Is this a Mormon board anymore?

[MormonVideoGame]

Quote

Previous research has devoted significant attention to understanding the link between health and personal religious beliefs and practices, typically finding that more religious people tend to have better health. However, almost no attention has been given to how switching religious groups or leaving religion altogether is related to self-reported health. Due to selection and causation mechanisms, switching from high-cost groups that are theologically and culturally exclusive could be associated with poor health more than switching from other religious groups. Using data from the 1972 through 2006 General Social Surveys, we examine the relationship between health and religious switching as moderated by the religious tradition of origin. We find that people who are raised and stay in high-cost sectarian groups, such as the Latter-day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses, have better self-reported health than those raised and staying in other religious traditions. However, people who leave such groups are more likely to report worse health than those who leave other groups.

Scheitle, Christopher P., and Amy Adamczyk. "High-cost religion, religious switching, and health." Journal of health and social behavior 51.3 (2010): 325-342.

No wonder why some online ex-mormons talk about the church all the time, the pain is real and they need therapy. 

Edited March 24, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[Bernard Gui]

21 hours ago, juliann said:

Is anyone else as tired of the relentless negativity as I am?  We are obviously losing our Mormon posters and I can only surmise it has stopped being fun after the tenth "look what the awful Church did!" thread a day. I appreciate the more neutral tone as the church is slowly dragged down, and even the perspectives. But when it is to the point we have excited threads about what hasn't even happened yet, it is overwhelming the Board, in my opinion, and quickly turning it into Mormon Discussions-lite. 

 

I have been on this board and its older version ZLMB for decades. There was always an interesting mixture of participants from bitter ex-Mormons to highly committed members, scholars from without and within the Church, rabid Evangelicals to sincere non-members wanting to get information, etc.

I have noticed a few downward trends...hardly any doctrinal discussions with members of other religions, very few heavy-hitting non-LDS or LDS scholars participating, an almost complete shift from faithful members defending the Church against outside critics to defending it from their own disaffected brothers and sisters, fewer discussions about doctrine and more about the supposed evil things the Church has done or is doing, more criticism of Church leaders by members, and good discussions getting hijacked and turned into negative debates between active and inactive or former members.

I commend the moderators for keeping things sane. I kinda miss some of the really good, spirited, serious, informative discussions of yore. 

From my POV, Elder Maxwell's perceptive prophecy that the time will come when members will have to choose whether they will stand with the First Presidency or not is being fulfilled before our eyes in this microcosm of Mormondom. 

But as I say, I fear no kimchee.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

7 hours ago, Calm said:

And above all else no matter what your position, if you have said almost the same thing three times in a thread, don't post another version (and if needed, only post it once in another thread...share a link to previous posts if you think some might benefit).  Just say 'I have made my point and unless I see a reason for saying something new, I see no reason to post again in this thread'.  Trust me, even if the other poster is refusing to concede, those of us reading your posts will get it by the third time and if not, ten more times isn't going to help, but only annoy.  Sure, ask for feedback if you think something isn't going through if you want to be sure before shutting up, but please know that sooner is better than later.

Guilty as charged. It's that Polish stubbornness, at least that's what my mom called it. Will do better.

 

Edited March 24, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[why me]

19 hours ago, juliann said:

Is anyone else as tired of the relentless negativity as I am?  We are obviously losing our Mormon posters and I can only surmise it has stopped being fun after the tenth "look what the awful Church did!" thread a day. I appreciate the more neutral tone as the church is slowly dragged down, and even the perspectives. But when it is to the point we have excited threads about what hasn't even happened yet, it is overwhelming the Board, in my opinion, and quickly turning it into Mormon Discussions-lite. 

 

A couple of years, I also made this point that the board favored exmormons and postmormons. Then, it was not a board where defenders were basically welcomed, especially if they disagreed strongely with the negative crowd. The board has changed. Maybe it is a sign  of the times. I miss the old days when the board was an apologetic board where strong members were in debate with the critics and as such, helped many people like myself at that time.

[why me]

19 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Perhaps so, but it is still an open discussions board with good rules, and the LDS Church is still quite lively -- and will survive the relentless negativity, just as it has survived so well for almost 200 years.  We can still learn a lot from one another, even though some participants come here without any intention of learning anything -- some only want to vent, which is also a legitimate purpose.

