Are cynical critics driving away Mormons?

[bluebell]

19 minutes ago, Calm said:

And it adds to the frustration when so often the views are misrepresented as more extreme than they are and then expecting posters to defend the misrepresentations of their beliefs.  And this continues to happen no matter how many corrections are offered.  There is at times little respect for allowing people to explain themselves rather than imposing one's own assumptions on them.

Very true. 

[USU78]

14 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Yes, I have seen the mods shut down a LGBT thread saying there were already several, and I support that. And you are probably right about the hot news topic being an exception. I'm not really complaining although this 12 year old "testimony" issue and its corollaries seems to have just taken over the board for a few days. But like I said, if I don't like that I can start my own threads or just not participate.

It's not just the current issue from the news story. It is a constant stream of threads and inapposite subthreads on the topic.

Hijacking abounds.

This place looks more like a homosexual advocacy board more than a Mormon issues board. And it's largely the same people taking the same positions on the same subtopics over and over ad nauseum.

Then people get frustrated and more provocative. And people get banned and threads shut down, and I'm wondering if some few like it that way.

[Duncan]

I like it fine and dandy here, I like to think I talk to people on here as if I knew them and was talking to them in real life. Some topics I know nothing about or i've said what I think about it and move on to something else

[Rain]

I noticed a few days ago several comments about how criticism was good.  I've been thinking a lot on those comments.

I am one who really likes people to let me know when I am doing things wrong or poorly.  If I ask you what I could do better I really want to know what I could do better.  If I have a big whitehead on my nose please tell me it is there!  I know however that I am very overweight.  You telling me that I am, when I already know it and there is nothing I can do about it immediately does me no good. 

I like to go clothes shopping with my husband.  He trusts that I will never ask "Do I look fat in this?" and put him in a no win situation.  I trust that when I ask "How does this work for me?" he will not tell me I look hideous or bloated etc or be dishonest when he says "fantastic".  Instead he says, "I think something else will look better" or "The way this type of style looks on you right here (points to it)  doesn't work on you."  I like it because he can see those things that are best or bad for me, but he also sees the beautiful in me and wants my heart to really feel good about what I am buying.

So since reading those criticism comments I have been wanting to ask, "If you criticized your spouse like you criticize the church or members of the church would you still be married?" But then I also think this could be asked of members who criticized others who are no longer members or are not traditionally faithful.

 

Edited June 19, 2017 by Rain

[deli_llama]

this is how I figure it:

[Calm]

We all have blinders on or we are neck and neck?

[deli_llama]

2 minutes ago, Rain said:

I have been wanting to ask, "If you criticized your spouse like you criticize the church or members of the church would you still be married?" But then I also think this could be asked of members who criticized others who are no longer members or are not traditionally faithful.

I didn't see your post here before I did mine or I would have included that you get a rep point for that comment alone, and it is worth reading twice. 

[Buckeye]

Fwiw, I haven't posted much for months due to work and really busy church callings. I have noticed a slight uptick in hostility when I peruse the threads, but I haven't left because of it. Just busy. 

[deli_llama]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

We all have blinders on or we are neck and neck?

Or both, or something like that but not that. Maybe nothing like that at all. 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

I noticed a few days ago several comments about how criticism was good.  I've been thinking a lot on those comments.

I am one who really likes people to let me know when I am doing things wrong or poorly.  If I ask you what I could do better I really want to know what I could do better.  If I have a big whitehead on my nose please tell me it is there!  I know however that I am very overweight.  You telling me that I am, when I already know it and there is nothing I can do about it immediately does me no good. 

I like to go clothes shopping with my husband.  He trusts that I will never ask "Do I look fat in this?" and put him in a no win situation.  I trust that when I ask "How does this work for me?" he will not tell me I look hideous or bloated etc or be dishonest when he says "fantastic".  Instead he says, "I think something else will look better" or "The way this type of style looks on you right here (points to it)  doesn't work on you."  I like it because he can see those things that are best or bad for me, but he also sees the beautiful in me and wants my heart to really feel good about what I am buying.

So since reading those criticism comments I have been wanting to ask, "If you criticized your spouse like you criticize the church or members of the church would you still be married?" But then I also think this could be asked of members who criticized others who are no longer members or are not traditionally faithful.

