Jump to content

Carrie Sheffied: "A Mormon Church In Need Of 'Reform'"


CQUIRK

Recommended Posts

Anti-Mormon article from the Washington Post that's supposedly written by a ex-Mormon. Basically Carrie calls on the church to be 'less secretive', pro-LGBT, etc. in her simpleton article.

I'm only posting the link to it.

Link to comment

As soon as I read or hear the buzz words, "cognitive dissonance" my eyes roll back in my head and I turn off immediately to any hope of having a worthwhile conversation of any kind. These are the brainwashed people that parade as free thinkers full of enlightenment and wisdom that us poor, feeble-minded miscreats that still believe in Jesus Christ and his Church just can't grasp. In truth, these are those that have closed their minds, repeat the mantra of cognitive dissonance as they continue to shove their head deep into the dirt of self-deception called being a free-thinker.

And they shall call black, white and evil, good.

Link to comment

I hate buzz words too, but what words would describe the conflict that people feel? I don't care what side of the fence you are on. There has to be something that describes what people feel. I first heard those words on this forum. I didn't know how to apply it but I think those are the proper words that some people feel. Perhaps there are instances of mis-application, but it does discribe what I went/am going through. I have a religion that says XYZ but I have a universe and sense of morality that says ABC. They are in conflict. Both are incredibly attractive. I think CD is an apt description, hating of buzz words or rolling of eyes aside.

As to the article, I can't speak to it. I think the church has to stand for a few things and as such, will alienate some people.

Link to comment
Anti-Mormon article from the Washington Post that's supposedly written by a ex-Mormon. Basically Carrie calls on the church to be 'less secretive', pro-LGBT, etc. in her simpleton article.

I'm only posting the link to it.

To bad, your anti'ism does understand that the church officially supports nondiscrimination concerning sexual orientation. The Church is also working on officially address it's "negative" history.

Also Elder Oaks gave a talk in Conference about not shunning family members who leave the church.

It is a real shame, shortsighted and downright dogmatic to disparate those who have real unpleasant personal experience with the Church. But at least you did not make this a political romney mancrush thread.

What is interesting is that the church is moving in a direction away from what elder packer suggested about not asking questions.

Link to comment

One of the most human of ideas is that we can and do hold one or more ideas that conflict with others ideas that we equally hold. Foolish insistance on consistancy is the hobgoblin of a narrow mind.

I'll let my wife know about that. She keeps expecting a paycheck every couple of weeks. :diablo:

Link to comment

What a novel idea! She is the first to suggest such a thing! It's ... breathtakingly groundbreaking!

Link to comment

Is there denial among this group that the stance taking by church leadership at almost all levels was and currently is "don't worry about some aspects of church history or Joseph smith life"

On my mission there was a lesson in EQ about whether "negative" aspects should be talked about or just simply ignored the concensus was to ignore and not talk about it. It is really interesting that so many here choose to ridicule rather than even attempt to address a factual aspect. Though the lady from the OP seems beyond answers to her issues, but how would things be different if she had not been dismissed earlier in life. Thankfully the Church is seeking to address questions rather than hide. And the good thing about the Church addressing the questions is the response will not be full of ridicule and disparaging commentary that so accompanies self annoited LDS apologies.

Link to comment
Frankenstein:

Why should the Church, especilly some 19 year, have to explain ideas that it doesn't hold?

Why should the Church care about members concerns and officially and directly help those members understand the issues that lead to the concern, whether it is misinformation the member received or inconvenient truths about church history.....oh I don't know the church would care, it is not as anyone important to church ever taught anything about seeking after lost sheep, or that anyone important to the Church ever said anything about the worth of souls.

And so since it has been established that there is no worth of souls and no one celebrates the return of the lost, then I guess the ridicule and disrespect that is so common with self annoited defenders is acceptable.

Your snark has reached critical mass. Take a break.

Link to comment

As a writer I find the whole piece an offensively bad piece of misinformation and half-truths. The "poor victim" mentality strikes just the right balance between being wistful and ignorant to make the whole thing abominably bad.

What specifically do you find offensively bad? I understand that it does not put the church in the best light. But do you feel iti s facutally worng? If so, what part do you feel is factually wrong. Or am I off base in trying to understand your reaction to the piece.

Link to comment

I have to ask also, why is it anyone can honestly claim we are being secretive when we go out of our way to share the Gospel with everyone we meet? We want to teach people the "secrets" of the Gospel all the time. We go door to door trying to get people to listen. The idea that we are secretive is absurd.

Link to comment

What specifically do you find offensively bad? I understand that it does not put the church in the best light. But do you feel iti s facutally worng? If so, what part do you feel is factually wrong. Or am I off base in trying to understand your reaction to the piece.

The total lack of detachment.

