Indoctrination -- Evil Or Duty

[Grundelwalken]

In another thread there was some mention and consternation concerning the practice of indoctrination by parents and members of the Church. It was intimated (or maybe stated more boldly) that LDS parents and leaders are in the business of indoctrinating their children, converts and members to keep them part of the fold. My impression was that the person felt this was devious or underhanded and was a sign that the Church was violating some principle of truth.

Here are two definitions of indoctrination found at an Internet site:

1. To instruct in a body of doctrine or principles.

2. To imbue with a partisan or ideological point of view: a generation of children who had been indoctrinated against the values of their parents.

My reading of these two definitions leads me to believe that what some would disparage as indoctrination akin to brainwashing is really asking parents to abdicate their duties to teach their children. Both definitions relate to the way teaching is done for those we love.

The first has to do with putting into the hearts and minds of others the doctrines and principles one feels are appropriate for life’s struggles. The second seems to be a little more negative but, to me, it doesn’t seem to be a bad thing that I am partisan with an ideological point of view when it comes to the Church. I will teach that way to anyone who will let me into their realm of influence.

I freely admit that I have and will indoctrinate my children and grandchildren in the teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as found in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. To do less than that would be letting someone else decide what values and beliefs my family would use for a foundation. If asked, I will also indoctrinate any who will listen to my spiel.

While the effort will always be to indoctrinate, there does come a day when the indoctrination must become more subtle in order to not violate the right to make individual choices (agency). If some decide to abandon the truths they have been taught, they have every right to do so. But the effort to bring them back to the fold will never cease.

It seems to me that most who blather about indoctrination or brainwashing are those who would want to allow children to grow up and “decide when they are ready” whether they want to follow Christ. Again, a ridiculous thing to do to children. By not deciding, the parents ARE DECIDING to let the world do the teaching. Isn’t that how we end up with some of the issues we have in the world? I think so.

I do not believe I am wrong but I welcome other viewpoints. MW

[KevinG]

The word used was conditioning (which in the context of the discussion implied a reward/punishment system as the basis of irrational beliefs).

I introduced the word indoctrination because I felt it was a fairer description of what goes on in a family or societal group. Human cultures all do it. It is called societal norms. Indoctrination is the process of passing those norms on to our young and insuring stable and healthy cultures.

It is not the practice of indoctrination that is evil or good. Much like parchment there is no inherant morality in conveying words, ideas, concepts and culture. It is the content of those messages that can be evil or good (healthy or destructive).

Taking this a step further it would be a great disservice to our children, brethren and sisters if we were to allow other to come into our families and church and dictate what messages are passed on. That is exactly what critics of organized religion or strong belief systems are asking us to do when complaining about how we teach our young. Hand over the pen to them and let them write the story for us.

Christ had other counsel.

D&C 93:38 Every ^aspirit of man was ^binnocent in the beginning; and God having ^credeemed man from the ^dfall, men became again, in their infant state, ^einnocent before God.

39 And that ^awicked one cometh and ^btaketh away light and truth, through ^cdisobedience, from the children of men, and because of the ^dtradition of their fathers.

40 But I have commanded you to bring up your ^achildren in ^blight and truth.

D&C 68:25“And again, inasmuch as parents have children in Zion, or in any of her stakes which are organized, that teach them not to understand the doctrine of repentance, faith in Christ the Son of the Living God, and of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, when eight years old, the sin be upon the heads of the parents.”

[cinepro]

I don't have a problem with "indoctrination" at a Church (in fact, I expect it).

And anyone who thinks that the Church's methods somehow limit a child's ability to choose later in life obviously hasn't seen retention statistics for the YSAs.

Edited February 7, 2012 by cinepro

[The Nehor]

Having seen idiot parents who tried to raise their children in a morally neutral and non-indoctrinating way and what monsters they created I would argue that not indoctrinating children is a far greater evil.

[Senator]

Having seen idiot parents who tried to raise their children in a morally neutral and non-indoctrinating way and what monsters they created I would argue that not indoctrinating children is a far greater evil.

I have seen monsters come out of the most heavily indocrtinated LDS homes as well. But I won't call the parents idiots.

[KevinG]

I have seen monsters come out of the most heavily indocrtinated LDS homes as well. But I won't call the parents idiots.