 

Part of my post that never posted was that I have no problem with multiple critical threads. I believe that helps keep me and other members on their toes as to the current "pulse" of society and helps prepare them for concerns and doubts of Church investigators. However a constant stream of it on one subject such as LGBT just gets old. Trying to get critics to criticize productively is just not going to work imho. A lot of critics have left the Church, and just aren't going to be nice about it. They typically take the most cynical view, and I fully expect to continue to see that. However, you are right Church members can take a better road when dealing with inactives or ex-members who come to the board. I generally just try to ask questions, and present my viewpoint. There is no sense in attacking them or being nasty. If they want to get nasty, I would report them. However the only post I have ever reported in my MMDB history was a member who I felt was making an indirect ad hominem. Most critics are fairly respectful and polite. That's one of the reasons I have made MMDB my home at present.

[DonBradley]

Juliann is right to be concerned about this.

She will remember as I do the time when ZLMB was a thriving forum. It was really amazing. But gradually, as the balance of posters and posts shifted more and more to the critical side, it just became an unpleasant place for believers to be. (For the record, I was one of the critics.) More and more believers withdrew, the dynamism of the board waned, and the place ultimately fell apart.

As a "critic," I saw the moderation, which was heavily tilted toward the believers, as largely a nuisance. In retrospect, it was this moderation, which aimed in good measure to make ZLMB a safe place for believers, that had allowed ZLMB to thrive in the first place and enabled it to continue to do so for as long as it did.

Critics need to realize that what they are devoting themselves to is attacking what is the very most important thing in the world to these other people. This kind of constant attack interrupts believers in talking to each other about what matters to them, and it puts believers in a constant defensive mode, making for a generally unpleasant environment.

To use an analogy, suppose you got onto a discussion group and day after day many or most of the people there wanted to attack members of your family, and you were constantly in the position of defending your family members, rather than talking about, or to, those family members in more constructive ways, or talking about other things that interest you.

I'm not saying that nonbelievers should never offer their critiques of LDS beliefs, practices, and the like. I'm saying that would-be critics should recognize that when any forum becomes too inundated with such criticism, religious believers are going to find it a hostile and toxic environment, not pleasant and not worth the time, effort, and emotion that goes into it.

No one wants to invest their time and emotion in experiences that are inimical to them and to what they most highly value.

Believers and critics do not come to a forum like this with equivalent goals. One comes to affirm, defend, explore, and better understand what they love and value; the other, insofar as they come in the role of critic, comes to challenge, attack, refute, and often mock what others love and value. These are not equally valuable or ethical activities, and those who manage the playing field should not pretend that they are. That field should be tilted in favor of protecting an environment where people can affirm and discuss what is most important to them. And critics should exercise some voluntary restraint, recognizing how they would feel if it were their deepest values and most important life meanings--families, political ideals, candidates, moral principles, etc--under attack, and recognizing, too, pragmatically, that creating an environment that believers experience as hostile will simply lead to the exit of more and more believers. Eventually, this would result in critics just talking with each other, and the dynamism and interestingness of the forum would deteriorate. It happened to ZLMB, and it can happen here.

Don

 

[BlueDreams]

2 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Part of my post that never posted was that I have no problem with multiple critical threads. I believe that helps keep me and other members on their toes as to the current "pulse" of society and helps prepare them for concerns and doubts of Church investigators.

I'd agree with this part...but I have to say that some of the discussions here aren't doing that at all, for me. Sometimes I feel like there's chronic Eeyore's running about, where even the most positive or neutral things can come with a surprisingly wet blanket . Where just about everything is a glass half empty. I'm an optimist as a general rule, so it's hard for me to follow that. And likewise certain potshots of criticism can also breakdown meaningful  communication IRL as well. It doesn't necessarily move along dialogue but leads to a partisanship and secluded camps of thought. 

I generally just leave threads alone that feel like they're less based in something concrete and more based on hearsay and sentiment. But I have noticed recently that some of these sorts of threads just become an echo chamber of likeminded people reaffirming their own ideas about this or that vague criticism or feeling or what have you. Sometimes I don't and jump in. Though that's not as common because it takes time to pull at underlying assumptions being taken as fact. After a while I'm not on my toes.  I'm just sitting out, partially paying attention as I shake my head a little, and preferring to garden or paint or hike or actually work on problems and concerns that do have meaning and impact. Sometimes I sit and look at the ward I'm in compared to the church people more critical describe again and again and can't fully correlate the two. Several times it's so different that I wouldnt even know where to bridge and see things that way. Around that time I just sit and shake my head. It feels like peering at the great and spacious and I would just prefer to eat the fruit than focus on every argument about the course to get to the tree and why It may be beneficial to branch out from the tree for ABC. 

