Reaching out to our Youth in Post-Policy Mormonism

[Danzo]

1 minute ago, consiglieri said:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865646414/LDS-Church-leaders-mourn-reported-deaths-in-Mormon-LGBT-community.html

I cannot believe the hypocrisy!

I don't follow. This is "detestable"?

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

You've misrepresented Downing's article while simultaneously calling for a conversation that is done in "full good faith and understanding".  Looks like there is work to be done on all sides of this issue. 

She is telling people to "stop arguing." She is blaming everyone and anyone--no matter how connected or unconnected to the victims--for the suicides if they do not fit the criteria she lays out.

Is that reasonable? Is that helpful?

Downing is an emotional arguer and this is a prime example. Balance is needed.

 

 

[smac97]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

Posting an essay is not "uncritically accepting dubious claims"

The essay appears to be almost entirely predicated on "dubious claims."  And I mean really "dubious."  And not only "dubious," but Machiavellian.  Assuming the cited statistic is false or greatly exaggerated (and really, that is presently the most appropriate analysis given the Trib's evidence and the Dragons' lack thereof), what sort of sick, twisted mind hates the LDS Church so much that they would fabricate false claims about teen suicide and then use those claims as a rhetorical weapon against the Church and its members?

Further, at present you appear to be accepting the validity of the statistic cited as the basis of the article in the OP.  And you continue to accept it despite A) the total absence of any "evidence" or corroboration, and B) the Trib article presenting information which strongly indicates that the statistic is either fabricated or wildly exaggerated.  So yes, "uncritically accepting dubious claims" appears to be an apt description of what is going on.

Quote

and discussing the essay is not beating the church with a stick.  

Bull.  The article is a thinly-veiled attack on the Church, its members and its leaders.  And there have been accusations in this very thread attacking Latter-day Saints and accusing them of not caring about teenagers murdering themselves.

If we were gay Mormons, you would be leaping to our defense against the calumnies spewn at us by the likes of Daniel on this thread.  Alas, we're observant Mormons, and thus not entitled to the same basic considerations of decency, respect and kindness you and yours purport to encourage toward gay folks.

Quote

Please consider that someone expressing a view that may contradict your own does not mean you've been attacked. 

We have been publicly accused of not caring about teenagers murdering themselves.  Our teenagers, no less.  

Yes, we've been attacked.  And so that's why I am so grateful to see you call for equal measures of civility and kindness in communication by your compatriots when they interact with observant Latter-day Saints who "express a view that may contradict" yours.

Oh, wait.  You've done nothing of the sort.  You've remained silent while your compatriots have publicly slandered us in the most vile terms.  Worse, you have joined in those vile slanders.  

So you'll forgive me if I don't take you and your calls for civility and kindness seriously.

Quote

Is it too wishful of me to hope that you actually read the LGBT ally link before responding?

Is it too wishful of me to hope that people calling for others to abstain from spewing hatred, and instead to express kindness and civility toward gay Latter-day Saints might, you know, actually take their own advice when interacting with Latter-day Saints of all stripes?

Yes, I think it is.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 29, 2016 by smac97

[Johnnie Cake]

3 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

Yeah it's downright amazing to see people use deaths of others to hate on the church. You would think they would have compassion not to weaponize their tragedy to attack innocents.

 

Yeah I agree...because the church should always come before the pain of individuals and families....stop directing your hate speech at the church people...their anti gay policies had nothing to do with these suicides...plus It's been repeated dozen's of times that the new policy was given by revelation to protect these children not hurt them...so there. Geezzz

[HappyJackWagon]

16 hours ago, Danzo said:

 

I don't quite understand you.

are you opposed to data sharing?

Dragon momma's say they are collecting the data, why are they not sharing?  

If they have made the determination that 34 people have killed themselves over the policy, they must already have this information.  

They say the the data is saying that we need to change, why don't they share the data so we can learn what they did?

Why is it more important to tell us we are wrong than giving us the tools to do better?

Why are you opposed to this?  What do you have to fear from the data.

 

You may want to do a little reading on this topic.

