the mormon church and social psychology

[nicolasconnault]

Seriously, this doesn't make you shiver just a little bit? Obviously they are just one step away from Stepford Wife Syndrome!

http://www.ldschurch.../2008/40474.jpg

Is... is one of them wearing PANTS???

[elguanteloko]

hello, nickleus!

I think you are giving too much credit to Church leaders, if you ask me. Even if it means your hate towards certain Church things diminishes, I think you will understand it better by realizing that there need not be a conscious manipulator for there to be manipulation. Most aspects in humans are NOT with full intent and most leaders (if not all, I'm sure) are as honest in their beliefs as you are of yours.

If you allow me two recommendations, I think you can get a much MUCH more profound understasnding by doing two things:

1) read "1984" by George Orwell c.a.r.e.f.u.l.l.y.

2) watch several of these other videos:

Again, I think you are giving Church authorities too much credit just as most people tend to give politicians they don't agree with by implying they are conscious and cold-blooded manipulators.

[Kenngo1969]

Is... is one of them wearing PANTS???

Well, they are tweaking the latest version of the XJ-330 Mind Control Chip . It isn't perfect ... yet.

[nickleus]

The great thing about the Gospel is that you can choose to serve or not. A persons level of commitment is completely up to them. We don't have a gun to our head to force us into anything. As our love and understanding grows we choose to serve at the level we are comfortable with. I feel sorry for you.

from the movie prop 8:

26:09 our relatives were visited by their bishop and were told "we believe your family can donate this much" and then they sat there and waited for them to write out a check

26:18 some bishops and stake presidents went to members' homes with their tithing records in hand and said "this is how much you make, this is how much we think you can give. give this much money. give this much time. or you face disfellowshipment, you might lose your callings, you might lose your membership."

[nickleus]

hello, nickleus!

I think you are giving too much credit to Church leaders, if you ask me. Even if it means your hate towards certain Church things diminishes, I think you will understand it better by realizing that there need not be a conscious manipulator for there to be manipulation. Most aspects in humans are NOT with full intent and most leaders (if not all, I'm sure) are as honest in their beliefs as you are of yours.

If you allow me two recommendations, I think you can get a much MUCH more profound understasnding by doing two things:

1) read "1984" by George Orwell c.a.r.e.f.u.l.l.y.

2) watch several of these other videos:

Again, I think you are giving Church authorities too much credit just as most people tend to give politicians they don't agree with by implying they are conscious and cold-blooded manipulators.

i think you're giving them too little credit. watch the movie prop 8 to see how the church really works =) fast forward to 07:57, where an investigator is given confidential documents from people inside the church showing the planning and scheming that went behind the establishment of the coalition against gay marriages, initiated and funded by the church with the intention of laying low as to not affect the campaign through negative association (the church knows people dont like them).

thanks for the youtube links, i will check them all out =)

funny thing though is the first one i clicked on, if you look to the right there's a picture of dallin oaks for a video called "bias bingo: how cognitive bias generates belief" and has the subtext:

This video presents a case study of a typical (in fact, randomly selected) talk from the LDS General Conference. Throughout the talk, we pick out textbook bases of psychological manipulation, and show how they are used to instill ill-founded beliefs into the audience.

=)

[nicolasconnault]

i think you're giving them too little credit. watch the movie prop 8 to see how the church really works =) fast forward to 07:57, where an investigator is given confidential documents from people inside the church showing the planning and scheming that went behind the establishment of the coalition against gay marriages, initiated and funded by the church with the intention of laying low as to not affect the campaign through negative association (the church knows people dont like them).

thanks for the youtube links, i will check them all out =)

funny thing though is the first one i clicked on, if you look to the right there's a picture of dallin oaks for a video called "bias bingo: how cognitive bias generates belief" and has the subtext: =)

LOL that is too funny! You are actually using this movie to back up your claims??? Nickleus, it's a MOVIE, and it's written from a negative point of view towards the LDS Church! Next you'll be quoting from the Godmakers, why don't you?

If this is all you can come up with as a rebuttal, it would have been better if you had abstained completely. How embarrassing...

[nickleus]

LOL that is too funny! You are actually using this movie to back up your claims??? Nickleus, it's a MOVIE, and it's written from a negative point of view towards the LDS Church! Next you'll be quoting from the Godmakers, why don't you?

If this is all you can come up with as a rebuttal, it would have been better if you had abstained completely. How embarrassing...

its a video documentary. do you deny that the church founded and funded the coalition against gay marriage? what positive view towards the lds church could be made concerning this issue? that they (mis)used a lot of time and money and members' time and money for a lost cause? how about the family who donated all their children's college savings to the lost cause? no harm done? what's embarrassing is the lds church's shameless exploitation of it's own members, meddling in politics and attempts to misrepresent their role in the whole affair.