It depends. Are they indoctrinating them in the Gospel or in bliondly obeying their parents? Heavily indoctrinated needs to be explained before I can fairly evaluate your statement. If it means what I think it means (blind obedience to mom and dad with no accounting for agency) then I would and do call those types of parents idiots.

[The Nehor]

I have seen monsters come out of the most heavily indocrtinated LDS homes as well. But I won't call the parents idiots.

So have I. The best homes in the world sometimes create monsters. I am pointing out that deliberately trying to teach your children nothing makes you an idiot and your children much more likely to be monsters.

[bluebell]

I'm with nehor. It's a parents job to indoctrinate, and all good parents do it to some extent. If not, then the parent is pretty much worthless to the child in my opinion, other than financially supporting them.

[Storm Rider]

To not teach our children in truth and light is a gross sin. To call teaching our chldren truth and light an offense and doing harm is just plain stupid. On the other thread I rejected such a proposal and I still reject it. At it most base level this thinking is the spirit of the Anti-Christ; I do not use that claim lightly or without thought.

[Montgomery Price]

For me, it's not so much that a child is told what to believe, but that a child is told to defend and identify with what they don't understand.

If you're in such a rush to lead children to believe and defend Mormon teachings, why don't we feel comfortable inviting them to come discuss Mormon teachings with the rest of us apologists and critics on forums like this one?

Unless we're willing to admit that those who religiously indoctrinate their children don't believe any balanced discussion of Mormon perspective is justified, I don't see how LDS parents can reconcile two quite evident and important facts. (1) Raising a child in the LDS Church is often the sort of religious indoctrination which seriously inhibits a person's ability to consider perspectives different from or contrary to Mormon teachings. (2) Those perspectives deserve some unbiased consideration.

The only answers I can think of are those which deny church teachings or fail to account for a child's future ability to consider alternate perspectives independently of their parents or church's biased instruction.

To make a specific point which I'd like someone to address:

Why does the church encourage parents to inhibit a child's ability to consider contrary perspectives by leading them to believe anything which denies church teachings should be summarily discounted as evil deceptions invented by Anti-Mormons before they've had any chance to properly consider another perspective, let alone aquire the capacity to do so?

This is a very serious accusation. Please provide evidence before making acusations like this about the Mormons or any other religion. - Ares

Edited February 8, 2012 by Ares

[Storm Rider]

For me, it's not so much that a child is told what to believe, but that a child is told to defend and identify with what they don't understand.

If you're in such a rush to lead children to believe and defend Mormon teachings, why don't we feel comfortable inviting them to come discuss Mormon teachings with the rest of us apologists and critics on forums like this one?

Unless we're willing to admit that those who religiously indoctrinate their children don't believe any balanced discussion of Mormon perspective is justified, I don't see how LDS parents can reconcile two quite evident and important facts. (1) Raising a child in the LDS Church is often the sort of religious indoctrination which seriously inhibits a person's ability to consider perspectives different from or contrary to Mormon teachings. (2) Those perspectives deserve some unbiased consideration.

The only answers I can think of are those which deny church teachings or fail to account for a child's future ability to consider alternate perspectives independently of their parents or church's biased instruction.

To make a specific point which I'd like someone to address:

Why does the church encourage parents to inhibit a child's ability to consider contrary perspectives by leading them to believe anything which denies church teachings should be summarily discounted as evil deceptions invented by Anti-Mormons before they've had any chance to properly consider another perspective, let alone acquire the capacity to do so?

I could not disagree more with your position. First, my job as a parent is to teach my children the difference between right and wrong. I am a LDS and I bring them up as LDS; however, our God gave us each a mind and we taught our children to use theirs. It is fallacy and it is offensive to assume that LDS, among all the believing peoples of the world, "indoctrinate" their children in a closed environment. It is similar to one of the more stupid accusations that LDS temple ceremonies are "secret", yes secret for about the time it takes anyone to look them up on the Internet. Not very secret! We teach our children what we believe just as every other people on the earth does. We teach them to think and we strongly encourage them to go to college.

We sent our children to private school for two reasons: 1) to get a great education, 2) a liberal institution not only was a good education, but it taught them to think. They think and they are independent. Their life of faith is theirs alone and they got there by themselves and they stand on their own two feet.