"part of a series of efforts to buy public affection"

Buy public affection?

"The church I was raised in values unquestioning obedience over critical thinking."

"This caused trauma and cognitive dissonance when I questioned church doctrine and official history."

Oh, poor baby.

"Some of us are prominent, such as Steve Benson, the Pulitzer Prize-winning political cartoonist, or singer Tal Bachman. Most of us are quiet dissidents who wish to lead conscientious lives."

Yes, those poor oppressed apostates. Unable to lead conscientious lives because of the church.

I could go on. Yes, it is an opinion piece but it is a silly one filled with cliches and cheap shots. It's drivel.

Link to comment

The total lack of detachment.

"part of a series of efforts to buy public affection"

Buy public affection?

"The church I was raised in values unquestioning obedience over critical thinking."

"This caused trauma and cognitive dissonance when I questioned church doctrine and official history."

Oh, poor baby.

"Some of us are prominent, such as Steve Benson, the Pulitzer Prize-winning political cartoonist, or singer Tal Bachman. Most of us are quiet dissidents who wish to lead conscientious lives."

Yes, those poor oppressed apostates. Unable to lead conscientious lives because of the church.

I could go on. Yes, it is an opinion piece but it is a silly one filled with cliches and cheap shots. It's drivel.

It is more that pitiful mewling form of whining. Woe, woe is me, but I fought throught it, could just pat me on the back a few more times, and it is was hard, and they are just such meanies. Besides, everyone knows Tal Bachman...right. You know him don't you; I mean he is famous, right. He is one of our biggies; you do not know him, right? Yes, yes, little one. He is certainly right up there with Elvis Presley. Here, let me pat you on the back for be a good, thinking person, free from those terrible Mormons. You went to Harvard I see. Here let me speak slowly for you; do not pass go, do not collect $200, but go straight...oh I give up.

Link to comment
My parents shut me out of their home for nearly five years because of religion

If this is true, I think it explains a lot, but it certainly cannot be blamed on the Church because such behaviour directly contradicts its teachings.

Link to comment

The total lack of detachment.

"part of a series of efforts to buy public affection"

Buy public affection?

"The church I was raised in values unquestioning obedience over critical thinking."

"This caused trauma and cognitive dissonance when I questioned church doctrine and official history."

Oh, poor baby.

"Some of us are prominent, such as Steve Benson, the Pulitzer Prize-winning political cartoonist, or singer Tal Bachman. Most of us are quiet dissidents who wish to lead conscientious lives."

Yes, those poor oppressed apostates. Unable to lead conscientious lives because of the church.

I could go on. Yes, it is an opinion piece but it is a silly one filled with cliches and cheap shots. It's drivel.

But you are not denying that it is her personal experience are you? Do you think she frabricated anything in the story? I guess it is similar to the other thread where the gay guy is saying how wonderful it is to be Mormon. One persons experience does not make it true for everyone. Wouldn't you agree?

Link to comment

If this is true, I think it explains a lot, but it certainly cannot be blamed on the Church because such behaviour directly contradicts its teachings.

I have had a very similar experience. It has been about 10 years since I came out to my family. Since that time, I have never been invited to a family dinner, reunion, missionary farewell, blessing, wedding receiption etc. I consider my family to be very active membes of the church. During this time two of my brothers were called as bishops. They know what the church teaches.

I know the church teaches that they should not shun sinners like me, but the feeling they have is if I am invited to family events, then it is some kind of acceptance of me being gay. So their attitude is, when you are no longer gay you can come back into the family. This is not an uncommon attitude even if it is not what the General Authorities advise. I can certainly relate to why someone would write such a column. While it does not reflect good on the church, it does accurately in my opinion reflect on how some members treat those that they disagree with.

The response by Storm Rider and Nehor reinforces that when such events happen, it must be the fault of the person who left the church. That only causes more bitter feelings for the person who has been treated badly by her family or a person reading the article. It is why some people feel like sharing the experience they have had with the church. When they do share their experience, some members feel it is their duty to attack the person. I understand that. It makes them feel they are on the right side, and the person who left is the evil whining person.

Link to comment

But you are not denying that it is her personal experience are you? Do you think she frabricated anything in the story? I guess it is similar to the other thread where the gay guy is saying how wonderful it is to be Mormon. One persons experience does not make it true for everyone. Wouldn't you agree?

I expect she thinks it is true. People are often the hero in their own recollections.

I would contend that this is a delusion. Deluded people like this are common in everyday life and in fiction. For example the words of Palpatine:

"Ever since I've known you, you have been search for a life greater than that of an ordinary Jedi. A life of significance. Of conscience."

Standard fictional temptation spiel. YOU are SPECIAL. They fight against you because they fear/hate/are jealous of you. Once she typecasts herself the rest follows. Hopefully it won't end like the quote with her breaking into a temple and killing children but we'll have to wait and see.