There are risks to the endangered population when specifics like this are shared. I am also suggesting that it would be inappropriate to share when the families request privacy. Those are 2 reasons I'm opposed to sharing detailed info about suicides.

http://www.lgbtmap.org/talking-about-suicide-and-lgbt-populations

Edited January 29, 2016 by HappyJackWagon

[smac97]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

Its certainly fair to say suicides are difficult.  It's very hard to understand the cause of them, often, particularly when the victims are people we know and love.  I dont' know how we solve the problem.  Medicating people to the point we often do to keep them from suicide is a band-aid approach which carries with it something quite unfortunate--some might say as unfortunate as suicide.  That suicide might be linked to altitude is something to build off of, I guess.  But man, this is hard.  If the 34 or 32 number is at all accurate and if in comparison to the past it's a significant increase, it is only wise to consider the factors.  To shut down such consideration because of loyalty to a faith is unfortunate and could really hold us as a Church and people back. 

 

Much of the response in this thread is unfortunate.  It doesn't feel like there's much room for discussion on this topic--which I grant is a difficult topic.

Yes, well.  When enemies of our faith publicly accuse us of not caring about our own teenagers murdering themselves, when critics present facially suspect (and, given the Trib's data, apparently falsified) statistics about teen suicides and then use them as a rhetorical weapon against the LDS Church, and when all of these things are being said and done by people who, apparently oblivious to the screaming hypocrisy of their position, simultaneously call for for kindness and decency when interacting with others, perhaps you can understand how good faith discussion is going to be difficult.

Thanks,

-Smac

[bluebell]

This is from this SLC tribune article-

"She tallied another six in other states — though none of the reported deaths could be specifically tied to the policy.

Montgomery's statistics were shared at a recent meeting in Los Angeles of Affirmation, a support group for gay Mormons.

"The number of suicides reported to Wendy Montgomery is shocking," says John Gustav-Wrathall, Affirmation's newly installed president. "I've never seen anything like it in the history of my involvement with the organization."

Trouble is, the number far exceeds the suicide figures collected by the Utah Department of Health.

Preliminary figures for November and December show 10 suicides in the Beehive State for people ages 14 to 20, with two more cases "undetermined."

"We monitor the numbers [of youth suicides] very closely. We review them every month," says Teresa Brechlin, who works in the department's violence- and injury-prevention program. "If we had seen such a huge spike, we would have been investigating it."

Had there been any mention of the LDS Church's policy on gays, her department "would have noted that," Brechlin adds."

[smac97]

19 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You may want to do a little reading on this topic.

There are risks to the endangered population when specifics like this are shared. I am also suggesting that it would be inappropriate to share when the families request privacy. Those are 2 reasons I'm opposed to sharing detailed info about suicides.

So . . . what do we do?  Just take at face value dubious statistics?  Particularly statistics that pertain to a hugely important issue?  Statistics presented by a partisan hostile to the LDS Church?  Statistics being used as a weapon against the LDS Church (at this point, that appears to be their purpose)?

At present I am looking at these statistics in the same way I am looking at false claims of rape or racial intimidation.  That is, I acknowledge that rape is a real and horrific thing.  But this does not justify people from fabricating rape claims for ulterior reasons ("morning after regret," revenge, seeking pity/attention, politicking or rhetorical advantage, etc.), which is also a real thing.  Same thing with fake claims of racial animus.  Gaslighting.  False flag operations.  Call them what you like.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 29, 2016 by smac97

[smac97]

20 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I don't follow. This is "detestable"?

Danzo, you are feeding a troll.  Don't take his flamebaiting antics at face value.

Thanks,

-Smac

[HappyJackWagon]

7 minutes ago, smac97 said:

So . . . what do we do?  Just take at face value dubious statistics?  Particularly statistics that pertain to a hugely important issue?  Statistics presented by a partisan hostile to the LDS Church?  Statistics being used as a weapon against the LDS Church (at this point, that appears to be their purpose)?

At present I am looking at these statistics in the same way I am looking at false claims of rape or racial intimidation.  That is, I acknowledge that rape is a real and horrific thing.  But this does not justify people from fabricating rape claims, which is also a real thing.  Same thing with fake claims of racial animus.  Gaslighting.  False flag operations.  Call them what you like.

Thanks,

-Smac

And your default is to assume these statistics are fabricated? That's fine.