It is sheer lunacy to make these broad brush stroke accusations as if LDS parenting is wrong or that LDS can't be good parents. Frankly, this type of sub-thinking is offensive and the very height of arrogance. What the bloody crap do you teach your children? You think you keep their little minds free from your benevolent influence? I have seldom read a more offensive, more stupid allegation in my entire life.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Storm Rider

[zerinus]

In another thread there was some mention and consternation concerning the practice of indoctrination by parents and members of the Church. It was intimated (or maybe stated more boldly) that LDS parents and leaders are in the business of indoctrinating their children, converts and members to keep them part of the fold. My impression was that the person felt this was devious or underhanded and was a sign that the Church was violating some principle of truth.

Here are two definitions of indoctrination found at an Internet site:

1. To instruct in a body of doctrine or principles.

2. To imbue with a partisan or ideological point of view: a generation of children who had been indoctrinated against the values of their parents.

My reading of these two definitions leads me to believe that what some would disparage as indoctrination akin to brainwashing is really asking parents to abdicate their duties to teach their children. Both definitions relate to the way teaching is done for those we love.

The first has to do with putting into the hearts and minds of others the doctrines and principles one feels are appropriate for life’s struggles. The second seems to be a little more negative but, to me, it doesn’t seem to be a bad thing that I am partisan with an ideological point of view when it comes to the Church. I will teach that way to anyone who will let me into their realm of influence.

Indoctrination, as your dictionary definition shows, has two different meanings, and they are not the same. One is a positive definition and the other is a negative one. One definition means to teach, to instruct, to inculcate. The other means the kind of thing that took place in Soviet style labor camps, and still takes place in North Korea and other such places whose aim is to brain-wash you to become the idealogical followers of Chairman Mao, or Dear Leader, or of Socialism, and what have you. There is no way that these two different definitions can be reconciled.

[why me]

Critics bring up indoctrination quite often as a way to show that the lds church indoctrinates its members, especially its children. Of course the use of the word is loaded. Likewise for the word conditioniong. And the usage of both words are used for connotative effects. Most decent parents are involved in various socialization proecess, some good and some bad. But for children, all are socializied in their family situations and in other various situations that they may find themselves in. For religious people, their church acts as a socialization process too since the children and adults establish beliefs and friendships with likeminded individuals.

And those who have left the church are basically indoctrinating and conditioning their own children into a belief system. We can see this on exmormon boards. Not to mention the fact, that when exmos or postmos post on likeminded boards, they do so for the social conditioning that they are experiencing among likeminded people too.

[Montgomery Price]

I could not disagree more with your position. First, my job as a parent is to teach my children the difference between right and wrong. I am a LDS and I bring them up as LDS; however, our God gave us each a mind and we taught our children to use theirs. It is fallacy and it is offensive to assume that LDS, among all the believing peoples of the world, "indoctrinate" their children in a closed environment. It is similar to one of the more stupid accusations that LDS temple ceremonies are "secret", yes secret for about the time it takes anyone to look them up on the Internet. Not very secret! We teach our children what we believe just as every other people on the earth does. We teach them to think and we strongly encourage them to go to college.

We sent our children to private school for two reasons: 1) to get a great education, 2) a liberal institution not only was a good education, but it taught them to think. They think and they are independent. Their life of faith is theirs alone and they got there by themselves and they stand on their own two feet.

It is sheer lunacy to make these broad brush stroke accusations as if LDS parenting is wrong or that LDS can't be good parents. Frankly, this type of sub-thinking is offensive and the very height of arrogance. What the bloody crap do you teach your children? You think you keep their little minds free from your benevolent influence? I have seldom read a more offensive, more stupid allegation in my entire life.

You didn't read my post very closely. The first sentence:

"For me, it's not so much that a child is told what to believe, but that a child is told to defend and identify with what they don't understand."

I should also add that their parents often don't understand their beliefs well enough, either.

My "broad brush stroke accusation" is that the church does encourage parents to attempt to create a closed environment and biased mindset by condititioning a child to often shy away from or boldly reject anything ostensibly Anti-Mormon before they could ever understand the debate. Sure, you can raise your child by ignoring just some of the prophet's teachings, but the LDS culture systematically creates these sorts of kids, with more or less efficiency. I resisted it at a young age before I even realized this was happening. I never left the church until a few years later because I was too shy to let anyone know that I just wasn't going to defend and identify with the LDS faith just because I was told it was good. I saw no good reason to believe it in the first place. Just a bunch of very emotional people.