Link to comment

As a former Methodist I have never felt the need to lecture my parents and former co-methodists on how they need to reform their church. If you don't believe as the (fill in the blank) believe then don't be a part of them. Move on.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Similar Content

    • By Jane_Doe
      Hi,
      I'm seeking someone to have a PM conversation with about experiences/advise about converting against your family's wishes.
      Thanks in advance
    • By Joshua Valentine
      From discussion on Thinker's "Are the Essays Backfiring?" poll/topic is another poll/topic inspired!
       
      Related to the Gospel Topic Essays possibly backfiring is the issue of whether or not the essays confirm what members were told were only "anti-Mormon lies" by other members or leaders (bishops and up) before the essays were released.  Please vote above (specific votes not viewable [if I did it right]) and feel free to give specifics below or continue this aspect of the topic.
       
      If you haven't read the essays, or all of them, yet, go to LDS.org, then click "Scriptures and Study", then "Gospel Topics", then "Explore the Essays" (on the right) and see list of initial essays to the right. Or https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng . And don't forget the other essays linked in the body of the first essays!
    • By lane
      Hello everyone my name is Marcus and it is an absolute please to be here!
       
      Might I add what a blessing it is for technology so that we can communicate and learn from one another without presently being in a specific location.
       
      As the title suggests I really do need opinion and your advise. First I do not regularly create an account on a forum and my first post is a request, I do plan to make contributions throughout the forum in time, but I am actually doing this for brother and he needs your opinion.
       
      Also I do ask from you in a very serious and reverent manner and I hope my writing will convey it you in that way.
       
      My brother and his wife have various laundromats all thorough Texas and they have thought about turning these into facilities that would specifically clean Temple clothing instead of keeping them for the public. 
       
      The process would be similar to this:
       
      1) A member creates an account, with membership number required or some form of verification
      2) They can then order online and the first order my brothers company will send them a special shipping package that they use with their customer number on it or something like that and they would ship their Temple clothing directly to the nearest facility. 
      3) Within a weeks time or so the clothing will then be shipped back. 
       
      He still has to speak with someone in church about this and see if he can do this, but I wanted to ask you what you thought about this.
       
      I apologize if this sounds like soliciting, but it is just an idea and something he has thought about a lot that could help many members out. I know it is sacred to speak of this and I do speak of it with the highest respect.
       
      If you can please let me know in all honesty if this sounds like something you might be interested in. 
       
      Have an absolutely wonderful day everyone and I appreciate all feedback!
       
      All The best,
      Marcus
    • By CQUIRK
      Came across this on Yahoo News-
      Such vain and petty stunts against the church have come and fizzled out before- this will be no different, nor will the disrespect, spiteful, and very much hateful motives of these people be concealed at all.
    • By Sky
      This is a spinoff of LDSToronto’s now closed thread “Apostate, Anti-Mormon - Different or Same”?
      I’ve noticed that many critics and former members of the Church object to being classified as an “anti-Mormon” or “apostate.” But then many of them turn around and derisively refer to believers as “TBM’s” and “apologists” or worse, as though none of us have any good arguments or that we can’t be truly objective or that we’re just a bunch of pawns for the LDS Church not capable of independent thought or less intelligent, and so forth.

      My questions are: do these terms or labels have any value, or should we just do away with them altogether in order to promote a more civil discourse? Do they serve any useful purpose other than for name calling and poisoning the well? If these terms were not used, what should be used in their place, if anything? Would “critic” and “defender” suffice? Is there even a commonly understood definition for any of these terms, or do they mean too many different things to different people?

      I don’t think any of us really appreciate being put into a box, no matter where we are with regards to Mormonism, or more specifically, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But one thing we all seem to share is a passion for this religion, whether we love it or hate it or are somewhere in between. We just can’t stop talking about it. I truly believe it’s because there is something unique and special here that cannot be found elsewhere. Mormonism is a vibrant and relevant religious tradition, and the outside world is taking notice of this more and more. We may sometimes be loved or hated or misunderstood or lampooned, but one thing we cannot say is that we are not talked about. Our religion generates a reaction from many people. We are not just another church. I see this as a good thing.
      I obviously consider myself a believer and will always defend the Church when I sense an unwarranted or mean-spirited attack. But I’m also on my own personal spiritual faith journey, and I don’t understand everything or have all the answers. When I ask questions, I don’t do it to attack anybody but only to try to increase my understanding. Hopefully my posts reflect this for the most part.
      Anyway, sorry for the lengthy OP. I hope I didn’t ramble too much. But I hope this will generate a good discussion. Let’s do our best to prevent the thread from being closed and not making it personal. Thanks in advance for your responses.
×
×
  • Create New...