Church discipline proceedings on a member who no longer lives in the stake boundaries?

[Tacenda]

A lot of women aren't able to feel those feelings very easily. Especially when she grows up not learning about it. Maybe just a book about it especially for men so that their wife is able to feel what the husband does so the husband learns about her body with her. If a woman or women disagree with me I'd like that response. I do think most p o r n is not appropriate. Maybe a romantic movie would suffice. Couples have to do whatever works I guess. There are frigid women out there that need visuals too. Or their husband's help. 

[Vanguard]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

I just read this and find it insightful and expresses well some concerns I have about the profession of therapist based on reports of students in grad programs or applying being told they should change their career or even are rejected from a program because of their personal beliefs as well as devout and doubting members who have expressed feeling pressured by therapists to change their religious beliefs (ranging from close family members to almost strangers).  I recognize this is anecdotal evidence, so while I have concerns I am not stating this is the current state of the profession. I would like to see Bennion’s evidence mentioned below, though his too may be anecdotal as it sounds like it is in the beginning stages. 

 

 

 

Calm! What a well-written article! His comments on the signatories of the letter were EXACTLY how I felt when I perused the many pages of signatures. His is the gift of well-articulated exposition. I become jealous when others are able to convey my very thoughts better than I can. ; )

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Oh, please!    While anyone who has been the victim of genuine stalking has my sympathy (for the record it's reprehensible, if someone needs to see that I've said it) as someone who's been accused of stalking when I never have done anything of the sort, "stalking" is an overused word.  If everything referred to when someone decides to use the word "stalking" actually is stalking, then nothing is stalking.  It does a disservice to people who genuinely are terrorized.  With due respect, knock it off.

 Sorry no I  don't respect you telling me to knock it off. I could give you dozens of cases where members on the fringe or going faith transitions and may be public about it are hauled in to be reprimanded and even had the now cuddly so called Membership Council due to members who know them following their social media activity and that member blowing them into their bishop or SP.  Like it or not that is a form of stalking. Sorry. 

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Vanguard said:

Calm! What a well-written article! His comments on the signatories of the letter were EXACTLY how I felt when I perused the many pages of signatures. His is the gift of well-articulated exposition. I become jealous when others are able to convey my very thoughts better than I can. ; )

One LDS therapist.  I read the article.  He made some fair and reasonable points.  Others not so much. It does confirm the bias though of many who post here so I am not surprised that you and others will cheer it on.

[Kenngo1969]

4 minutes ago, Teancum said:

 Sorry no I  don't respect you telling me to knock it off. I could give you dozens of cases where members on the fringe or going faith transitions and may be public about it are hauled in to be reprimanded and even had the now cuddly so called Membership Council due to members who know them following their social media activity and that member blowing them into their bishop or SP.  Like it or not that is a form of stalking. Sorry. 

You're moving the goal posts.  My previous reply to you concerned your egregious misuse of the word "stalking."

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

You might want to read some history about the Pharisees and the Sadducees outside the Bible. The writers of the gospels certainly had an agenda to paint the Jewish leaders in the worst light possible and indeed the Jews as well. So much pain and misery has been the result. 

I actually have read a lot on that time period.  Do you have a book on the Jewish ruling class during Jesus' time that you recommend?

[Teancum]

5 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

You're moving the goal posts.  My previous reply to you concerned your egregious misuse of the word "stalking."

Was not your response to my post that some were stalking Helfer?

[Teancum]

6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I actually have read a lot on that time period.  Do you have a book on the Jewish ruling class during Jesus' time that you recommend?

I do not have one particular book. I have seen comments in other broader based books.  I am not an expert on this. I was just surprised on some of what I  read along the way. Mostly in a couple of Bart Ehrman books.  It did not seem they were the devils the NT makes them out to be.

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, Teancum said: Sorry no I  don't respect you telling me to knock it off. I could give you dozens of cases where members on the fringe or going faith transitions and may be public about it are hauled in to be reprimanded and even had the now cuddly so called Membership Council due to members who know them following their social media activity and that member blowing them into their bishop or SP.  Like it or not that is a form of stalking. Sorry. 

So when a Facebook participant publishes apostate views for scores of fellow Facebook friends to readily see, the mere act of reading what that person openly has to say now constitutes ‘stalking?’ Baloney! And just in case you’ve forgotten, the Lord expects all priesthood holders, from the teachers to the high priests, to watch over the Church to assure pernicious wickedness is exposed to the proper authorities before it can take root and produce serious harm. In fact, allowing such evil to take root and spread without exposure is a serious dereliction of sacred duty. 