It seems that most LDS believe critics are attacking them unfairly when they're accused of indoctrinating their child. I see how this can be difficult to admit, but the church specifically instructs parents to lead their children to hold beliefs which bias their point of view and create distortion and dissonance in their minds which is difficult to deal with later on in life.

What would I teach my kids? Well, if I ever have kids, I would teach them how to consider Mormon teachings from a perspective which doesn't insist that the entire game is rigged and there's only one answer which serves the purpose of the party rigging the game. And generally, I wouldn't lead my kids to defend and identify with something before they understand why I believe it's justified in the first place, but more importantly, not before they even understand the concept of justification.

It's not about the act of indoctrinating a child, it's how they are indoctrinated by particular LDS teachings. There's helpful indoctrination and not-so-helpful indoctrination. Many LDS imagine the problem critic's raise is whether someone has the right to teach their child anything at all. That's absurd. You're missing the more specific picture.

It's not actually stupid or offensive to anyone but those who believe like you do. It's just clearly evident but no one can handle having it pointed out that we're more reasonable than this. This is the point I want to make, and I'd appreciate you not waste my time by sticking to it and answering or disputing the following question:

We know kids don't understand the things we talk about on this forum, so why does the church encourage parents to distort their perspectives so extremely with harmful indoctrination before they eventually will be able to handle it? Unfortunately, the answer only involves denying church teachings or fails to account for the child's future ability to make a balance decision on their own, which every kid deserves.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Montgomery Price

[KevinG]

CFR that LDS instruct their children to defend things they don't understand?

Monty P_ this seems like a family dysfunction problem not a doctrinal problem.

I always figured the best way to help a child or adult to defend themselves was to make sure they were fully informed. My kids know about the criticisms of our faith from a very young age. They also know how their father reconciles some questions and apparent contridictions. They learn the anti-mormon stuff in school from well meaning (or just plain mean) friends who got it at their church. We discuss these thigns openly.

Lets make this more interesting and stop hiding your agenda under hypotheticals and implications... please show what specifically we are indoctrinating our children in that they do not understand?

Then share with us - what is your approach to introducing abstract concepts like faith, God and liberty to your children without causing dissonance in their adult lives?

[The Nehor]

I was taught that murder is wrong and I was not taught to defend or identify with the contrary position.

Does this mean I had bad parents?

[Montgomery Price]

Lets make this more interesting and stop hiding your agenda under hypotheticals and implications... please show what specifically we are indoctrinating our children in that they do not understand?

I was taught that murder is wrong and I was not taught to defend or identify with the contrary position.

Does this mean I had bad parents?

It's seems neither of you read my posts very closely. Trust any one or none of my motives, but I'm absolutely interested in an more stimulating discussion. In fact, let me warn you right away, my prime interest is the specific responses and doubts apologists have concerning my very particular and clear contention, which I've yet to see. Plus, I love a challenge.

I'm more or less convinced as well now that it's extremely unlikely any apologist will reach full comprehension of my argument and like to talk about it. Especially considering your fallacious misconceptions about the distinction inherent in my argument between acceptable indoctrination and unreasonable indoctrination and your presumptions about hidden agendas to which I'll directly respond in a moment. But more importantly, I'm also certain that this problem is very difficult to ignore and misunderstand for long. But please understand, I am ultimately interested in what you think about the argument itself, not why you think I made it. We can talk about these things, but I rather not because the validity of these sorts of statements are contingent upon my contention being valid. It's just in the way. And honestly, I feel poking at preconceptions concerning my motives and argument--or whatever else is distracting you from my attempts to direct your attention--is the best way to expose how weak the responses often are.