I think that a problem has been identified and good research needs to be done. I was responding to the ridiculous claim by DANZO that we would know all of these personal details about the suicides from sources like obituaries and coroner reports.I was trying to illustrate that the type of private, particular information he was asking for is going to be very difficult to get. But just because particulars are in short supply and very challenging to verify we shouldn't dismiss the problem.

[smac97]

6 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

And your default is to assume these statistics are fabricated? That's fine.

Golly, it sure would be nice to have a good faith discussion with people like you.

No, it's not my default.  Have you read the Trib article?  Have you investigated the source of the statistic in question?  If not, then you are speaking out of ignorance.  If you have, then you have no good faith basis for suggesting that I am proceeding on a "default" assumption?

So which is it: ignorance or bad faith?  

Quote

I think that a problem has been identified and good research needs to be done. 

Indeed.  "Good research" instead of untested, untestable, and apparently fabricated statistics.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 29, 2016 by smac97

[Mystery Meat]

37 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The essay appears to be almost entirely predicated on "dubious claims."  And I mean really "dubious."  And not only "dubious," but Machiavellian.  Assuming the cited statistic is false or greatly exaggerated (and really, that is presently the most appropriate analysis given the Trib's evidence and the Dragons' lack thereof), what sort of sick, twisted mind hates the LDS Church so much that they would fabricate false claims about teen suicide and then use those claims as a rhetorical weapon against the Church and its members?

Bull.  The article is a thinly-veiled attack on the Church, its members and its leaders.  And there have been accusations in this very thread attacking Latter-day Saints and accusing them of not caring about teenagers murdering themselves.

If we were gay Mormons, you would be leaping to our defense against the calumnies spewn at us by the likes of Daniel on this thread.  Alas, we're observant Mormons, and thus not entitled to the same basic considerations of decency, respect and kindness you and yours purport to encourage toward gay folks.

We have been publicly accused of not caring about teenagers murdering themselves.  Our teenagers, no less.  

Yes, we've been attacked.  And so that's why I am so grateful to see you call for equal measures of civility and kindness in communication by your compatriots when they interact with observant Latter-day Saints who "express a view that may contradict" yours.

Oh, wait.  You've done nothing of the sort.  You've remained silent while your compatriots have publicly slandered us in the most vile terms.  Worse, you have joined in those vile slanders.  

So you'll forgive me if I don't take you and your calls for civility and kindness seriously.

Is it too wishful of me to hope that people calling for abstaining from spewing hatred, and instead to express kindness and civility toward gay Latter-day Saints might, you know, actually take their own advice when interacting with Latter-day Saints of all stripes?

Yes, I think it is.

Thanks,

-Smac

Checkmate.

[RevTestament]

22 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

Here is what I reject - the use of a child's death to further a political agenda; the use of a child's suicide to make accusations.  For those that have the gall to point a finger of accusation over the grave of any suicide is offensive.  I detest this type of action and I reject it completely.

You, as in the context of all people, don't have a clue of the full range of emotions that are involved in the choice of someone who commits suicide.  Attempting to place blame at the feet of the Church or its leaders is monstrous.  

When did LDS as a group not love their children or preach that we should stop loving children regardless of their choices?  This is a new low and it demonstrates the depths some will go to push an agenda of hate, death, and division.  

Despicable. 

I didn't get that feeling from the article at all. I got a feeling that the author and Rock Pond are trying to let the LDS community know that there has been an apparent marked increase in suicides since the policy was announced:

Quote

Twenty-eight of these suicides occured in Utah, a state that averages 37 youth suicides in a 12 month period. Thirty-four in 84 days is a stunning statistic. It’s horrifying. And gut-wrenching. It is also telling. It tells us we adults are not suc[c]essfully supporting our LGBT youth. 

In fact I get a distinct impression from the author that they are not trying to blame the policy, although statistically a strong inference is there. I believe that the author wants us to know how sensitive the situation is, and that there are kids out there who may be feeling unloved and/or ostracized. Therefore, we should be very careful in choosing our words to them regarding the policy so as not to cause more alienation etc. One of the stated reasons I have been told for the policy is to help the children of LGBT parents. Is this statistic showing a different result? We should remember that kids who have LGBT feelings can grow up to live happy lives in a heterosexual relationship which should be our desire for them for those who believe the scriptures. Therefore, our goal should be to help them in that direction rather than to ostracize....