Maybe the question should be: do active members who are struggling find comfort here and do they have their questions answered? And as Juliann stated where have all the active members gone? Of course, time moves on as do the issues. Did the board change its character with the assault on the Maxwell Institute? I have seen strong members suddently change and become critics when posting on this board. Are more active members finding comfort here?

 

Edited March 24, 2017 by why me

[why me]

18 hours ago, Ahab said:

A Mormon board?  I have never seen it that way, although many members of the board are "Mormon".  But many are not, too, and this board has always been open to all who want to join in.

I see it as a board where we, generally, discuss Mormons and things about Mormon culture. And since some members of the board are not Mormon, and usually do not accept "Mormonism" or things that are associated with it, our discussions usually include both positive and negative comments.

If this was a "Mormon" board and every member of the board was a Mormon, I imagine our discussions would be a lot different than they usually are, with a lot less of the negative comments.

It has always been a mormon board, at least back in the day. I think that her point was: has it ceased to be a mormon board? It began as an apologetic lds board.

[why me]

9 hours ago, 3DOP said:

It's pretty boring here most of the time watching Mormons running down their church for some political reason and moving towards atheism for what appears to me to be some related reason. I am disinterested in the Mormons attacking themselves, making themselves further from what I believe than ever. I liked Mormons better when they attacked what I believe, called my church apostate, believed in Joseph Smith, and accepted his private life.

Those were the good ol days. I think that one can get the drift  with who finds comfort from the board: the active member with questions, the one who loves their church or to the struggling member who finds comfort and support in their struggling positions. I think that the OP brings up a good point. She is obviously feeling a little dismayed.

[JulieM]

8 minutes ago, why me said:

Maybe the question should be: do active members who are struggling find comfort here and do they have their questions answered? 

This describes me, and yes, I do find comfort and answers here from those who aren't currently struggling.  Most are very willing to help.  However, I've learned some things that have even caused me to have more questions and issues.  

I do feel anyone can come here and ask almost any question and many will help them find good answers.  

I think there's a good balance of active members vs. struggling or inactives.

[Darren10]

10 hours ago, Calm said:

You heathen!

LOL! He's of the worst kinda.

 

We luv ya' 3DOP!!!

[Darren10]

5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I have been on this board and its older version ZLMB for decades. There was always an interesting mixture of participants from bitter ex-Mormons to highly committed members, scholars from without and within the Church, rabid Evangelicals to sincere non-members wanting to get information, etc.

I have noticed a few downward trends...hardly any doctrinal discussions with members of other religions, very few heavy-hitting non-LDS or LDS scholars participating, an almost complete shift from faithful members defending the Church against outside critics to defending it from their own disaffected brothers and sisters, fewer discussions about doctrine and more about the supposed evil things the Church has done or is doing, more criticism of Church leaders by members, and good discussions getting hijacked and turned into negative debates between active and inactive or former members.

I commend the moderators for keeping things sane. I kinda miss some of the really good, spirited, serious, informative discussions of yore. 

From my POV, Elder Maxwell's perceptive prophecy that the time will come when members will have to choose whether they will stand with the First Presidency or not is being fulfilled before our eyes in this microcosm of Mormondom. 

But as I say, I fear no kimchee.

"Kimchee" reminded me of "kimchee" a Korean coworker once told me about. If it's gross then that's a very good use of it in your concluding statement sir.

[BlueDreams]

I've always come here in spurts. If I'm on vacation I barely touch this site. And sometimes I just meander away or find nothing that really interests me. Lately it's been a bit the latter since I peak in here at least daily. Sometimes on specific hot-topic threads it can read like an echo chamber where five or so people will have basically the same opinion. The opinion becomes re enforced by the amount of yea saying. My opinion usually varies from it, but I weigh whether it's worth it. On a good day I think out my posts and self reflect before answering. That turns into being slow for a number of topics. And on top of that I have a family that's basically an echo chamber. Sure some of us have different beliefs, but it takes extra work to push ones own thoughts in a meaningful way when that happens. So I don't unless it looks like it would be somewhat productive. 

It can also get a little tiring to watch people do the same thing that they dislike so much about active believers just in reverse...and have little awareness that they're doing such. 

