Top Ten Things I Love About Not Being A Mormon Anymore: A Response

[Mystery Meat]

In fairness to our sister, I'd rename her essay "Top 10 Things I Love About Not Being the Mormon I THOUGHT I Had To Be."

I think some people find Mormonism stuffy because they, for whatever reason, come to believe that the religion is just an endless pattern of pray, pay and obey. You must pray like this. You must dress like this. You must not eat this or watch that.

However, I see that on this board, there is quite a bit of flexibility in how each of us is Mormon. For example, with regard to movies, some of us treat as gospel the advice to avoid R-rated movies. Others take it one step further and won't even watch PG-13 movies. Others believe that PG stands for "porn gateway" and will only watch movies that start with a castle and Tinker Bell (except for when Disney tries to push a gay agenda). And still others, do things "correctly" and use the power of discernment.

However, that kind of flexibility is seldom, if ever preached. More often than not, the bishop, stake president, etc. lays down "the law of the land." (e.g., the Holy Spirit goes to bed at midnight, no beards without a note from the Surgeon General, etc.).

And it's not just the leaders. In my area, it's common for fathers to require that their sons get their Eagle Scout badge before they get a driver's license. This means that a boy could be a world class cellist but he still will have to ask his tone-deaf little brother for a ride to school because he isn't "worthy" to drive a car. And rightly so, since scripture clearly states, "Man judges by the outward appearance, but God judges by the number of knots you can tie."

So, for that boy (and many, many others), I can see how they would be happy to be free from the Mormonism they were taught was so restrictive.

 

Newb, I am liking you more and more. At first I was like, "who is this guy with all of his crazy anti mormon ideas?" Now I am like "This guy isn't afraid to dis scouting. I like this guy."

 

I award you one rep point.

 

Signed,

 

A proud non-eagle scout

[Bernard Gui]

Newb, I am liking you more and more. At first I was like, "who is this guy with all of his crazy anti mormon ideas?" Now I am like "This guy isn't afraid to dis scouting. I like this guy."

 

I award you one rep point.

 

Signed,

 

A proud non-eagle scout

Please don't derail this thread any more.

[cinepro]

That's an interesting blog post.  Her experience in the Church is definitely way different than mine. 

 

So she's wrong.

Edited April 17, 2014 by cinepro

[why me]

Usually when someone posts such posts, it can usually mean that they miss it alittle. They need to convince themselves that life is much better now. However, it can also be a sign that the person never actually understood mormonism and the mormon life. I have never been castigated for the life that I live. I come and go as I please. No one is very concerned for my soul. My mormon friends know that I can attend catholic mass..and I experience no problem from them or the bishop. Mormonism is a pretty open faith. One can live one's life and exercise one's free agency without any problems.

 

So, why write such a blog post on the internet. I suppose that it has to do with attempting to be noticed for 15 minutes. And to get support and kudos. One can be a mormon and not wear temple garments and one can be a mormon and not pay tithing. Many are in this kind of boat. So why the blog?

[why me]

That's an interesting blog post.  Her experience in the Church is definitely way different than mine. 

 

So she's wrong.

Maybe she had a distorted view of mormonism. Also, usually people who write such blogs can hash over what other people have written. It becomes a mantra and even if this mantra has no validity, the more people that hum it, the more it becomes a 'truth'.

[Bikeemikey]

Not all change is good.

http://search.dilbert.com/comic/Change%20Is%20Good

Of course.

I'm curious about your response to the following question.

If this women's experience was as she says it was, would her life be better off leaving the church?

Let's leave aside the question of whether her experience is similar to your experience or my experience. Let's simply address that she has shared an experience that seems difficult.

[Bikeemikey]

That's an interesting blog post. Her experience in the Church is definitely way different than mine.

So she's wrong.

Well when you put it like that... It seems so obvious.