In fact, the answers given by defenders of religious indoctrination are often so unsatisfactory, I think it's quite ironic that the best excuses I've hear so far are to admit that Mormon kids are religiously indoctrinated just as the church encourages and instructs. But it's unfortunate they then ignore the implications of this admission, often with a silly "so, what?" attitude directed at an argument I never made. To be clear on what I mean by this statement, I call your attention to the very clear explanations and evidence I've already described in this thread more than once.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Montgomery Price

[Montgomery Price]

First, Nehor,

No, I don't think telling a child to defend or identify with a certain position, in and of itself, is bad. Clearly, my issue is with what they're being told to defend and identify with, and how these attitudes often manifest and lead to harmful misunderstanding and dissonance. I think this is very easy to understand. I don't see how you could have missed it other than my tendency to be wordy. If that's the case, sorry... but here's where you should have picked up that this is obviously not what I'm talking about:

[Comments in brackets being clarifications...]

For me, it's not so much that a child is told what to believe, but that a child is told to defend and identify with what they don't understand.

(1) Raising a child in the LDS Church is often the sort of religious indoctrination which seriously inhibits a person's ability to consider perspectives different from or contrary to Mormon teachings.

The church specifically instructs parents to lead their children to hold beliefs which bias their point of view and create distortion and dissonance in their minds which is [unnecessarily] difficult to deal with later on in life.

It's not about the act of indoctrinating a child, it's how they are indoctrinated by particular LDS teachings. There's helpful indoctrination and not-so-helpful indoctrination. Many LDS imagine the problem critic's raise is whether someone has the right to teach their child anything at all. That's absurd. You're missing the more specific picture.

Does it make sense yet? And if you'll continue with me in the same train of thought, onto my evidence for these arguments...

DaddyG,

I already referred to a few specific teachings of the church which I find questionable subjects of indoctrination, but there are literally countless examples. This is just the most obvious and potent example I observe which is in particular contrast to the way apologists behave.

I have no doubt that anyone familiar with LDS culture knows exactly what I'm speaking of when I talk about doctrines concerning how to identify what is Anti-Mormon, and what children are taught to do if they happen to encounter it.

I really don't feel the need to point to any specific talk or correlated teaching out of the mouths of nearly every prophet and in the primary rooms of nearly every church which exposes this. I don't feel the need to portray that conversation nearly every parent has with their child about those who are attempting to deceive the most obedient children of God and that the just don't have the blessings and light that special, special little Mormon children do. I don't feel the need because it's so easy to point out that LDS conceptions of Anti-Mormonism are pervasively touchy, controversial issues about which many have very strong opinions which all support my argument. That is, most LDS are of the opinion that the thinking has already been done for the children, and any investigation by the children will inevitably lead to faith-harming doubt.

Seriously, need I go on? If I'm still somehow wrongheaded in how these observations relate to my argument, including my own experience being raised in the church, could you please explain what sort of evidence you're even looking for? It's not a serious accusation at all. It's LDS culture and teaching which I find pretty self-evident. It seems many forget that Mormon practice is often a very serious and involved lifestyle, but the fact that lots of serious indoctrination happens outside the church somehow dismisses my argument.

Here's where I "show what specifically we are indoctrinating our children in that they do not understand":

Why does the church encourage parents to inhibit a child's ability to consider contrary perspectives by leading them to believe anything which denies church teachings should be summarily discounted as evil deceptions invented by Anti-Mormons before they've had any chance to properly consider another perspective, let alone aquire the capacity to do so?

The church does encourage parents to attempt to create a closed environment and biased mindset by conditioning a child to often [resist in an suspicious or unreasonable way which preserves a misleading perspective] or boldly reject anything ostensibly Anti-Mormon before they could ever understand the debate.

We know kids don't understand the things we talk about on this forum, so why does the church encourage parents to distort their perspectives so extremely with harmful indoctrination before they eventually will be able to handle it?

I wouldn't lead my kids to defend and identify with something before they understand why I believe it's justified in the first place, but more importantly, not before they even understand the concept of justification.

So, I sincerely hope this is easy to understand for the both of you. Please, point out exactly what doesn't actually make sense, keeping in mind that I've already claimed that the only answers I can think of or have come across fail to resolve the problem because they either (1) deny official church teachings and doctrine or (2) fail to account for a child's future ability to make unbiased decisions on these matters later in life.

I realize this can be a very personal issue, but I think I've made it way too clear how I intend to direct any discussion I wish to be involved with. That is, towards my contention about the general state of LDS culture, not your lives or mine.