I hope LDS Christians don't err in the direction of the latter. I want any kids out there reading this who believe they have LGBT feelings to know that  they are not doomed. No one should be acting on their sexual attractions anyway until they are married, which these days is usually into their twenties. I lived a celibate lifestyle until I was married in my thirties. Everyone has a spirit with feelings, and a need for love. Love is much more than just a physical response. Those with mature love don't necessarily have to have a sexual attraction. Once the strong hormones of adolescence pass, this becomes plainer.

However, having said all that, it does appear that Dragon Mama may not have been responsible in her reporting of statistics...

Bluebell says: 

Trouble is, the number far exceeds the suicide figures collected by the Utah Department of Health.

Preliminary figures for November and December show 10 suicides in the Beehive State for people ages 14 to 20, with two more cases "undetermined."

"We monitor the numbers [of youth suicides] very closely. We review them every month," says Teresa Brechlin, who works in the department's violence- and injury-prevention program. "If we had seen such a huge spike, we would have been investigating it."

Had there been any mention of the LDS Church's policy on gays, her department "would have noted that," Brechlin adds."

So before everyone gets up in arms on this issue, we should hold Dragon Mama responsible for accurate reporting of the true number of suicides rather than just rattling off what she "has been told" and making a fuss over it. If she doesn't have an accurate number, it is possible the article is a thinly veiled attack. 

Edited January 29, 2016 by RevTestament

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

We have discussed the essay and found that the thesis is based evidence that is not credible.  

When you post an essay you should expect it to be critically analyzed.

I do expect it to be critically analyzed and discussed.  Of course.  

And while the evidence cannot be substantiated, for reasons that have been discussed, not everyone here agrees with the conclusion that it is not credible. 

[rockpond]

49 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The essay appears to be almost entirely predicated on "dubious claims."  And I mean really "dubious."  And not only "dubious," but Machiavellian.  Assuming the cited statistic is false or greatly exaggerated (and really, that is presently the most appropriate analysis given the Trib's evidence and the Dragons' lack thereof), what sort of sick, twisted mind hates the LDS Church so much that they would fabricate false claims about teen suicide and then use those claims as a rhetorical weapon against the Church and its members?

Further, at present you appear to be accepting the validity of the statistic cited as the basis of the article in the OP.  And you continue to accept it despite A) the total absence of any "evidence" or corroboration, and B) the Trib article presenting information which strongly indicates that the statistic is either fabricated or wildly exaggerated.  So yes, "uncritically accepting dubious claims" appears to be an apt description of what is going on.

Bull.  The article is a thinly-veiled attack on the Church, its members and its leaders.  And there have been accusations in this very thread attacking Latter-day Saints and accusing them of not caring about teenagers murdering themselves.

If we were gay Mormons, you would be leaping to our defense against the calumnies spewn at us by the likes of Daniel on this thread.  Alas, we're observant Mormons, and thus not entitled to the same basic considerations of decency, respect and kindness you and yours purport to encourage toward gay folks.

We have been publicly accused of not caring about teenagers murdering themselves.  Our teenagers, no less.  

Yes, we've been attacked.  And so that's why I am so grateful to see you call for equal measures of civility and kindness in communication by your compatriots when they interact with observant Latter-day Saints who "express a view that may contradict" yours.

Oh, wait.  You've done nothing of the sort.  You've remained silent while your compatriots have publicly slandered us in the most vile terms.  Worse, you have joined in those vile slanders.  

So you'll forgive me if I don't take you and your calls for civility and kindness seriously.

Is it too wishful of me to hope that people calling for others to abstain from spewing hatred, and instead to express kindness and civility toward gay Latter-day Saints might, you know, actually take their own advice when interacting with Latter-day Saints of all stripes?

Yes, I think it is.

Thanks,

-Smac

You've read far too much into that essay that wasn't there.  Your emotional response here leads me to believe that you went into that essay with some personal biases that colored your reading of it.  I didn't intend to offend anyone by posting and sharing the essay - I'm sorry if it did.  I saw it as an important call and plea for some suffering fellow saints.  