That said I do think some of the topics, are still pretty interesting and it's gotten a little better. I think. Even in a good week, I don't post much and read far more than I speak up. That includes some LGBT threads, though I do think that they at times can become too much of a focus and way too polarizing. So I tend to not participate in them even though I've worked with and have tying concerns to the issue. Neither polarized side I agree with and  neither are really willing to listen. Or so it seems to me. 

 

3 hours ago, Rain said:

o since reading those criticism comments I have been wanting to ask, "If you criticized your spouse like you criticize the church or members of the church would you still be married?" But then I also think this could be asked of members who criticized others who are no longer members or are not traditionally faithful.

Amen! I was actually thinking about this the other day as I was thinking about the couples I've seen and particularly the ones that get caught up in everything negative their partner is doing/did. Or at least place more emphasis on the negative side of things. It creates a no-win situation...and even when there are good reasons to maybe feel hurt or critical, the excess doesn't actually help but maintains the problems. Best case scenario If that persists is a chronically poor relationship that cannot repair or grow. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited June 19, 2017 by BlueDreams

[Tacenda]

I hope it's okay if I butt in for a second and mention how hard it is for me to post on boards that all think about the same, as in critics of the church or even strugglers in the church. I guess I need the balance of voices from both sides. 

I like what has been said, and I will do my best to not be that critic. 

[Meerkat]

I'm a new person on MDDB.  There is a lot to love about this place.  The name implies it welcomes discussion of all things Mormon.  I see myself as a "True Believer" in the faith I have embraced.  I enjoy focusing on threads that challenge why I believe the things I do, which drives me into the scriptures, articles, books, threads, etc.  Once I have participated in a good discussion, my mind is set in a good place for the rest of the day.  I guess that is my agenda here-- participating in discussions that strengthen my faith.  

I imagine most people here are invested in a point of view they want to strengthen and enjoy, that may be different from mine. Hence lively and interesting discussions may ensue between competing "True Believers."  The fact that we may not persuade each other is okay in my opinion.  

The other day, I participated in a discussion that wasn't very satisfying.  I hope I was respectful.  (If not, I apologize and intend to be more so in the future.)  Some of the responses felt condescending and intended to create shame and ridicule.  The discussion did not feel civil to me.  In fairness, perhaps my well meaning defense of my beliefs also came across as condescending.  I hope not.  But maybe it happened in the mind of the beholder. My point is that we can have interesting conversations where everyone is edified if we make the small effort to treat everyone with kindness.  What if we assumed they were sincere and used our best evidence to try to persuade, rather than intimidation and strong language.

Regarding the LGBT conversations, I'm glad my topic was shut down.  Some of the comments were turning disrespectful and, in my opinion, unnecessarily gross. Why?  It didn't need to happen that way if we took a moment to craft our comments with a little care.  What I did see in that brief discussion is that, for me, MDDB is not a safe place to participate in an LGBT discussion at this time.  The vitriol on both sides does not help me.  It's not what I'm looking for here. Therefore I won't be participating in those for awhile, if ever.

I do appreciate the many wonderful people I find here and the moving challenges many of us face with faith and optimism. There are many threads that lead to heart warming connections, and better understanding of many issues.  Those are the ones I will be seeking out.

Warm regards,

Meerkat

Edited June 19, 2017 by Meerkat

[Gray]

7 hours ago, DonBradley said:

Believers and critics do not come to a forum like this with equivalent goals. One comes to affirm, defend, explore, and better understand what they love and value; the other, insofar as they come in the role of critic, comes to challenge, attack, refute, and often mock what others love and value. These are not equally valuable or ethical activities, and those who manage the playing field should not pretend that they are. That field should be tilted in favor of protecting an environment where people can affirm and discuss what is most important to them. And critics should exercise some voluntary restraint, recognizing how they would feel if it were their deepest values and most important life meanings--families, political ideals, candidates, moral principles, etc--under attack, and recognizing, too, pragmatically, that creating an environment that believers experience as hostile will simply lead to the exit of more and more believers. Eventually, this would result in critics just talking with each other, and the dynamism and interestingness of the forum would deteriorate. It happened to ZLMB, and it can happen here.