Put very simply, I don't see how we can accept that children should eventually decide whether they accept the Mormon perspective--including claims that any aledged Anti-Mormon ideas should simply be labeled as evil deceptions and dismissed--but also find it acceptable to indoctrinate them with that very same Mormon concept which distorts their view of this alternate perspective and serves to amplifiy attitudes which do nothing to help this bias which inhibits the balanced and reasonable decision they deserve.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Montgomery Price

[Storm Rider]

Sorry, this is just not worth my time. Cheers,

[The Nehor]

Put very simply, I don't see how we can accept that children should eventually decide whether they accept the Mormon perspective which claims that all Anti-Mormon ideas should simply be labeled as evil deceptions and dismissed but also find it acceptable to indoctrinate them with that very same idea in question which distorts their view of this alternate perspective and amplifiy attitudes which do nothing to help this bias which inhibits a balanced and reasonable decision.

In response to this I would say that I believe in the tenets of the LDS faith and one of those is that God gives every soul a fair choice whether 'indoctrinated' by parents or not. I have no desire to help foster a "balanced and reasonable decision" by doing the devil's work for him. I can say I was raised to avoid them and they found me anyways. What anti-Mormons tend to mean by this is that they are complaining that they aren't getting a fair hearing because we aren't eagerly wanting to help them get their foot in the door. On a cynical note I've never heard of them trying to help missionaries teach families to make sure people are making a reasonable and balanced decision (in fact they do the opposite) so they basically want us to help them without reciprocating. Understandable but we shouldn't pretend then that their goal is 'balance and reason'.

In larger terms the scriptures make it clear that God takes care of situations where the bias on earth swings too far to the light or the dark. When it swang too far to the light, God took up Enoch's city. When it swings too far to the dark, God sent a flood or allowed some kind of natural or man-made catastrophe to destroy the culture. If it makes opponents to the LDS faith feel better our talk of prophecies and the last days is an acknowledgement that they are gaining the upper hand.

The devil gets a fair chance to present his case. He always has. God has given no directive to the saints to help him out so we can assume he is capable of doing it with the resources at his disposal.

I also believe that all anti-Mormon ideas are evil deceptions. Allow me to explain that. I do not mean to say that all who share them are incredibly evil or that there aren't criticisms that can't justly be brought against the culture or the people of the Church (the purest source for this tends to be General Conference). But real anti-mormonism, things that lead people away from the kingdom of God on the Earth or are opposed to the Kingdom of God on the earth, are evil. Most are also deceptive. To pretend otherwise causes as much cognitive dissonance for me as trying to give a fair and balanced take on the advantages and disadvantages of exaltation and damnation. I do suspect there are souls on earth unable to accept the truth of the gospel in this life for reasons God only knows. There may be relative innocents opposed to the gospel. Still I will not help them or support them just because they are ignorant of what they are doing.

In any case I don't intend to play devil's advocate in the interest of fairness until the devil is willing to play God's advocate in the interest of fairness. I'm not holding my breath on that count.

[Montgomery Price]

Sorry, this is just not worth my time. Cheers,

I'll only be temporarily discouraged by your absence. I'm genuinely interested in sharing thoughts on why I do think this is worth your time. The invitation to return to discuss my argument remains open.

[KevinG]

MP - CFR on a specific example of the Church teaching those who think differently than we do are evil. When people of any religion claim that I'm more likely to think they came from a dysfunctional family than a dysfunctional church.

When it does happen in LDS families shame on them for neglecting one of the most important aspects of the Gospel. The agency and divine nature of all mankind.

You can keep repeating that apologists aren't likely to understand your intellectual offerings but it just don't make it so.

I think I'm with storm rider. Trying to reason with your repeated shouted (bolded) opinions is a waste of time. Just because we disagree with your opinions doesn't mean we don't understand them.

Edited February 9, 2012 by DaddyG

[Montgomery Price]

Thanks for the thoughtful and direct response. It's kinda rare in discussion I attempt to direct.

In response to this I would say that I believe in the tenets of the LDS faith and one of those is that God gives every soul a fair choice whether 'indoctrinated' by parents or not. I have no desire to help foster a "balanced and reasonable decision" by doing the devil's work for him. I can say I was raised to avoid them and they found me anyways.

