Even Prophets can be deceived by evil people (as Joseph Smith was many times) or they can be deceived to fall for or support evil.

Prophets can fall or do wrong just like any of us.

Most religions preach the myth that their leaders or their top leader (like our Prophet) can’t led us astray or be wrong. Such a myth makes the masses easier to control and convince, especially when teaching them false doctrine that they don’t want anyone to question.

The myth that started as an opinion, that the Lord wouldn’t allow his Prophet or President to lead us astray, is not scriptural and not true. In fact the Lord has continually warned us today about false prophets in the Church, and to beware of them or we will definitely be led astray.

But the masses like to believe they are safe to have blind unquestioning obedience, because it is much easier and they can just get to heaven on the Prophet’s coat tails and they don’t have to question, study, pray & prove all things to know if what is said by anyone is true or not.

But history has proven that Prophets and many many Presidents of the Church, can fall and have fallen and led the Church astray to do evil and into apostasy. But few see it, for hardly anyone believes it’s even possible.

Satan loves that most people so easily fall for the idea that prophets can’t lead us astray, for it makes it very easy for him to do just that, lead us totally astray and we never know it happened.

I am opposed to free education as much as I am opposed to taking property from one man and giving it to another who knows not how to take care of it…

Sounds like Brigham was opposed to socialized education. Most people aren’t aware that there is one example of government-controlled education in the scriptures and it wasn’t positive. See Mosiah 24.

Another related thought – Our “American” public school system is not American in either origins or type. It is based on compulsion, not freedom. See: https://vimeo.com/53059156

Not only was Brigham Young correct, read “Revealed Educational Principles and the Public Schools by John D. Monnett. He can be a bit sensational at times, but if the history he recites is correct, God never intended to have Zion’s youth schooled by non-believers. You can see the fallout from the Saints unwillingness to support the commandment that they eschew public schools and support Stake schools by supplying students and paying a reasonable tuition rate.

That prophetic and arrogant statement of Khruschev is indeed chilling. Ezra Taft Benson endorsed (the first on the back cover) in a 1972 General Conference the book “None Dare Call it Conspiracy” wherein one can see photographs of Kruschev in rip-roaring laughter backslapping the Rockefeller brothers. The book has the reader contemplate this strange thing, the so-called “Barons of Capital” with their arch nemesis to capitalism, the Soviet Premeir? It is believed by some, that David Rockefeller was Kruschev’s boss, and it was after David Rockefeller showed up to Moscow that Khruschev was put down (fired as some speculate) with another to take his place. And you may very well know all that history, the phony “uprising of the masses” we were fed in US Propaganda centers, when in reality, paid mercenary armies with Wall Street financing put the Bolsheveks to power. G. Edward Griffin’s must have for any library, “The Creature From Jekyll Island” goes into some of this stunning history, as do many other books. Strange that Wall Steet financiers were all of a sudden interested in “Red Cross” humanitarian missions in Russia. Doctors and nurses discovering their “missions” were a front for these brokers of power abandoned such fraudulent enterprises. And, it’s laughable that Trotsky was riding around New York City in limousines just a short time before the revolution—and not the revolution that we in the west have been propagandized to believe it to be: the downtrodden masses rising up. No, it wasn’t quite that pretty a picture for the common man.

Now, Laura, imagine of government didn’t plunder you nearly to death and you were left with your full income to decide what to do with it, such as pursuing an education in a free market? A “free education” is absolutely a false term, for it does not exist. You paid dearly for your education, we all pay dearly with a state that sucks off and zaps the zeal and motive for people to produce and grow in wealth and abundance. The Marxist Federal Reserve Bank (a plank of the Communist Manifesto) robs you and me ruthlessly. It allows government to spend and spend and give illusion to “free stuff” for the citizenry.