I know someone mentioned this is reflective of what they see happening for them in their day. But it's just not for me. Some of this has little baring on what I see in my day to day. Even among the non-members or struggling mormons I talk to. Which is the other concern. I could interact with an echo chamber and go in continual circles  and try to be a more positive voice in a critical room or I could go outside and live. Weeds are sprouting in my garden and need attending, my clients struggle to find health and sometimes come with spiritual concerns and pains that also need help navigating, my ward is young and idealistic and a place to serve as well as give voice in, my roommate is struggling with getting active, politically things are crazy and I like to be informed, oh and it would be nice to find a companion before I sprout my next white hair . etc. Life wins out more often than not. 

So that's where one active happy Mormon is at. I do hope there can be a little more balance in the room. But I'm probably not the best on a good day to help. Life is just so distractingly beautiful. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited March 24, 2017 by BlueDreams

[Johnnie Cake]

10 hours ago, JulieM said:

I hope you're not leaving this board!  I may not always agree with you, but you definitely start some of the most interesting and thought provoking discussions on this forum.  Please stick around.

That's awful kind of you to say...I'm not leaving just going to take a break...but not until next week

[probablyHagoth7]

2 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

...So that's where one active happy Mormon is at....Life is just so distractingly beautiful. 

It is.

And I gotta ask. Under the mountain?

A reference to an Irish/Elven retreat?

 

A WV reference? (If so, I lived there once.)

 

Or some dwarven stronghold?

Edited March 24, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[JLHPROF]

17 hours ago, rongo said:

While funny (and insightful), I think Orson Scott Card's levels of Mormons in "Saintspeak: The Mormon Dictionary" are very applicable to discussion here. I like how he highlights the good in all the different shades (except for Fundamentalist), and pokes fun at some things that should be poked fun at:

Quote

Fundamentalist 1. In the world, someone who believes that the words of dead prophets, as recorded in the Bible, are all the word of God mankind will ever need. Some Mormons occasionally get confused and think we have something in common with Christian Fundamentalists. 2. In Saintspeak, someone who believes that the words of dead prophets, as recorded in the Journal of Discourses, are all the word of God the Church will ever need, and any modern prophet who contradicts even the wildest speculation of a long-dead apostle is obviously leading the Church to hell. Mormon Fundamentalists tend to believe in polygamy, the Adam-God theory, blood atonement, and string-tied garments. The current prophet is telling us we ain't heard nothin' yet while Fundamentalists think they've already heard it all.

 

HEY!  I resemble that remark!  (Well, a  little bit anyway.)

Edited March 24, 2017 by JLHPROF

[rongo]

6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

HEY!  I resemble that remark!  (Well, a  little bit anyway.)

I also think that what past prophets have said is often too cavalierly dismissed for spin reasons. Yes, what current prophets say is most important to us, but "most current" doesn't always mean "most correct." Sometimes, past prophets were more correct, in my view.

[BlueDreams]

46 minutes ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

It is.

And I gotta ask. Under the mountain?

A reference to an Irish/Elven retreat?

 

A WV reference? (If so, I lived there once.)

 

Or some dwarven stronghold?

Haha, no. I live in Utah

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

I also think that what past prophets have said is often too cavalierly dismissed for spin reasons. Yes, what current prophets say is most important to us, but "most current" doesn't always mean "most correct." Sometimes, past prophets were more correct, in my view.

Current prophets are more important because they give us guidance and direction and receive revelation specifically suited to our situation and circumstances.  That doesn't make them more correct on doctrine, especially being further removed from the revelations than those that received them.

It is the idea that they can change doctrine that was based on a documented prior revelation, vision, or visitation that I disagree with.  Joseph taught that revelation adapted to our circumstances is correct, but that any revelation that contradicted God's previous revelatory teachings can be dismissed as false.
 

Edited March 24, 2017 by JLHPROF

[Storm Rider]

11 hours ago, JulieM said:

Who do you consider here to be anti-Mormons?  I think there are posters on this board that are from every stage of activity (or inactivity) which results in all sides represented in a discussion.  That's what makes a discussion interesting and I think most are very civil to others here and are respectful even when they disagree.

I don't think it's very productive labeling people or calling others names though (i.e. "twisted"). And doesn't everyone believe they have the best opinion? 