What anti-Mormons tend to mean by this is that they are complaining that they aren't getting a fair hearing because we aren't eagerly wanting to help them get their foot in the door. On a cynical note I've never heard of them trying to help missionaries teach families to make sure people are making a reasonable and balanced decision (in fact they do the opposite) so they basically want us to help them without reciprocating. Understandable but we shouldn't pretend then that their goal is 'balance and reason'.

Clearly, what you mean by "balance and reason" differs from my own perspective concerning questions about Mormonism. I trust you believe in balance and reason as interpreted by Mormonism and I don't. Do you hold any concept of a balanced discussion of questions which don't already presume Mormonism to be true?

My point is that we shouldn't teach children to avoid those ideas which would be crucial to a balanced discussion of Mormonism independent of Mormonism, because there is an important decision to be made specifically from this independent perspective which doesn't presume the truth of Mormonism.

I personally know and have grown up with many people who struggle with viewing any contrary view independent of this biased perspective I am trying to expose.

Because that's exactly what I'm interested in. I'm not interested in what follows from Mormonism, but why it is insisted that kids must be indoctrinated with what follows before they can consider properly any reason to follow. To combine my contention with your thoughts here... It doesn't matter whether you believe indoctrination is justified. It's whether children should be indoctrinated in a way which inhibits their ability to properly consider whether the worldview which led you to believe Mormon indoctrination should be accepted in the first place.

I don't see any reason to think they're ready to consider perspectives independent of whether Mormonism is true which doesn't (1) deny church teachings or (2) fails to account for their future ability to make a decision without their parents biased imposed upon them.

Why should parents make this particular decision for their children? When a child is taught only to consider contrary ideas as Mormonism interprets them this harmfully distorts any consideration of views independent of Mormon interpretation. This makes it clear to me that it doesn't just seem harmful, it is.

In larger terms the scriptures make it clear that God takes care of situations where the bias on earth swings too far to the light or the dark. When it swang too far to the light, God took up Enoch's city. When it swings too far to the dark, God sent a flood or allowed some kind of natural or man-made catastrophe to destroy the culture. If it makes opponents to the LDS faith feel better our talk of prophecies and the last days is an acknowledgement that they are gaining the upper hand.

The devil gets a fair chance to present his case. He always has. God has given no directive to the saints to help him out so we can assume he is capable of doing it with the resources at his disposal.

More statements contingent upon Mormonism being true. A false upper hand. Hardly convincing as favorable.

It seems you are suffering from the same sorts of biases indoctrination instills. I'd like you to consider alternate perspectives without the assumption of Mormonism.

I also believe that all anti-Mormon ideas are evil deceptions. Allow me to explain that. I do not mean to say that all who share them are incredibly evil or that there aren't criticisms that can't justly be brought against the culture or the people of the Church (the purest source for this tends to be General Conference). But real anti-mormonism, things that lead people away from the kingdom of God on the Earth or are opposed to the Kingdom of God on the earth, are evil. Most are also deceptive. To pretend otherwise causes as much cognitive dissonance for me as trying to give a fair and balanced take on the advantages and disadvantages of exaltation and damnation. I do suspect there are souls on earth unable to accept the truth of the gospel in this life for reasons God only knows. There may be relative innocents opposed to the gospel. Still I will not help them or support them just because they are ignorant of what they are doing.

In any case I don't intend to play devil's advocate in the interest of fairness until the devil is willing to play God's advocate in the interest of fairness. I'm not holding my breath on that count.

Critics only seem to be asking you to help them do the devil's work because you've yet to consider any contrary view. What if it's not evil? I know you have an answer to this question, but should children be led to accept your view with unquestionable obedience to the prophets and teachings of the church before they understand why one might accept that there should be unquestionable obedience to prophets and teachings of the church.

Is the issue clear now?

[KevinG]

As an adult convert to Mormonism I have seen the church without indoctrination. I used to have opinions very similar to yours (although perhaps with a touch less arrogance about others being more deluded than myself). I was juvenile and wrong headed.

You never did answer the questions posed to you about what and how you would have parents teach their children so they were never improperly indoctrinated? I would be very interested in what you propose to substitute for patterns of socialization and parenting developed over millenia of human interaction?

As a professional with experience in pedagogy and adult education I am all ears to hear this revolutionary system for teaching values without warping young minds.

[Ares]

Montgomery - since Mormons are incapable of seeing reason through their delusions I will save you from wasting time arguing with them. You are excused.