Containing 5,717 Articles Spanning 332 Topics  
Ex-Mormon News, Stories And Recovery  
Online Since January 1, 2005  
PLEASE NOTE: If you have reached this page from an outside source such as an Internet Search or forum referral, please note that this page (the one you just landed on) is an archive containing articles on "EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24". This website, The Mormon Curtain - is a website that blogs the Ex-Mormon world. You can read The Mormon Curtain FAQ to understand the purpose of this website.
⇒  CLICK HERE to visit the main page of The Mormon Curtain.
  EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24
Total Articles: 28
The "Opinion" topic was created to separate out recovery from opinions on posts made in Ex-Mormonism.
topic image
Book Of Abraham And The Facsimiles Into The Future
Wednesday, Mar 6, 2013, at 09:15 AM
Original Author(s): Sock Puppet
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
With the announcement of a spruced up version of LDS quad after 30 years, it would seem now would have been the opportunity to drop the Facsimiles and Explanations, if there was any serious movement afoot among the Brethren to possibly do so. They didn't take this opportunity. They've kept them, and thus have for the foreseeable future.

With the rejection of the OMIDS' 'apologetics of personal destruction' approach (kicked out of NAMIRS and now being told to cool it with Interpreter), the smoothing over of NAMIRS from apologia into Mormon Studies, the 'let it alone' admonition from BKP, closing the leakage gap between high school grad and mission age, extending an olive branch to John Dehlin, and keeping the Facsimiles/Explanations, I think we are seeing not only a 'kinder, gentler' turn by the Brethren, but also a return to the preeminence of faith over reason as an LDS requirement. The multi-decade FARMS experiment to reconcile science/logic with LDS teachings is receding quickly into the background.

The JSJr Papers project and making it accessible will inoculate the LDS masses. Not in the sense that those masses will look, have a short period of doubt and return as active, faith-believing TBMs in the pews on Sunday. Rather, when someone digs into the past, apostatizes and leaves trumpeting the problems loudly, the LDS leaders will be able to say in the future, 'we made it available, there's nothing to hide' and those without the curiosity to prompt them to look for themselves will be content to remain in the pews despite the trumpetings of such apostates. Perhaps Droopy's refrain captures the LDS logic for the post-Mormon Moment era: "Nothing to see here. Move along."

Mormon Studies, however, and other historians looking ever more closely into the historical record will keep uncovering more and more issues for the Brethren and the LDS truth claims. Just as the Brethren have dismantled their apologetic machine, the prospect for more problems cropping up is greater. Now is the time that they are doubling down on faith, not reason, as their hook. They are keeping the Facsimiles/Explanations.

I think it was coincidence (at least I hope it was) that John Dehlin cited the orgiastic sinning of ex-mos as a reason for his return to the LDS fold at this time. I think a renewed theme for the Brethren to explain apostasy will again focus on the desire to sin. The firewall will be reestablished. Keep the FAITH (don't look for rationales), to keep your marriage intact and your children from wanton sinning. I think DCP might have been right when he suggested that there is currently occurring a rejection of Maxwell's confidence that the LDS Church could reason its way out of criticisms. He was too focused on the slam dunk competition at the 'all star' game to realize that LeBron James wasn't participating. In the modern era, the Brethren seem to be learning that their big gun, FAITH (not reason), isn't in the slam dunk competition. Just keep preaching FAITH, let go of the need to stop slam dunks.

When I was a missionary, there were no personal computers with internet connections in people's homes. But today there are, at least in the middle class and more affluent homes. Those were the potential tithe-payers that we were not explicitly, but with a nod and a wink were encouraged to tract in neighborhoods. We were discouraged from preaching to the lower end. The explanation, if it ever became voiced, was that retention rates showed that it was not fruitful from a long term perspective. (There was quietly discussed among the rank and file missionaries that these were salvation ordinances being offered up to people, and that even those that might fall away as inactive would benefit from having them performed.)

Ironically, those potential tithe-paying homes are the ones now equipped with computers and the internet. They are the ones having access to the historical information.

While not good for its coffers or empire building, the LDS missionary effort would, I suspect, find more success on focusing on those that do not have such information resources at their disposal.
topic image
Osmonds To Rock The Utah Capitol With A Love Bomb Of Hate
Friday, Mar 22, 2013, at 09:52 AM
Original Author(s): Blueorchid
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
From LDSMag:
With oral arguments scheduled to be heard at the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of California's Prop 8 and also the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), it is time to stand for marriage by celebrating it. You and your family are invited to a Celebration of Marriage on Tuesday, March 26 at 7:00 p.m. at Utah State Capitol Rotunda. Scot and I will be there for the celebration because we believe that marriage is worth celebrating and that every child deserves a mother and a father.
http://ldsmag.com/blogs/editors-blogs...

"having similar celebrations to cheer for marriage--an institution that is becoming an endangered species." HUH?!?!???

I cannot believe they have the nerve to spin it like this. Divorce is at nearly 60% in this country I believe, which the heterosexuals have done all on their own. Gay marriage can only give the institution a boost, not endanger it further.

The real threat to marriage is that many people just don't feel the need to be married--gay or straight. Many people have realized you can have a great life with or without it.

If marriage is endangered, it is because of selfishness, immaturity, recklessness, and good old fashioned incompatibility-- not because two people of the same sex wish to have equal rights. News bulletin: straight people can still get married even if gay people can too.