[Storm Rider]

18 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

11 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I didn't get that feeling from the article at all. I got a feeling that the author and Rock Pond are trying to let the LDS community know that there has been an apparent marked increase in suicides since the policy was announced:

In fact I get a distinct impression from the author that they are not trying to blame the policy, although statistically a strong inference is there. I believe that the author wants us to know how sensitive the situation is, and that there are kids out there who may be feeling unloved and/or ostracized. Therefore, we should be very careful in choosing our words to them regarding the policy so as not to cause more alienation etc. One of the stated reasons I have been told for the policy is to help the children of LGBT parents. Is this statistic showing a different result? We should remember that kids who have LGBT feelings can grow up to live happy lives in a heterosexual relationship which should be our desire for them for those who believe the scriptures. Therefore, our goal should be to help them in that direction rather than to ostracize....

I hope LDS Christians don't err in the direction of the latter. I want any kids out there reading this who believe they have LGBT feelings to know that  they are not doomed. No one should be acting on their sexual attractions anyway until they are married, which these days is usually into their twenties. I lived a celibate lifestyle until I was married in my thirties. Everyone has a spirit with feelings, and a need for love. Love is much more than just a physical response. Those with mature love don't necessarily have to have a sexual attraction. Once the strong hormones of adolescence pass, this becomes plainer.

Hello Rev, that is the issue - there are not statistics that support the premise.  Montgomery appears to have simply created this statistic to support her agenda.  Why would someone lie or, at best, grossly exaggerate this statistic of teen suicide?  What reasons can you think of for doing such a thing?

Suicide is never, ever, a single issue.  It is multifaceted and complex.  Those that want to use the grave of a young person as an emotional weapon solely for the purpose of pushing an agenda is offensive.  

Drawing attention to the issue of teen suicide is worthy of discussion and outreach.  If someone wants to encourage others to reach out and become actively involved in serving youths then that is great.  Using the topic of teen suicide to push an agenda is beyond despicable.

 

[rockpond]

56 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

She is telling people to "stop arguing." She is blaming everyone and anyone--no matter how connected or unconnected to the victims--for the suicides if they do not fit the criteria she lays out.

Is that reasonable? Is that helpful?

Downing is an emotional arguer and this is a prime example. Balance is needed.

 

 

It's a bad thing to ask people to stop arguing?

As members of the church, we are all connected... That was explained at the Waters of Mormon. 

[stemelbow]

1 hour ago, consiglieri said:

Well, let's see.

Kids not killing themselves versus kids killing themselves.

Which do you think is causing the most harm?

I'm not so quick to pin any deaths on the Church nor the policy as yet, but it's a scary/sad thought. 

[Jeanne]

13 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

Daniel,

You are painting a picture to meet your perspective and not the reality.  There remains a high concern about those who choose suicide regardless of the reason. What is so offensive is to use teen suicide to further a political agenda.  That is what is abhorrent to me.  

Several of us have stated clearly the opinion similar to, " Concern for youth and suicide is not a gender issue; it is not a race issue; it is a personal, individual issue.  LDS parents, members, leaders have, as a group, never stopped being concerned about the issue."  

All you have done is pander to the agenda and smugly, self-righteously agree with Rock.  

When you have a member that has committed suicide then you come and talk to me about this stupid agenda being bandied about.  IF, that is a big, giant if, the real intent is to inspire members to care more deeply about teen suicide and to become more involved there is a totally different approach to inspiring others.  What this unfortunate blog entry has done is despicable and I again state, I reject it in total for what it is; a piece of propaganda to further a specific agenda.  

Stormerider, respecting your post but his perspective is HIS reality.

[smac97]

11 minutes ago, rockpond said:

You've read far too much into that essay that wasn't there.  

I disagree.  I think the essay is problematic.  And there are several others in this thread who have read it and come to similar conclusions.

Quote

Your emotional response here leads me to believe that you went into that essay with some personal biases that colored your reading of it.  

My response is more clinical than emotional.  But to some extent, you are correct.  I resent being publicly accused of not caring about LDS teens murdering themselves.  I resent enemies of my faith fabricating data about teen suicides so that they can use those data as a rhetorical weapon against my faith.  I resent hypocrites spewing hateful rhetoric at me and mine while simultaneously calling for kindness and decency.  I resent anyone exploiting the tragedy of suicide for rhetorical advantage.

Yes, I resent these things.  Color me fickle.

Quote

I didn't intend to offend anyone by posting and sharing the essay - I'm sorry if it did.  I saw it as an important call and plea for some suffering fellow saints.  