[Amulek]

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

I could give you dozens of cases where members on the fringe or going faith transitions and may be public about it are hauled in to be reprimanded and even had the now cuddly so called Membership Council due to members who know them following their social media activity and that member blowing them into their bishop or SP.  Like it or not that is a form of stalking. Sorry. 

No, like it or not, @Kenngo1969 is 100% right: you're misusing the word. 

Reading and discussing what someone publicly posts on the internet for the entire world to see does not constitute stalking. 

 

[InCognitus]

5 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

My previous reply to you concerned your egregious misuse of the word "stalking."

Examples of the true meaning of "stalking":  Blondie - One Way or Another,  Daryl Hall & John Oates - Private Eyes, The Police - Every Breath You Take, Rockwell - Somebody's Watching Me (but maybe that's just paranoia). 

[Vanguard]

5 hours ago, Teancum said:

One LDS therapist.  I read the article.  He made some fair and reasonable points.  Others not so much. It does confirm the bias though of many who post here so I am not surprised that you and others will cheer it on.

So you've never read an article that you wholeheartedly agreed with? And if so, can I then accuse you of bias because you 'cheer it on'? ; )

[Vellichor]

Quote

There is chilling new evidence emerging that even many LDS therapists end up steering their clients away from nourishing faith practices that they profess to share, often doing great harm in the process. 

Calm, you asked for more information about this emerging evidence. Here's a new Public Square article by Christopher D. Cunningham that addresses this: https://publicsquaremag.org/health/are-latter-day-saint-therapists-meeting-their-clients-expectations/

Some quotes from the article:

Quote

My informal survey asked respondents if their therapists ever made suggestions that they felt were outside the boundaries of the Church’s teachings. Of the 72 respondents who said that they chose a Latter-day Saint therapist specifically so they would not provide advice or treatment outside the boundaries of the gospel, over half of them (51%) said their therapist made recommendations they believed to be outside of gospel boundaries. 

Quote

Strikingly, none of these people reported pushing back or clarifying their boundaries. And many admitted they had left the session believing that the therapist’s recommendation somehow implied Church approval.

Quote

When therapists advertise themselves as Latter-day Saints, it is clear that they create an expectation among a significant portion of clients that they will provide therapy within the broadly agreed-upon boundaries of the Church. These clients trust their therapists to help them improve their mental health while keeping them spiritually safe. Gratefully, once again, many Latter-day Saint therapists do exactly this and provide support within these expected boundaries.  

Yet in all too many cases, Latter-day Saint therapists seem to be significantly violating that trust. 

 

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Teancum said:

Like it or not that is a form of stalking. Sorry. 

Because reading someone’s public blogs is stalking?  Don’t the authors intend their blogs to be read or even followed if they are publicly published?

It seems like going to a movie and then writing to tell someone that it wasn’t worth the ticket price would be stalking by that standard. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, InCognitus said:

Examples of the true meaning of "stalking":  Blondie - One Way or Another,  Daryl Hall & John Oates - Private Eyes, The Police - Every Breath You Take, Rockwell - Somebody's Watching Me (but maybe that's just paranoia). 

It has diminished the enjoyment of a number of songs when I recognize that they are describing stalking or obsessive, manipulative, even abusive behaviour (any that say the singer would die if they left/stopped loving them, for example).  Being able to easily confirm what lyrics are has its downsides.

Edited April 25, 2021 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Vellichor said:

Calm, you asked for more information about this emerging evidence. Here's a new Public Square article by Christopher D. Cunningham that addresses this: https://publicsquaremag.org/health/are-latter-day-saint-therapists-meeting-their-clients-expectations/

Some quotes from the article:

 

Thank you for providing this. I would assume there would always be a small number of clients that think this way about their therapists because often misunderstandings or obsessive interpretations of doctrine, standards, etc are a result of mental or emotional dysfunction.  

In order to address this and the reluctance of clients to question their therapist, I would hope that anything that is close to borderline is explained by the therapist within the framework of Church teachings and standards (this does not include imo insisting the Church is wrong).  For example, in a group therapy setting I once attended long ago as a psych student, one man commented about how he was having constant sexual (as in attraction) thoughts about women he saw and it was very disturbing to him. It came across to me as an obsessive, perfectionist interpretation of scripture that led him to increased obsessing rather than leading to self control due to his worrying about any stray thought. Church teaching is not that any sexual thought about others not one’s spouse is sinful as there is recognition that such thoughts do pop up without our control to a certain extent, but rather nurturing such thoughts (staring at others or fantasizing about them) or seeking out ways to increase them (porn) is where one risks sin.  Often if clients understand that some of their behaviour is normal and acceptable by Church standards, they relax and stop obsessing, which then lessens and hopefully may even stop any of their behaviour that goes too far.

However, 50% is more than I would expect as a result of their therapists intending to help clients have a more realistic and reasonable understanding of church teachings.