[Senator]

I actually do, I just know why she is thinking the way she is thinking. Just mentioning it to give some insight as to why people say things the way they do without dismissing them outright. People have reasons to bash the church. It's only by understanding why they are attacking can you find the thorn they can't pull out of the lion's paw.

 

The job of the apologist isn't to understand.

 

It is first to contradict

 

....then belittle

 

...then dismiss with a wave of the hand.

 

 

Oh,  the irony in my post. 

[Thought I would save Wade a post]

Edited April 17, 2014 by Senator

[Bernard Gui]

That's an interesting blog post.  Her experience in the Church is definitely way different than mine. 

 

So she's wrong.

A public declaration like this is legitimately subject to questions and comments.

[Bernard Gui]

I'm curious about your response to the following question.

If this women's experience was as she says it was, would her life be better off leaving the church?

Let's leave aside the question of whether her experience is similar to your experience or my experience. Let's simply address that she has shared an experience that seems difficult.

It it is as she says, she may be better off leaving the church. At lest she will not be violating sacred covenants.

 

Here's a question for you:

 

When you publish an expose like this, are you assuming everyone else in the Church is as deceived and as  you think you were?

[Bernard Gui]

The job of the apologist isn't to understand.

 

It is first to contradict

 

....then belittle

 

...then dismiss with a wave of the hand.

 

 

Oh,  the irony in my post. 

[Thought I would save Wade a post]

One can understand and oppose without belittling and dismissing. Responding with a thoughtful contrary response

is hardly a wave of the hand.

[Bernard Gui]

Double post

Edited April 17, 2014 by Bernard Gui

[Bikeemikey]

It it is as she says, she may be better off leaving the church. At lest she will not be violating sacred covenants.

Here's a question for you:

When you publish an expose like this, are you assuming everyone else in the Church is as deceived and as you think you were?

My question was not better off in relation to the violation of covenants... Incidentally where is the idea that someone not enjoying their church experience must be violating covenants? Is there a covenant that we must always enjoy church, I don't recall that one.

Anyway, my question was, if someone has had the experience this women has had would she actually have a better life outside of the church? This has no bearing on the truth of the church, it is purely about ones fit and experience.

As for the last question... I have no reason to think that someone sharing their personal experience assumes everyone's experience is like theirs. For this person specifically you would need to ask her.

Do you think everyone's experience is like yours?

Edited April 17, 2014 by Bikeemikey

[Senator]

One can understand and oppose without belittling and dismissing. Responding with a thoughtful contrary response

is hardly a wave of the hand.

Yes, it is possible.

[Avatar4321]

Reading her response it seems clear that she missed out on a very important thing. She didn't have a testimony of the Savior. She didn't understand the Atonement.

 

People talk about guilt in Mormonism. I don't see it. The Church lays out the standards. That's it. It also lays out the means to repent and be forgiven through Christ. It's like The Miracle of Forgiveness. People say how it's designed to make us all feel guilty and such. I've read the book serveral times and never felt that way. It's clear that the book is designed to give people hope and remove guilty by assuring people that the power of the Atonement is there.

 

I've never been prevented from learning anything. In fact, it's because of the teachings of the Church that I have such a passion for learning. We are supposed to be studying and learning all things. It's a commandment.

 

The Lord tells us we have our agency. We are do to good and not just sit around.

 

I see what the Gospel teaches and what her perception of it and it's just totally foreign to what is taught. I don't know her experiences, but I feel incredibly sad that she missed what is so clear and bright.

[thesometimesaint]

In fairness to our sister, I'd rename her essay "Top 10 Things I Love About Not Being the Mormon I THOUGHT I Had To Be."

I think some people find Mormonism stuffy because they, for whatever reason, come to believe that the religion is just an endless pattern of pray, pay and obey. You must pray like this. You must dress like this. You must not eat this or watch that.