Don

 

Very few such critics post here. Mostly they are relegated to the other board. Mostly the dynamic here is between the mostly orthodox and the mostly unorthodox, and a few relatively friendly former Mormons.

In a way, the most hard-core orthodox and hard-core critics really bring the same kind of environment to discussion forums. Those who are closer to the middle seem to offer more interesting conversations.

Edited June 19, 2017 by Gray

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

Very few such critics post here. Mostly they are relegated to the other board. Mostly the dynamic here is between the mostly orthodox and the mostly unorthodox, and a few relatively friendly former Mormons.

In a way, the most hard-core orthodox and hard-core critics really bring the same kind of environment to discussion forums. Those who are closer to the middle seem to offer more interesting conversations.

I agree.  I haven't seen many critics that are outright anti's here and they don't last long it seems. Maybe they're quickly banned or just move on after a few hits?

To be honest some of the ultra believers are the most harsh and offensive in the manner they interact at times, IMO.  I've seen very little of that from nonbelievers who even though they may not agree with the church, etc, are mostly civil.

I think there's a very good balance here and some really interesting discussions.  If  they were all one sided, the board would be pretty boring, IMO.  I've learned a lot from members here with varied beliefs and opinions and wouldn't want that to change.

If the LGBT threads bother some, maybe just don't read them or engage in the discussion.  I think that most the topics like that here are what is of interest to members or relates to what is going on in the church today.  

Edited June 19, 2017 by JulieM

[stemelbow]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

Very few such critics post here. Mostly they are relegated to the other board. Mostly the dynamic here is between the mostly orthodox and the mostly unorthodox, and a few relatively friendly former Mormons.

In a way, the most hard-core orthodox and hard-core critics really bring the same kind of environment to discussion forums. Those who are closer to the middle seem to offer more interesting conversations.

I think you're right.  I think Juliann, and others, are interested in getting rid of us faithful LDS who would rather explore LDS thought in a critical method kind of way moreso than getting rid of actual people who are not Mormon and don't consider themselves Mormon--perhaps this small crew will be a cherry on top type of victory.  Juliann has been uppin' her game with me, by categorizing me as "critic" many times.  The 4 or 5 regular-ish posters who don't consider themselves LDS couldn't possibly be said to have "relentless negativity of those who post here for the sole purpose of trashing church doctrine and practices."  And I really don't read you, HappyJack, Rockpond, Tacenda (all of who are, like me, faithful LDS as well) as having anything near that either. So to me, this is a really sad thread, and a case of people getting dramatic to get their way.  I've enjoyed my many years here--and the many discussions with the many faithful who have posted here.  But it looks like it may come to an end.  I'll accept their decision when it comes. 

I'm rather disappointed by some of the subsequent accusations that have come in response to Juliann's OP.  I had no idea that some of these posters really did not appreciate some of us.  I thought we had a pretty good history and somewhat of a kinship going.  I did not realize they were harboring the type of resentment they've shown in this thread.  That has me a bit down.  But, oh well.  We all move on, I suppose. 

I've tried to view this as a we're all in this together kind of way.  I know I've offered many a criticism, but I've also defended where I felt it appropriate.  Its like some here really just want me to change my views, so they don't have to hear them.  I don't consider myself a cynical critic, even if I can be cynical at times.  Such labels have always felt unnecessarily divisive to me, which lately Juliann, most certainly has been.  And to me, we're all more complicated than what others label us, thus, labeling feels dismissive and disrespectful.  If other's jump on board with Juliann's most recent effort to, what seems to me to, dismiss and disrespect, well, I guess that means I shouldn't be here anyway.  They'd be doing nothing but offering comments in bad faith, which has happened to some extent anyway, from all angles.

If this happens to be my last post, thanks to everyone here--and I mean everyone.  I've spent tons of time lurking.  I've spent tons of time responding, tons of time researching as perspectives shared here have driven me.  I'm as low on the totem pole of interesting, insightful, and good people one can get.  I'm coming to terms with that.  There are billions of people, and many billions more who have passed.  Something happened years ago where Moses' words really spoke to me: 

Quote

Now, for this cause I know that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed.

I want goodness and truth in my life.  I think God is the source of such.  I seek not because I want to know all but because I want to do something good.  Finding the good is not easy.  With Robert (from page one) I say, "Open debate is no threat to the truth. "

Peace...seriously, peace to everyone here.  I wish you the best. 

