk the talk. They are good people who live their religions and bother noone else. Mormons do not live their religion and try to force it upon others...I never saw a Quaker PR comerical saying.." look how normal we are""I respect Amish etc. and did reports in college on your Penn. groups, and have deep respect for them and how the run their lives and live their reigion. So sorry if my intent was misunderstood, I repect your state's minority religions, I do not respect the morg in any way....Sorry



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2011 02:25PM by get her done.

get her done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was trying to indicate, purhaps poorly, that the general populations see the Quakers, Mennonites, Amish as closed cult like religions that are generally insignificant.

I agree with Janebond that all three groups are generally viewed postively in the mid-Atlantic area and in New England.

The Amish maintain a market in my area. They come in, do their business, and go home. Their products are good quality and they are invariably courteous, even if you walk in wearing shorts and a spaghetti-strap top, as I have done.

I agree that they are viewed as something of a curiousity, but they keep to themselves and don't bother anyone else. You don't have their religion and viewpoint constantly shoved down your throat. They don't try to influence the outside world.

My feeling is that the Quakers are much closer to mainstream Protestants, and might well be considered to be in the mainstream. They dress no differently than you or I, hold regular jobs, etc. Film maker David Lean ("Lawrence of Arabia",) James Dean, Judi Dench, and Ben Kingsly are all listed as being or having been Quakers. Singer Bonnie Raitt was raised as a Quaker. President Richard Nixon was also a Quaker.

My understanding is that their meetings are simpler and quieter than other Protestant church services, but that's just an anecdotal recounting from a friend.

Yeah I don't view the Amish, Mennonites or Quakers as cults in the least.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/02/2011 11:40PM by suckafoo.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/03/2011 12:23AM by mtnmdwcookiemonster.

I didn't take affront to your comment. I wanted to point out some broad differences b/w the groups.

Summer - classic Quaker worship services may be silent unless a member feels moved by the Holy Spirit to speak. Those congregations have no pastor.

Some Quaker congregations may have a pastor lead their worship service. It would be more along the lines of what most of us think of as a church service.

Quakers/religious society of friends is absolutely not a closed, cult-like religion. They operate schools and universities, their churches are open. They aren't out to convert people, but the are not unwelcoming either. They are fully assimilated. They once wore "plain dress" like the amish and old order mennonites, but, with limited exception, they haven't for a long time, like over a century.

Religiously, the Quakers have nothing to do with the Amish or Mennonites other than having origins as a persecuted religion and a pacifist philosophy. Mennonites and Amish are anabaptist and Quakers are not. The reason they are all in PA is because William Penn settled Pennsylvania as a religious experiment, a safe-haven for persecuted religions like the Quakers (which he was), the Amish, Mennonites (and other anabaptist religions).

By the way, with the exception of the old order Mennonites, the Mennonites drive cars and live in regular communities. They don't try to lure people in, but they don't discourage converts. They operate real schools (not like the amish one-room schoolhouses), and colleges. While the women do were a little bun-cover on their hair, and dresses in the same style, it's not AS extreme as the Amish. The men just wear regular clothing.

The Amish are not cults, they live in closed communities because their aim is to not be on the grid and have self reliance. This is why they don't have electricity and modern conveniences, it's not because they are not willing to modernize, it's because they don't want to have to rely on the electricity grid, municipal water, etc. They do have generator-driven appliances like fridges, heaters, and also crank-operated heaters. They do not get or care to get converts because someone would need to know PA Dutch to read their religious texts and attend services. You can't convert to a religion you don't understand (which is part of their anabaptist belief, so people are baptized in adulthood not at birth or at 8), you'd have to learn PA dutch first, so it's self-limiting in terms of converts. The amish stand out because of their clothing styles and such, a lot of that is because they don't use things like zippers and snaps, they don't sew with sewing machines, etc. And they are limited in the colors they use. I don't remember the reason for the colors.

The somewhat proselytizing branch of the Anabaptists is the Church of the Brethren, their members are fully assimilated, they operated colleges and schools too. In PA, they're just a regular church, Both women and men work regular jobs, wear regular things, they are no different than people who are Lutheran or anything else.

In answer to your original post, I'd say that the amish, mennonites, etc. are ICONIC, but not "laughable" or questionable in beliefs like, say, scientologists. They aren't butts of jokes or anything (or at least I don't think so, but my opinion might be skewed after living in PA "Dutch country" for years). I don't think people consider theirs to be invalid religions.

The missionaries in their stereotypical garb are both iconic and butts of jokes, and most people who learn a bit about what mormons believe find the religion questionable and not really valid. I think people would probably be more apt to lump LDS in the same category as Scientology (and I guess jehova's witnesses, but I'm not really familiar with them or what they believe, is the watchtower a whole different scripture book like the BoM?) than they would be to lump them in with amish/mennonites/quakers. The difference being that amish/mennonites/quakers have their own interpretation of the bible, but they don't have a whole new book with new stories and characters, no jesus in america, etc. It's the Book of Mormon that makes the mormons seem like they are following fiction and not really a bible-based religion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2011 05:00PM by wittyname.