Meanwhile, you and your compatriots publicly accuse me and mine of not caring about (or worse, causing) teen suicides.  It frankly amazes me how you can be oblivious to how incredibly offensive and mean-spirited and false that claim is.  And that's giving you the benefit of the doubt (that you are "oblivious" rather than . . . ).

The community of the Saints cares deeply about our teenagers and their welfare.  It is the most hateful, vile of falsehoods to suggest otherwise.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 29, 2016 by smac97

[Jeanne]

13 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

When it comes to suicide can we all just come to a mutual conclusion that it's Satan at fault and he's to blame?

That is too easy.,we are all responsible to a point.  Our connection and communication with our fellowman are important.

[Mystery Meat]

2 hours ago, rockpond said:

You've misrepresented Downing's article while simultaneously calling for a conversation that is done in "full good faith and understanding".  Looks like there is work to be done on all sides of this issue. 

Can you at the very LEAST understand that we have a good faith reason to doubt her article? Calling for believing LDS to stop advocating for the principals we believe in (all while remaining silent about the chaos that opponents of the policy caused in the wake of its announcement) was bad enough. Even if you think thats not what she did,her using a number, 28 (?), for suicides in Utah by gay, LDS teens from November til now, when the state government body that actually tracks those numbers says there was 10, maybe 12, total (not just LGBT, but total), in the same time frame, would cause her to lose all credibility and expose another agenda. If you can't even see that, then you have your head in the sand and are being willfully blind. 

Based on the official data her report is categorically false and maybe an outright lie.

The most disappointing thing, is that she did not need exaggerate or attack anyone to start/further the conversation. She could have cited to ONE such suicide (without even referencing the Church's revealed policy) and the conversation would have been much healthier. That is on her, because we now need to defend truth before we can even have the conversation.

[bluebell]

Just now, rockpond said:

It's a bad thing to ask people to stop arguing?

 

I don't think it's bad.  Sometimes those kinds of pleas are needed.  

But it's very easy for those kinds of pleas to come across as 'stop disagreeing with me.  Let me say what i want to say and you be quiet because what i'm saying is helpful and what you are saying isn't.'  

Part of asking people to stop arguing (especially if you do so while you are explaining why you are right and those who don't agree with you are wrong) is to allow both sides a chance to say what they feel needs to be said and then, after each side has gotten everything out, to have everyone stop arguing their side at the same time.  

That means  you (general 'you') don't publish an article explaining your side and calling for everyone to stop arguing and then act like those who see things differently are doing something bad when they want the same chance to express themselves as you had.

It's a bad thing argue your side, and then, when you are done but before anyone else has spoken, ask people to stop arguing.

[stemelbow]

49 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes, well.  When enemies of our faith publicly accuse us of not caring about our own teenagers murdering themselves, when critics present facially suspect (and, given the Trib's data, apparently falsified) statistics about teen suicides and then use them as a rhetorical weapon against the LDS Church,

it's also possible this is not used as a rhetorical weapon against the Church by Rockpond, Daniel, myself or any others.  But, everyone should be alarmed if the number of suicides since the policy as reported by Momma Dragons is accurate.  That would be awful.  People shouldn't deny that.  It's worth looking into more than it is worth building a defense against any perceived enemies (as for me, I don't regard any posters here as an enemy).

 

49 minutes ago, smac97 said:

 

 

and when all of these things are being said and done by people who, apparently oblivious to the screaming hypocrisy of their position, simultaneously call for for kindness and decency when interacting with others, perhaps you can understand how good faith discussion is going to be difficult.

Thanks,

-Smac

Wow.  That all seems terribly unfair. 

[Storm Rider]

1 minute ago, Jeanne said:

Stormerider, respecting your post but his perspective is HIS reality.

I understand the argument that reality is only found in everyone's mind; that reality is relative.  I tend to reject the premise for numerous reasons.  The issue here is that Rock and Daniel were both patting themselves on the back for being so enlightened and commiserating about the stupid Mormons that just will never see the issue their way.   The specific problem is that Daniel ignored everything that conflicted with his perception of reality - he ignored reality in favor of his own perspective.  That is the problem with such a philosophy - perspective becomes absolute rather than the reality that exists outside of the subjective needs of the individual.