Edited April 25, 2021 by Calm

[helix]

11 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I’m confused. I thought she approved of pornography.

A quote from Helfer addressing a crowd cheering her for fighting the church: 

"[Heated] I swear to God, if they mention pornography, one more time on a Sunday.  When we all know that every time you say 'pornography' YOU'RE PICTURING IT!  Oh thank you for reminding me about h***** people [she does vulgar mimicking] when I'm trying to worship my God.  And Elder Oaks did that on General Conference on Easter Sunday!  And what, I'm just supposed to be like [In a timid tone] 'Oh, excuse me Elder Oaks of revelatory power, um, I'm respectfully calling you out on this' [Mimicking Elder Oaks] 'You don't have the authority to call me out Sister Helfer.'  [Speaking of herself] I have all the authority!  No, what you did was kind of crappy. . . . No.  You can't talk about that on Sunday, when my teenage sons are hearing you.  And then you're wanting them to not think about it and not do it.  Well you just reminded them about it.  So I'm guessing they're going to go home tonight and probably look something up.  Thank you!  Thanks Elder Oaks for that."

[kllindley]

10 hours ago, Vanguard said:

Calm! What a well-written article! His comments on the signatories of the letter were EXACTLY how I felt when I perused the many pages of signatures. His is the gift of well-articulated exposition. I become jealous when others are able to convey my very thoughts better than I can. ; )

Do you by chance have a link to the signatories. I have only found the letter and claims that hundreds signed it. Thanks!

[Vanguard]

7 hours ago, kllindley said:

Do you by chance have a link to the signatories. I have only found the letter and claims that hundreds signed it. Thanks!

Go to Calm's link that I had included in my post. The letter and signatures were both included together.

[Teancum]

13 hours ago, teddyaware said:

So when a Facebook participant publishes apostate views for scores of fellow Facebook friends to readily see, the mere act of reading what that person openly has to say now constitutes ‘stalking?’ Baloney! And just in case you’ve forgotten, the Lord expects all priesthood holders, from the teachers to the high priests, to watch over the Church to assure pernicious wickedness is exposed to the proper authorities before it can take root and produce serious harm. In fact, allowing such evil to take root and spread without exposure is a serious dereliction of sacred duty. 

One of Steven Hassan's BITE model of mind control groups.  From Information Control.  Thank you for the example.

1. Encourage spying on other members
   a. Impose a buddy system to monitor and control member
   b. Report deviant thoughts, feelings and actions to leadership
   c. Ensure that individual behavior is monitored by group

 

https://freedomofmind.com/cult-mind-control/bite-model/

[Teancum]

13 hours ago, Amulek said:

No, like it or not, @Kenngo1969 is 100% right: you're misusing the word. 

Reading and discussing what someone publicly posts on the internet for the entire world to see does not constitute stalking. 

 

Ok so stalking may be overstated.  Perhaps spying and reporting is the better term. 

 

1. Encourage spying on other members
   a. Impose a buddy system to monitor and control member
   b. Report deviant thoughts, feelings and actions to leadership
   c. Ensure that individual behavior is monitored by group

https://freedomofmind.com/cult-mind-control/bite-model/

[Teancum]

10 hours ago, Vanguard said:

So you've never read an article that you wholeheartedly agreed with? And if so, can I then accuse you of bias because you 'cheer it on'? ; )

Sure and sure.....

[Teancum]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

Because reading someone’s public blogs is stalking?  Don’t the authors intend their blogs to be read or even followed if they are publicly published?

It seems like going to a movie and then writing to tell someone that it wasn’t worth the ticket price would be stalking by that standard. 

I have conceded stalking is overstating it.  But it does fall into this arena of mind group mind control:

1. Encourage spying on other members
   a. Impose a buddy system to monitor and control member
   b. Report deviant thoughts, feelings and actions to leadership
   c. Ensure that individual behavior is monitored by group

https://freedomofmind.com/cult-mind-control/bite-model/

[kllindley]

49 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

Go to Calm's link that I had included in my post. The letter and signatures were both included together.

I must be blind, because I am not finding it. ☹️

[helix]

47 minutes ago, Teancum said:

One of Steven Hassan's BITE model of mind control groups.  From Information Control

Ugh, this canard again.

Steve Hassan simply created his own formula to define a pejorative to sell books.  He created the equivalent of a checklist to describe "jerks".  He deliberately avoided peer-review because he's only interested in writing books.  His checklist is so vague and expansive that it can easily include graduate school programs, high school sports, and military programs.  And he forgot to include mechanisms to indicate what does not count.

Your argument can be a fine one, but Steve Hassan is not the authoritative source you want backing you up.

Edited April 25, 2021 by helix