[nicolasconnault]

its a video documentary. do you deny that the church founded and funded the coalition against gay marriage? what positive view towards the lds church could be made concerning this issue? that they (mis)used a lot of time and money and members' time and money for a lost cause? how about the family who donated all their children's college savings to the lost cause? no harm done? what's embarrassing is the lds church's shameless exploitation of it's own members, meddling in politics and attempts to misrepresent their role in the whole affair.

<sarcasm>Everyone knows that video documentaries are objective and unbiased, and that their producers' intentions are only to bring out the truth of things as they really happened...</sarcasm>

Now you're citing one anecdote (CFR please) as an proof of the "LDS Church's shameless exploitation of it's [sic] own members". You need some lessons in rhetoric, my friend

[nickleus]

<sarcasm>Everyone knows that video documentaries are objective and unbiased, and that their producers' intentions are only to bring out the truth of things as they really happened...</sarcasm>

Now you're citing one anecdote (CFR please) as an proof of the "LDS Church's shameless exploitation of it's [sic] own members". You need some lessons in rhetoric, my friend

http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=830

As it turned out, when the SP sat down with us, it was actually about making a contribution

[nicolasconnault]

http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=830

Wow thanks for the link. These people obeyed an apparently ridiculous commandment by their Stake President, at the risk of losing their dream house. They had doubts, they had fears. But they still did it. And what happened? They still got their dream house. "So much for kicking against the pricks" are this person's closing comments.

Are you trying to use this article to justify your view that the Church manipulates members to bolster their own political agenda? Because if you are, this is not a good way to do it. What this article is showing is that the Lord will try the faith of his people, yea, He will try their faith and their patience. And he will richly bless them if they obey Him in every particular.

Thanks, that was an inspiring story. Do you have others?

[nickleus]

Wow thanks for the link. These people obeyed an apparently ridiculous commandment by their Stake President, at the risk of losing their dream house. They had doubts, they had fears. But they still did it. And what happened? They still got their dream house. "So much for kicking against the pricks" are this person's closing comments.

Are you trying to use this article to justify your view that the Church manipulates members to bolster their own political agenda? Because if you are, this is not a good way to do it. What this article is showing is that the Lord will try the faith of his people, yea, He will try their faith and their patience. And he will richly bless them if they obey Him in every particular.

Thanks, that was an inspiring story. Do you have others?

simply see the second comment:

My friend

[nicolasconnault]

simply see the second comment:

My friend

[nickleus]

Did the stake president ask for that much money? (note that this is about proposition 22, not prop

it was the same thing then as it was for prop8 (it's the same issue), members were visited by bishopric and stake presidency members and given donation slips and asked to give money.

and bishops were given quotas by the first presidency as to how much money they needed to get their members to donate (as seen in comments from the prop8 page):

#35. My father in law is a bishop in Southern CA. For those of you who want to know how much a family is expected to give to Prop 8 in his stake, it

[nicolasconnault]

yes it was the same thing then, members were visited by bishopric and stake presidency members and given donation slips and asked to give money.

here's the first presidency letter:

http://www.lds-mormo..._politics.shtml

they invoke temple covenants (you dont have a *choice* you've already covenanted) and in addition they tell members how to vote.

You still don't have any proof that this sister was asked the exact sum of $15,000.

Where are temple covenants being invoked?

[Jeff K.]

from the movie prop 8:

26:09 our relatives were visited by their bishop and were told "we believe your family can donate this much" and then they sat there and waited for them to write out a check

26:18 some bishops and stake presidents went to members' homes with their tithing records in hand and said "this is how much you make, this is how much we think you can give. give this much money. give this much time. or you face disfellowshipment, you might lose your callings, you might lose your membership."

I saw the movie "Superman", didn't know men in tights could fly......

Not everything you see on TV is real you know.

[Deborah]

Documentaries can be manipulated to make things appear a certain way. In the first place I would question anyone who says the bishop sat there and told them a specific amount of money for a political campaign. I just don't believe it happened and would be counter to church policy.

You are very naive, nickleus, if you think just because something says documentary it's factual.

[WalkerW]

Documentaries are borderline worthless. Fun, but worthless.

[elguanteloko]

i think you're giving them too little credit. watch the movie prop 8 to see how the church really works =) fast forward to 07:57, where an investigator is given confidential documents from people inside the church showing the planning and scheming that went behind the establishment of the coalition against gay marriages, initiated and funded by the church with the intention of laying low as to not affect the campaign through negative association (the church knows people dont like them).

LOL I'm sort of on your side but I have the feeling I'm going to waste my time watching that one.. but I'll do it anyways. thanks for the recommendation.

thanks for the youtube links, i will check them all out =)

have at it!

funny thing though is the first one i clicked on, if you look to the right there's a picture of dallin oaks for a video called "bias bingo: how cognitive bias generates belief" and has the subtext: =)

actually, I didn't recommend you his whole youtube channel because most of the other stuff is most of the times naive, ignorant, and some other times just plain stupid. take them with a grain of salt.