I am from New Jersey and currently live in San Diego, I am not any of these religions in question! I do total agree with "wittyname" about PA Dutch community! I want all of you to remember why America was colonized in the first place "Money, Land & Freedom of Religion!" Even during war time Conscientious objectors did help out this country, yes they DIDN'T fight but they did essential stuff for the country back home.

All of these religions are Christian Anabaptist, and nonviolent. Yes the clothes they wear is plain, and some groups avoid modern electronics, and some services that most people find essential now like motors, cell phones, MP3, computers, etc...! Is that really a reason to laugh at them? As for people calling them cults, think back to when Christianity was considered a "Cult!" All religions are a cult to someone.

The part I find funny is they get harassed, sometimes non violently and other time violently. How is it that "Christians & Muslim" religions are suppose to be non violent. Yet we kill each other every day, and have been for Centuries.

I have it on good authority that men live on the moon and they dress JUST like Quakers!

hahahahahahahahahahaha!

if you don't believe me, just go ask Joseph Smith.

I wouldn't exempt the Amish from "cult" status that quickly. The Amish practice shunning rather ruthlessly against their own children if they ever leave. Their shunning is far worse and more institutionalized than Mormon shunning.

There is no middle ground with the Amish. They don't seem to have charismatic leaders, but their grip on members resembles a cult closer than a group of like-minded individuals sharing the same values.

The Mormons are almost as weird looking, in their see-through white shirts, with their magic underwear showing. What other religion blights the landscape with bodacious temples, where secret rituals are performed for dead people. I find that more creepy than laughable.

Plus the fact that these secretive liars are constantly trying to recruit our children.

Why isn't there a law against Mormon recruitment? The Krishnas were banned from the airports years ago.

Interesting points.

The Quakers were vital to the abolitionist movement--some of the first civil rights advocates in the U.S.--and many maintain a level of consciousness and activism today. I would be honored to share that heritage instead of coming from stock that thought Joseph Smith and the Gold Bible were divinely inspired.

Some Mennonites are very noticeable, while others blend in totally into society, drive cars wear modern clothing etc.

Not only missionaries but the whole gang.

Remember, hot girls in Utah marry Young.

I think Mormons are so detached from public opinion that they had to hire a public relations firm to tell them what the average person thinks. THey have no common sense left after climbing the laddar of opportunity in the Lard's true church and suffering the death of brain cells as a personal sacrifice.

They can't tell what's funny; they can't tell what's hacked to death. They have to go to statisticians to tell them what is working and what isn't. And don't even SAY the word "revelation."

I am quite thrilled about all this. The loss of respect and becoming a laughing stock as a mean-spirited church who is dissing women and gays while having been brought to the altar by the ear by blacks (not by God, mind you, but by threatened law suits).

In our world of facebook and twittering and instantaneous fact-finding, the lying Mormons are an anachronism. Better get your cellphone out and take a picture of the next helmeted, suit-wearing, bicycle-riding missionary, because they will be replaced by a web bot. The web bot missionary will determine your likelihood of conversion before ever contacting you...via email or maybe a text.

Look in your inbox for "Message From God"

Anagrammy

Mormons are second only to Jehova's Witnesses and Hare Krishna's in terms of being mocked. Quakers and Mennonites are widely respected in Europe, at least by those who've heard of them.

My family used to have pet dogs on a holiday farm with names like Menno, Tenzin and Siddharta. Most visitors had no ideas where the names came from, but those that recognized them as Menno Simons (founder of the Mennonites), Tenzin Gyatso (the current Dalai Lama) and Siddharta Gautama (Buddha) were very pleased we named the most sociable dogs after those gurus. For security reasons, my relatives also kept a vicious attack dog in a cage. For that one I wish I had suggested the name Brigham.

He was a DOG...LOL

That's exactly what happens with Mormons, people confusing them with Amish. I'm from back there with a lot of all three. There are different sects of Mennonites, but mostly they are mainstream and they do good stuff. The Quakers I've known are really normal folks. Even Nixon was Quaker. Amish and Dunker Baptists still follow the old traditions, drive buggies, speak German at church, and all that. But I do agree with your point and I think you are right.

My DW comes from a long line (from the beginning) of the Mennonites, most of her mom's lines. Her dad came from Quaker lines.

Not all Mennonites are horse and buggy. Many, scattered a cross USA and Canada, are just very conservative Christians, into clean living and modesty and charity.

I have learned a lot...thanks.

Don't forget there are Quakers on the moon who are still waitng for those adorable mishies.

Quakers, Amish, etc. are seen as "quaint" or maybe even "kooky." Mormons on the other hand are seen as annoying, out of touch, plastic, etc.

The Book Of Mormon musical actually treats them pretty well. They almost come off as loveable as opposed to "full of hate" which is how most of the educated world sees them after Prop 8 and all that.

In Seattle.

there are Mennos of different strains; we don't have to be
Unitary in our beliefs like the Mos, JWs, SDAs do.

ALL FAITH is Very Personal, Very Individual; my chief objection to MoMism is that they think EVERYONE has to Play the Same Tune...

Um, I think mormon missionaries have been easily mocked for years... they aren't "becoming" laughable... they've been laughable for eons. Mainly due to their sheer annoyance factor.

Want another example of how the Amish vs. the mormons are perceived?

Kelly McGillis in Witness--HOT!

Trey Parker in Orgazmo--screamingly funny... in a not very complementary way..