The public education system is an abomination, and all children everywhere would be benefited most blessedly were compulsory schooling abolished, and Lucifer put back into chains and shut up in hell, rather than subjecting the rest of us to a K-12 hell of compulsion, boredom, propaganda, meanness, a huge taxing of resources, time wasted, and perhaps most of all, spirits and minds damaged building up a resistance and hatred toward one of the greatest things ever that one could obtain, the gaining of knowledge.

Albert Eienstein stated it this way:

“It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry; for this delicate little plant, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom; without this it goes to wreck and ruin without fail. It is a very grave mistake to think that the enjoyment of seeing and searching can be promoted by means of coercion and a sense of duty.” (In H. Eves Return to Mathematical Circles, Boston: Prindle, Weber and Schmidt, 1988.)

My soul agrees. Bravo Albert, Bravo!

When I read of the knowledge and brilliance obtained by Thomas Jefferson and his peers by age 20, I feel embarrassed for myself and all in my generation and even of this past century. With all our “free education” we don’t have Ph.D’s even approaching a smidgen of the intelligence that those men obtained by education that had no government involvement—and what a supperior education that was.

Education was once prized highly by the poor and sought for diligently. Once government gets ahold of it, funds it, mandates it, watch out, the spark dies, and as Einestein states above, such learning goes to “wreck and ruin without fail.”

George Bernard Shaw, one of the Fabian Socialists and one who, whether he knew it or not, subscribed totally to Lucifer’s plan of cooercion and force stated his ideal, which should make any lover of agency and human liberty feel chills up their spine:

“Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.” (George Bernard Shaw: The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928, pg. 470)

Lucifer is for “free education” and “free salvation” “Free baptism” free everything. But it is a fraud. He can’t deliver, it is false advertizing. His rhetoric sounds appealing and love filled, but he is a malignant one with the wrong intent, despite his seemingly “good” sounding selling points.

Free education, is evil, if it comes by compulsion and force. I would love to see education freely given and freely accepted, but government and it’s force of arms could not be in the equation anywhere.

John Taylor Gatto, two time teacher of the year on New York has written some great books on the “Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Education,” which is the subtitle of one such book, wherein he discloses to the reader that the last stronghold of resistance to compulsory, Federally mandated schooling in these United States was Cape Cod Massachusetts where in the 1880′s children were marched off to school by bayonette point against their and their parents wishes. Neither you nor I ever read that reality in our US History textbooks in our blessed “free education” indoctrination.

Fun things to contemplate, are they not?

Hey MormonConservationist, what a delight to hear of your giving your children a proper use of their own lives and time, rather than just turning them over to a soul destroying, time monopolizing federal babysitter, K-12. Way to be.

I am waiting, expectcing “someone” to come on here and denounce a kook, especially this kook (LOL!)

I speak from experience. We began homeschooling almost decades ago, and we are still homeschooling, though we are senior citizens.

The pros: I would expose too much about my children to go into it, but whenever children have any unique needs, homeschool really does help them to gain confidence and avoid peril.

The cons: Homeschooling makes young people not ‘fit’–

Now, before anyone who is pro-homeschooling who thinks I am attacking what *I* personally have invested decades into doing–

teaching my own . . .

because I say that homeschooling makes young people not ‘fit’–

I have discovered that not fitting is what anyone who chooses a unique and possibly more excellent way . . . will do.

I discovered that my children find their college-educated peers to be narrow and easily led.

I discovered that they are frustrated about having to spend so much money to be taught things they could learn ‘on their own’.

Home educating opens a pandora’s box, and I can’t get the contents back inside. We will never, ever be ‘normal’ again–

Many home educators jump on the ‘go to college’ bandwagon. We were prepared to do that, but our children resisted. They are still learning, on their own, as we taught them to do–

one who has most stridently opposed college is a private business owner and is successful; one who decided to go to college is now in debt to school loans and can’t find a good job–

it’s a conundrum, as Connor might say.

It doesn’t make life easier, but I still don’t regret having done it, and our children thank us for it.