However, I see that on this board, there is quite a bit of flexibility in how each of us is Mormon. For example, with regard to movies, some of us treat as gospel the advice to avoid R-rated movies. Others take it one step further and won't even watch PG-13 movies. Others believe that PG stands for "porn gateway" and will only watch movies that start with a castle and Tinker Bell (except for when Disney tries to push a gay agenda). And still others, do things "correctly" and use the power of discernment.

However, that kind of flexibility is seldom, if ever preached. More often than not, the bishop, stake president, etc. lays down "the law of the land." (e.g., the Holy Spirit goes to bed at midnight, no beards without a note from the Surgeon General, etc.).

And it's not just the leaders. In my area, it's common for fathers to require that their sons get their Eagle Scout badge before they get a driver's license. This means that a boy could be a world class cellist but he still will have to ask his tone-deaf little brother for a ride to school because he isn't "worthy" to drive a car. And rightly so, since scripture clearly states, "Man judges by the outward appearance, but God judges by the number of knots you can tie."

So, for that boy (and many, many others), I can see how they would be happy to be free from the Mormonism they were taught was so restrictive.

 

The goal of the Boy Scouts is to shape young boys into good men. Any parent that would force by threat their own vain ambitions really does need to repent. They remind me of "Stage Moms", though it really is both sexes that do it.

[wenglund]

In fairness to our sister, I'd rename her essay "Top 10 Things I Love About Not Being the Mormon I THOUGHT I Had To Be."

I think some people find Mormonism stuffy because they, for whatever reason, come to believe that the religion is just an endless pattern of pray, pay and obey. You must pray like this. You must dress like this. You must not eat this or watch that.

 

Yes, and that would be a very clueless and immature view of the gospel. Young children tend to view their parents in the same way, and in their teens they end up rebelling and thinking they know better than their parents, but when they hopefully grow up, they finally get what their parents were all about, and develop a whole new perspective, particularly when they become parents themselves.

 

In spiritual terms, I see Jen as a rebellious teen for whom I wish all the best and hope that she one day grows up.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

I actually do, I just know why she is thinking the way she is thinking. Just mentioning it to give some insight as to why people say things the way they do without dismissing them outright. People have reasons to bash the church. It's only by understanding why they are attacking can you find the thorn they can't pull out of the lion's paw.

 

I understand the reason why she bashed the Church. It is because she doesn't get the Church and in accordance with her immaturity. If she did rightly get the Church, she would have no cause to bash it even if she continued not to believe. And, if you correctly understood the Church as well as her, you would have known this. You do her and the Church a disservice by indulging her bad behavior.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Senator]

Like I said, It is possible......

[JDave]

Like I said, It is possible......

For all the shining beauty that apologetics could be, it always has to get around the imperfection of humans.  The feelings expressed in her post are real, and many other people share those feelings.  I think the question of why so many people feel that way is a very good question to consider.

 

Regarding the post itself, it unfortunately is a very sad (and nearly literal) case of throwing out the baby (Son of God) with the bathwater.  So many of her concerns could have been handled better within the framework of the gospel, in my opinion.  Be the change that you want to see, and all that.

[wenglund]

While Mormonism as a concept may exist in some kind of platonic form "out there and perfect" for us all to see, the truth is that "being" mormon occurs in the real world for members.

This can be great for some, and not so good for others. This is more about the individual though it is also about the church, and it is not a value judgement either way when some have positive and some have negative experiences.

Based on this women's list her life will likely be better without Mormonism... That said, her experieneces are very different to mine. Having said that, if there was a single thing in my life generating the issues expressed on her list I would dump it immediately.

People can leave the church and be happier and more fulfilled out of it, the same people can also stay in the church and be happy and fulfilled, either change to a more happy life experience would require change.

For some the change is to leave, for others they stay and change something else.

 

There seems to be a cultural tendency these days to capitulate to and justify the whiners and complainers as if their whines and complaints are by default valid and warranted.

 

I don't happen to adhere to this tendency, and believe instead that there are institutions that are inherently good for one and all, and that there are also spoiled and immature and misbehaving brats, and we really ought to not conflate the two.