[juliann]

I don't want to be unkind, but when I ask for one thread for believing LDS on a Mormon forum, it is indicative of the problem I am pointing out when those who do little but criticize will not respect even that boundary. 

Mormons are being attacked every day on their own board. We are beginning to object and call it out. If what looks to be the majority of the Mormons here don't like the behavior and are leaving because of it, that should indicate to a reasonable person that they need to modify what they are doing.

The lack of awareness is mystifying to me and others I am talking to. Why does it take more than one reminder in a thread that a critic is going too far? Why are those who only want to point out every conceivable flaw in someone else's belief system surprised when they are told ENOUGH?

This is a Mormon space. We get to set the boundaries. Not you. When a Mormon poster goes too far that is our problem and having been here a couple of decades, there have been countless bannings of over the top Mormons. So stop using that as an excuse for your own. Critics are in their space, poking sticks at them and then trying to set up behavioral standards that they don't apply to themselves. It's not going to fly. 

 

 

Edited June 19, 2017 by juliann

[JulieM]

14 hours ago, CV75 said:

I don't think open debate is the issue but the blatant jerkiness that infuses some of the expression.

And that takes place from both sides at times. Maybe we all need to work on being more open to other's opinions and being more civil?  This may be a good reminder for us all....

And, juliann, are you referring to me (who should not be responding here)?  I'm not sure with some of what you're posting, so I'm asking in all sincerity.  I'm still a believer, still active, hold a calling and a TR.  But yes, I have doubts and questions and even outright criticism of some things related to the church (much of that is from church history questions).  

If you want this thread to only include those who never doubt or question or criticize at all, you're down to a very small number of posters here and even you would be excluded from what I can tell.

But, out of respect to you, I won't respond anymore if I'm one of those you'd rather stay off this thread. 

Edited June 19, 2017 by JulieM

[bluebell]

22 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I think you're right.  I think Juliann, and others, are interested in getting rid of us faithful LDS who would rather explore LDS thought in a critical method kind of way moreso than getting rid of actual people who are not Mormon and don't consider themselves Mormon--perhaps this small crew will be a cherry on top type of victory.  Juliann has been uppin' her game with me, by categorizing me as "critic" many times.  The 4 or 5 regular-ish posters who don't consider themselves LDS couldn't possibly be said to have "relentless negativity of those who post here for the sole purpose of trashing church doctrine and practices."  And I really don't read you, HappyJack, Rockpond, Tacenda (all of who are, like me, faithful LDS as well) as having anything near that either. So to me, this is a really sad thread, and a case of people getting dramatic to get their way.  I've enjoyed my many years here--and the many discussions with the many faithful who have posted here.  But it looks like it may come to an end.  I'll accept their decision when it comes. 

I'm rather disappointed by some of the subsequent accusations that have come in response to Juliann's OP.  I had no idea that some of these posters really did not appreciate some of us.  I thought we had a pretty good history and somewhat of a kinship going.  I did not realize they were harboring the type of resentment they've shown in this thread.  That has me a bit down.  But, oh well.  We all move on, I suppose. 

I've tried to view this as a we're all in this together kind of way.  I know I've offered many a criticism, but I've also defended where I felt it appropriate.  Its like some here really just want me to change my views, so they don't have to hear them.  I don't consider myself a cynical critic, even if I can be cynical at times.  Such labels have always felt unnecessarily divisive to me, which lately Juliann, most certainly has been.  And to me, we're all more complicated than what others label us, thus, labeling feels dismissive and disrespectful.  If other's jump on board with Juliann's most recent effort to, what seems to me to, dismiss and disrespect, well, I guess that means I shouldn't be here anyway.  They'd be doing nothing but offering comments in bad faith, which has happened to some extent anyway, from all angles.

If this happens to be my last post, thanks to everyone here--and I mean everyone.  I've spent tons of time lurking.  I've spent tons of time responding, tons of time researching as perspectives shared here have driven me.  I'm as low on the totem pole of interesting, insightful, and good people one can get.  I'm coming to terms with that.  There are billions of people, and many billions more who have passed.  Something happened years ago where Moses' words really spoke to me: 

I want goodness and truth in my life.  I think God is the source of such.  I seek not because I want to know all but because I want to do something good.  Finding the good is not easy.  With Robert (from page one) I say, "Open debate is no threat to the truth. "

Peace...seriously, peace to everyone here.  I wish you the best. 