I think of a critic as an individual who is seeking the truth.  The operative term is seeking, which requires an openess to finding the truth.  An anti-Mormon, in my perspective, is one that is simply consistently negative and sees everything the Church is or stands for, in a negative light.  They jumpt to the most negative conclusion in all things having to do with announcements and is prepared to accept the most outlandish negative claims about the Church.  For an anti-Mormon there is no searching for the truth of any kind; what has become a priority is to destroy.

It is innappriate to identify precisely whom I think of as an anti-Mormon, but it does not take a rocket scientist to identify the individuals who fit my definition on the board.  

I agree that labels should not be used lightly, but labels exist to be used.  We should each feel comfortable with labels that fit.  I am a LDS,  a poor example of one, but a LDS none-the-less.  I am also a critic.  These are labels.  The term anti-Mormon carries a lot of baggage and is often used inappropriately; however, the term remains valid when used properly.  

[Jeanne]

14 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

If the characterization does not match you then you should not take offense to it.  If it does match you then perhaps you would. 

Some of us take this as how you feel about all of us..it is hard to erase the words you have written. 

[VideoGameJunkie]

I would love more threads discussing doctrine.

[Storm Rider]

4 hours ago, why me said:

Maybe the question should be: do active members who are struggling find comfort here and do they have their questions answered? And as Juliann stated where have all the active members gone? Of course, time moves on as do the issues. Did the board change its character with the assault on the Maxwell Institute? I have seen strong members suddently change and become critics when posting on this board. Are more active members finding comfort here?

 

I seldom identify the site to other LDS regardless of their level of activity.  I have concluded the site is not helpful to the normal LDS that has questions and is seeking answers.  I think of this site as more antagonistic toward the Church, the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the reality of God.  That does not mean that truly great things are found here - it only means that one must search through a ton of garbage to find those pearls.  I regret that it is so hard to find these pearls of wisdom.

Oddly, when I am looking for an uplift or an intellectually thoughtful discussion I often turn to Crisis Magazine.  The articles are often excellent and I enjoy them.  I don't know of an LDS source that closely reflects the same offering.  Though it is a Catholic, I often find wonderful truths there.

[JulieM]

30 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

I think of a critic as an individual who is seeking the truth.  The operative term is seeking, which requires an openess to finding the truth.  An anti-Mormon, in my perspective, is one that is simply consistently negative and sees everything the Church is or stands for, in a negative light.  They jumpt to the most negative conclusion in all things having to do with announcements and is prepared to accept the most outlandish negative claims about the Church.  For an anti-Mormon there is no searching for the truth of any kind; what has become a priority is to destroy.

It is innappriate to identify precisely whom I think of as an anti-Mormon, but it does not take a rocket scientist to identify the individuals who fit my definition on the board.  

I agree that labels should not be used lightly, but labels exist to be used.  We should each feel comfortable with labels that fit.  I am a LDS,  a poor example of one, but a LDS none-the-less.  I am also a critic.  These are labels.  The term anti-Mormon carries a lot of baggage and is often used inappropriately; however, the term remains valid when used properly.  

Thanks for explaining your position and opinion.  I guess I take the term of anti-Mormon to mean someone who's angry, who actively preaches against and tries to cause harm to the church.  I've only seen a few who seem to be trying to do this here, IMO.

I see angry posts and vitriol from both sides at times too.  That's what I think can be avoided along with any personal attacks.  But we all get caught up with emotion at times when discussing religion.

Edited March 24, 2017 by JulieM

[HappyJackWagon]

It's ironic that we have a long thread about whether or not this is a Mormon board anymore, based on what is described as superfluous topics and a lack of in depth doctrinal discussion, that is itself a superfluous topic which fails to engage in a doctrinal discussion.

For those who would like more doctrinal discussions, I'm curious what is preventing you from creating threads on the topics which interest you. I don't understand this criticism. Read the topics you like. Skip the ones you don't. If there is a gap in what you would like to see, fill it.

[Jeanne]

As for labels, I am ex-mormon..but not anti.  It is hard to see this but it is true..this makes it difficult for me not to get emotional or at least frustrated in trying to put across what I feel with what I know..I keep things..I throw things away.  I love talking about history and although I don't know a lot about translations and stuff, I am always interested in proof..on either side.  I learn here..and I still desire to see how women here view different aspects of the gospel.

[probablyHagoth7]

48 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

Haha, no. I live in Utah

Ah, so an Elven stronghold.

Awesome. :0)

Edited March 24, 2017 by probablyHagoth7