How my soul has eternal hatred for compulsory schooling. Lucifer is it’s author, and Lucifer now runs this nation—as far as the Lord will permit him. Oh, that is not my opinion either. My friend in Highland Utah, the High Priest Group leader in his ward shared this following quotation in an assigned lesson to the Priesthood and Relief society, and to his amazement, half present were deeply insulted and offended by the words of a prophet.

“The United States is not the kingdom of God, neither is England, Germany, or France….Satan has control now. No matter where you look, he is in control, even in our own land. He is guiding the governments as far as the Lord will permit him. That is why there is so much strife, turmoil, and confusion all over the earth. One master mind is governing the nations….it is Satan himself.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3, pp 314-15)

Once this idea of forcing our neighbors to take care of our needs & our children’s needs takes hold it could be made to cover anything.

No one should be forced to take care of anyone else but themselves & their own family. If people want to voluntarily give charity & funds for education that is just fine but we all know that it is against God’s commandments to use force in this way.

So yes, I do believe public education by forced taxation is evil & that those who support it will be held accountable. For I believe everyone knows it is wrong to force others to take care of their children in any way or support them if they are poor or do anything for them, unless it’s completely voluntary.

What is not right for us to do ourselves we cannot give government the power to do. We must take stands for right & against such things or we by default help evil to get worse.

The only justification for attending public schools is if people were forced to attend them or face punishments, but I believe people have always had the right to send their children to private schools, so it doesn’t seem it was ever completely mandatory here in the U.S., & especially not now that parents can even homeschool if they can’t afford private school.

I know of one G.A.. Elder H. Verlan Anderson, who started a very affordable private school many years ago so his grandchildren & other children wouldn’t have to attend public schools.

In 1877 the Liberal Party candidate for Territorial Superintendent of District Schools (who was running against future church president, John Taylor) M. W. Ashbrook, wrote,

“The final and absolute emancipation of serfdom from Utah must be eventually achieved through the education of the masses…We demand a free public school system for Utah wherein sectarianism [a narrow-minded adherence to a particular sect or party or denomination] shall be wholly eliminated, and teachers in numbers and competent to impart knowledge to all and every child of our Territory…We desire taxation of all property, including that of churches, for the support of free schools.” (Salt Lake Tribune, July 29, 1877, p. 4)

“..despite a deep love of education early Mormons possessed a strong hostility to taxes. In the 1864-65 Territorial School Report Superintendent Robert L. Cambell wrote, “While the sentiments of the people are so favorable to education they are equally unfavorable to taxation.”[2] Brigham Young (second President of the Church) once said, “I am opposed to free education as much as I am opposed to taking away property from one man and giving it to another…Would I encourage free schools by taxation? No! That is not in keeping with the nature of our work” (JD 18:357). Naturally he was not opposed to free education per se[3], but he was opposed to free education funded by compulsory taxation. Though he may not have been completely opposed to the appropriation of public funds for the support of public schools.[4] In 1873 he said, “There are many of our people who believe that the whole Territory ought to be taxed for our schools. When we have means, that come in the proper way, we can make a fund to help the poor to school their children, and I would say amen to it” (JD 16:19).

“In the era before free schools were the norm, two objections were commonly raised against free education. They were (1) taking a man’s property to educate another man’s children is like taking another man’s plough to plough his neighbor’s field, and (2) it was believed free education would injure private and denominational schools. (Public Education in the United States, p. 122.) Both objections were raised by Utah’s Mormons. As already quoted above, Brigham Young opposed free education because he saw it as taking property from one person and giving it to another. And in 1884 one article in the Church owned Deseret News pointed out that “supporting schools by taxation has been opposed” by church leaders “because institutions supported by general taxes cannot be conducted on a religious basis…We believe that there should be schools for the children of the Latter-day Saints, taught by Latter-day Saints, with Latter-day Saint text books, and supported entirely by the funds of the Latter-day Saints” (Deseret News, December 3, 1884, p. 8, column 5)

Even if the majority of the people choose evil, the righteous among them still don’t fall for & support the evil everyone else does. So why would he support public education & go against previous Prophets?