This post is a good example of what I was talking about. 

 

[juliann]

9 hours ago, DonBradley said:

 And critics should exercise some voluntary restraint, recognizing how they would feel if it were their deepest values and most important life meanings--families, political ideals, candidates, moral principles, etc--under attack, and recognizing, too, pragmatically, that creating an environment that believers experience as hostile will simply lead to the exit of more and more believers. Eventually, this would result in critics just talking with each other, and the dynamism and interestingness of the forum would deteriorate. It happened to ZLMB, and it can happen here.

Don

 

Good to see you! I still consider ZLMB the golden days. It got so bad for believers that I re-activated the old FAIR board and invited the Mormons to come with a promise of protection. It was an exodus after Dan P. made the switch, we had all had enough. And, of course, those same antagonists followed us here. 

We are in a new era where social issues are taking over the old you think Jesus is Satan's brother stuff. It would be nice to have a forum where Mormons could work out this kind of stuff. My attraction to message boards has always been that it is the poor man's peer review. There is no place like it to work out how things fit together...or don't. We have great minds here. I'd like to see more of them rather than those who think an intellectual discussion is about how many times they can type homophobe. 

Maybe we need designated work threads for believers with banning for those who won't respect that?

 

[Jeanne]

14 minutes ago, JulieM said:

And that takes place from both sides at times. Maybe we all need to work on being more open to other's opinions and being more civil?  This may be a good reminder for us all....

And, juliann, are you referring to me (who should not be responding here)?  I'm not sure with some of what you're posting, so I'm asking in all sincerity.  I'm still a believer, still active, hold a calling and a TR.  But yes, I have doubts and questions and even outright criticism of some things related to the church (much of that is from church history questions).  

If you want this thread to only include those who never doubt or question or criticize at all, you're down to a very small number of posters here and even you would be excluded from what I can tell.

But, out of respect to you, I won't respond anymore if I'm one of those you'd rather stay off this thread. 

JulieM...you deserve respect.  You sure have mine. 

[stemelbow]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

This post is a good example of what I was talking about. 

 

Ok.  I gotcha, Bluebell.

here's what you said for interested readers:

Quote

Part of what get's exasperating to me is that it sometimes feels like a constant "you believe this way/don't agree with me because you are homophobic, unloving, unkind, pharisaic, etc."

I don't think I said anything near that.  I've never seen myself as:

Quote

Self-righteous people

I realize I can come off as and can be self-righteous at times.  Which I wish I was better at recognizing and apologizing for.  It seems to me we all can be a bit self-righteous, so I suppose I figured we were given each other some amount of a pass from time to time.  But with that, overall, I don't see myself as a self-righteous person.  I feel bad you do. 

I will add the resentment you expressed, which seems to be in part directed at me, was what I was disappointed about.  We've been back and forth many times.  I've enjoyed your posts.  I'm honest when I say I wish you the best. 

Juliann said:

Quote

I don't want to be unkind, but when I ask for one thread for believing LDS on a Mormon forum, it is indicative of the problem I am pointing out when those who do little but criticize will not respect even that boundary

Well, I consider myself a believing LDS.  I go to Church each week and serve in my two callings as best I can.  I pay tithing, hold a current recommend and do whatever I can to help support the efforts of my ward.  If you had said, I don't want Stembelbow posting.  Well, then, I'd be clear who you want and who you don't want.  And I'd happily step aside. 

[juliann]

17 minutes ago, JulieM said:

And that takes place from both sides at times. Maybe we all need to work on being more open to other's opinions and being more civil?  This may be a good reminder for us all....

And, juliann, are you referring to me (who should not be responding here)?  I'm not sure with some of what you're posting, so I'm asking in all sincerity.  I'm still a believer, still active, hold a calling and a TR.  But yes, I have doubts and questions and even outright criticism of some things related to the church (much of that is from church history questions).  

If you want this thread to only include those who never doubt or question or criticize at all, you're down to a very small number of posters here and even you would be excluded from what I can tell.

But, out of respect to you, I won't respond anymore if I'm one of those you'd rather stay off this thread. 

Look at what you are doing right here. You are not here to work on the problem. You are here to lecture and shift blame. I don't appreciate it, especially the strawman approach about those who doubt or question not being welcome. So I appreciate your willingness to step back and let us talk. That is a first step.

[juliann]

Stem, please get out of this thread. We have heard it all. It is our turn.