I have read the Book of Mormon more than once. I have attempted to read it critically, seeking to discern its legitimacy both historically and theologically. Historically speaking, I have found nothing in the BM of change my view of it as historical fantasy. Theologically speaking, the portrayal of Jesus and God to be thoroughly inconsistent with the biblical presentation of the Godhead. I find no inspiration in the book at all.

What should I expect from any lds site but a defense of Mormonism? I did look at one site and searched steel. From what I read, no evidence has yet been found to support the Book of Mormon's account of fine steel swords.

Did the descendants of Lehi speak reformed Egyptian or Hebrew? Only if they spoke Hebrew could there be any trace of a semitic language in the modern day Spanish of Mexico or the western U.S. Why aren't traces of semitic languages found in the Spanish of Nicaragua or El Salvador?

What should I expect from any lds site but a defense of Mormonism?

The fundamental historical questions remain. Cite on piece of indisputable evidence for any of the stories in the Book of Mormon. Where is any evidence of "reformed Egyptian" as a language? The Book of Mormon is a historical fantasy and a poor one at that.

Perhaps you might point out some indisputable archeological evidence for, say, iron mines and some evidence for steel-making in the pre-columbian Americas. Where did the silk come from. Where are the graves of the mass-casualties of even one of the wars the Book of Mormon tells about? What evidence exists for any of the large cities said to have existed in the Americas? I could go on. By the way, I have read the Book of Mormon.

As a LDS apologist, Mr. Hart fails to address the most important issue in the debate between Evangelicals and Mormons: the Book of Mormon. LDS theology is rooted in a historical fantasy. Are we to believe in a book filled with error (steel bows and swords, silk and linen garments, horses, cattle, goat and sheep in the Americas before their introduction ny Europeans?) one might debate some of the historical accounts of Scripture, but the history of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures can be verified. The Book of Mormon has no historical support at all. Mormon theology falls because it's foundation is a lie.

Who cares what Jeanane Garafalo thinks.

So, according to Stossel, ten homeless men living under a bridge could be "married." If we go with Stossel, marriage, essentially, becomes anything, thus, nothing. To hell with standards.

Matt Damon is an actor: he gets paid great sums of money and gets lots of undeserved attention for pretending to be something he isn't. He is not a social theorist professional. He certainly is not an educator. He is pretending to be both. He is not more qualified to speak to education than he is to address matters of national defense and the CIA.