P.S. Oh, and if you see anything in his channel on what science is, don't waste your time. His stuff is like from the 1940's and the philosophy of science has moved greatly since then.

[MorningStar]

So what you're saying is that anyone in the church who gave to Prop 8 did so because the church manipulated them into doing so with their amazing mind control abilities?

That's silly.

[nickleus]

So what you're saying is that anyone in the church who gave to Prop 8 did so because the church manipulated them into doing so with their amazing mind control abilities?

That's silly.

yes, that would be silly, of course many people gave "freely", but it is documented that the first presidency gave wards and stakes quotas for donations, specific figures they needed to get members to raise and they commanded members to give of their means (money) and time and required them to vote a specific way on an issue.

to all, i just found this interesting timeline for prop8.

here's an interesting document that page links to, from loren c dunn to neal maxwell, about raising money and calling someone on a "mission", not to teach faith, repentance and baptism and the gift of the holy ghost, but to head a political coalition against gay marriage:

http://www.mormongate.com/document1.html

[nickleus]

Documentaries can be manipulated to make things appear a certain way. In the first place I would question anyone who says the bishop sat there and told them a specific amount of money for a political campaign. I just don't believe it happened and would be counter to church policy.

You are very naive, nickleus, if you think just because something says documentary it's factual.

deborah, see my previous posts about this starting here: and all posts right up to where you began commenting...

[MorningStar]

yes, that would be silly, of course many people gave "freely", but it is documented that the first presidency gave wards and stakes quotas for donations, specific figures they needed to get members to raise and they commanded members to give of their means (money) and time and required them to vote a specific way on an issue.

to all, i just found this interesting timeline for prop8.

here's an interesting document that page links to, from loren c dunn to neal maxwell, about raising money and calling someone on a "mission", not to teach faith, repentance and baptism and the gift of the holy ghost, but to head a political coalition against gay marriage:

http://www.mormongate.com/document1.html

"Commanded"? I think that's an exaggeration. The church asked its members to support a moral issue we believe in already that is expressed in the family proclamation.

[nickleus]

"Commanded"? I think that's an exaggeration. The church asked its members to support a moral issue we believe in already that is expressed in the family proclamation.

the church commandments/principles are fine for church members, but asking members to go out and limit freedoms of others goes against the 11th article of faith:

We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

and no the church did not "ask members to support", they *required members to oppose* gays who wanted the right to a legal marriage:

*require* that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints *oppose* any efforts to give legal authorization to marriages between persons of the same gender. Therefore, we ask you to do all you can by donating your means and time *to assure a successful vote*.

this also gives no room for members who differ in opinion to vote differently on this political subject. it's one thing to believe that homosexuality is against god's commandments, but for those who choose to continue to practice homosexuality, it's kind of already too late to then try and limit them further. stopping them from getting married isn't going to stop them from living homosexual lives and in homosexual partnerships. should the church really force everyone to live their personal beliefs and commandments? all you accomplish is just hurting people and pissing them off. this all goes against the 11th article of faith and it reminds me a little of islamic sharia (obviously minus the beheadings and stoning, etc)--a religion trying to decide how even non-believers must live.

[MorningStar]

the church commandments/principles are fine for church members, but asking members to go out and limit freedoms of others goes against the 11th article of faith:

We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

and no the church did not "ask members to support", they *required members to oppose* gays who wanted the right to a legal marriage:

this also gives no room for members who differ in opinion to vote differently on this political subject. it's one thing to believe that homosexuality is against god's commandments, but for those who choose to continue to practice homosexuality, it's kind of already too late to then try and limit them further. stopping them from getting married isn't going to stop them from living homosexual lives and in homosexual partnerships. should the church really force everyone to live their personal beliefs and commandments? all you accomplish is just hurting people and pissing them off. this all goes against the 11th article of faith and it reminds me a little of islamic sharia (obviously minus the beheadings and stoning, etc)--a religion trying to decide how even non-believers must live.

Men marrying other men is not worship. That has nothing to do with the 11th article of faith and your comment about Islamic Sharia is way over the top. The church isn't forcing anyone to follow the commandments. Expecting everyone to call a union between a man and another man "marriage" is not reasonable. It was originally a religious ordinance. I like what Elton John had to say about it. He favors civil unions. If it could give people the same privileges marriage does, I don't see what there is to complain about. From my point of view, God ordained marriage and it feels sacreligious to use the term to describe a union between two men.

[Kenngo1969]

So what you're saying is that anyone in the church who gave to Prop 8 did so because the church manipulated them into doing so with their amazing mind control abilities?

That's silly.

MorningStar, MorningStar, MorningStar ... Tsk, tsk, tsk! I implore you: please don't underestimate the immense power of the XJ-330 Mind Control Chip!