 

This doesn't mean that I don't see good cause for people to leave the Church. I do. In fact, I think it wise for Jen to have left the Church because, in her immature frame of mind, she will, instead of looking inward, will view the Church as if through a funny house mirror, and make herself miserable from all the cognitive distortions.

 

But, as indicated above, we do her and the Church a disservice by countenancing rather than condemning her bad behavior. Spoiled brats need to be called out.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Bernard Gui]

My question was not better off in relation to the violation of covenants... Incidentally where is the idea that someone not enjoying their church experience must be violating covenants? Is there a covenant that we must always enjoy church, I don't recall that one.

Anyway, my question was, if someone has had the experience this women has had would she actually have a better life outside of the church? This has no bearing on the truth of the church, it is purely about ones fit and experience.

As for the last question... I have no reason to think that someone sharing their personal experience assumes everyone's experience is like theirs. For this person specifically you would need to ask her.

Do you think everyone's experience is like yours?

 

Despising the temple garment, swearing, not observing the sabbath, violating the word of wisdom, ridiculing and misrepresenting the doctrine and members, finding happiness in "sins" are not indicators of keeping covenants. It is better to be released from the covenant than to be condemned for intentionally violating it.

 

(Yes, that's right, I love to do all these Mormon "sins."  No, I didn't leave because I wanted to sin.  I left because I found out that the church wasn't true.  Then again, maybe I would have left because I wanted to sin had I known sooner how awesome all these things were!)

 

 

I already agreed she may be happier out of the church. May things go well for her.

 

The clear implication of the essay is that Mormons are deceived and stupid to stay in the Church. She is advocating they get them out as she did and find true happiness.

 

Your last question....pffft.

[Tacenda]

http://mormonstories.org/brad-kramer-on-faith-paradigms-and-letting-go-of-eden/

 

Listening to this podcast with Brad Kramer and John Dehlin.  They discuss those that are leaving.  One thing Brad compares those on the fringe with is, a relationship with the church is much like their relationship with their parents.  It's time to let members grow up, not treat them like 5 yr. olds.  Also, that the church is like their parents in the way that they can't just up and leave so easily, just as they couldn't up and leave the their parent forever. 

 

Another thing he mentions is accommodating the doubter.  Understanding that the member/child will come to be aware of things not told to them, for instance say their parents didn't tell them something in the past to protect them.  Just as the church has done. 

 

So he'd like the church to make room for those on the fringe.  But believes that the church needs more faithful in the church, just room for some that aren't as much.

 

So much more was said on the podcasts than these, my attention was led elsewhere as I was listening, so I might have to re-listen.   

[why me]

Senator,

 

The job of an apologist is to understand and then to respond. It is also to explain the other side of the interpretation. It is also to challenge what seems to be correct in order to show its own contradiction. An apologist is someone who may quite often play the black pieces and also quite often can play white. But it should all be done with respect for the other where respect is not necessary, especially when the other side is hostile and aggressive.

[thesometimesaint]

http://mormonstories.org/brad-kramer-on-faith-paradigms-and-letting-go-of-eden/

 

Listening to this podcast with Brad Kramer and John Dehlin.  They discuss those that are leaving.  One thing Brad compares those on the fringe with is, a relationship with the church is much like their relationship with their parents.  It's time to let members grow up, not treat them like 5 yr. olds.  Also, that the church is like their parents in the way that they can't just up and leave so easily, just as they couldn't up and leave the their parent forever. 

 

Another thing he mentions is accommodating the doubter.  Understanding that the member/child will come to be aware of things not told to them, for instance say their parents didn't tell them something in the past to protect them.  Just as the church has done. 

 

So he'd like the church to make room for those on the fringe.  But believes that the church needs more faithful in the church, just room for some that aren't as much.

 

So much more was said on the podcasts than these, my attention was led elsewhere as I was listening, so I might have to re-listen.   

 

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.