White men can still hold the priesthood even if black men can too.

Even worse, the mormon church uses marriage as a weapon. They put the marriage, especially the temple marriage and the church ahead of the two people who are in it. A lot of the men are stressed out of their minds and the women are on prozac, bitter from forfeiting careers and education and yet still expected to show the world that they are the happiest people on earth.

Not one of those people in the save marriage rallies ever does anything but twist words and put a selfish spin on it. They will never discuss the truth: Marriage is a legal contract between two people. It has nothing to do with religion. You can tack religion on, but when you go to court for a divorce, is will be about legalities, not green aprons--proving it is a legal right.

The ignorance of this stance is classic Mormon. No facts, no reason, just, "this is what I want and God says I am right" mentality.
topic image
Commandments Which The Mormon Church And Its Leaders Disregard
Friday, Mar 22, 2013, at 09:57 AM
Original Author(s): Rpackham
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
Many Mormons may be unaware that they and their church are disregarding many commandments given in earlier years by revelation to their leaders, even many which appear in their own scriptures. The following is a listing of some of the commandments that the Mormon church or its leaders do not obey:

When blessing the sacrament, the congregation is to kneel with the elder blessing sacrament (Moroni 4:2; see also DandC 20:76)

When blessing the sacrament, the elder or priest is to take the cup (i.e. hold it) Moroni 5:1, DandC 20:78

An elder, if present, should bless sacrament, not a priest. DandC 20:46, 50

In both the New Testament and the Book of Mormon, Jesus told his followers how to pray, and gave them the prayer commonly known as "The Lord's Prayer." Mormons almost never use this prayer, or many of the ideas in it.

Missionaries are to go alone, not in pairs. On March 30, 1836, Joseph Smith said (HoC 2:431): "...the Elders would go forth, and each must stand for himself, as it was not necessary for them to be sent out, two by two, as in former times..." (This contradicts a previous revelation given February 9, 1831: At DandC 42:6 God commands missionaries to go "two by two" when preaching the gospel ; see also 52:10. This follows the pattern set by Jesus in sending out his seventy at Luke 10:1).

Missionaries are to carry neither purse nor scrip DandC 84:86, 91 says: "Therefore, let no man among you ... from this hour take purse or scrip, that goeth forth to proclaim this gospel of the kingdom... And he that doeth not these things is not my disciple; by this you may know my disciples." (See also v 78 and DandC 24:18; also Matt 10:9-10, Luke 10:4)

When preaching, you should not prepare your talk, but rely on the spirit. DandC 84:85 says: "Neither take ye thought beforehand what ye shall say [when preaching].

Only a virgin could be a polygamous wife. DandC 132:61 "if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else."

Polygamous marriage required the first wife's consent DandC 132:61 "if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent,..."

Mormons are to use tobacco as a poultice and for sick cattle. (DandC 89:8)

Mormons are to make their own wine for use in the sacrament . (DandC 20:75, 89:5-6)

The true church should not try to be a popular church. If it does, it is of the devil. (1 Nephi 22:23)

When fasting, Christ's followers are to ritually anoint the head and wash the face. (3 Ne 13:17)

The temple is to be a "house of fasting." (DandC 109:16)

The salutation in the temple should be with uplifted hands. (DandC 109:19)

DandC 88 directed the establishment of a "School of the Prophets," which was the forerunner of the later temples. Certain rituals were prescribed for those entering the school, including the precise wording of the greetings (v 127-137) and the washing of feet (v 139-141). All of these have now been abandoned in the present temples.

The "Word of Wisdom" (DandC 89) was specifically said not to be a commandment (v 2).

Joseph Smith instructed Mormons not to proselytize non-Mormon children without parents' consent. "Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith" pp 86-87:

Mormons disregard the New Testament direction about head covering while praying: "Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved" (1 Cor. 11:4,5.) but Mormon men have their heads covered in temple for the "true order of prayer"

Teaching as doctrine anything more than faith, repentance and baptism is of the devil. ( 3 Nephi 11:31-40, DandC 10:67-68, Mosiah 18:18-20)
topic image
Tipping Point Is Social Media Driven
Wednesday, May 15, 2013, at 11:40 AM
Original Author(s): Sparkyguru
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
Is it me or does there seem to be a new person nearly every day that reveals to you that they don't really believe?

When I opened up on FB and decided that I wasn't going to just slink away in the darkness but instead speak out regarding the lies that are being perpetrated I didn't expect to 'de-convert' anyone. I was just doing what I felt was right and moral, revealing all the facts to allow for an informed decision. Personally I felt that I hadn't been given that opportunity. Once I discovered true historical facts and the discord with what I learned in primary I needed to tell others.

So spending time watching the threads here and on FB. I have seen what looks to me like an accelerating curve of understanding sweeping through the membership. just a few months ago I met maybe one new person that whole month that had gone through what I had. now it is averaging twice a week. about 1/2 the time people are becoming open about it and about 1/2 the time they are staying silent (so as to not offend family or risk a job etc) but they let me know that they are more inclined to see the falsities that I have as well.

What this all means is the biggest thing that kept people from leaving after learning the truth was/is fear. fear of family judgement fear of being alone and without social support fear of losing their support group. but now with social media allowing connections all over the planet these small clusters abate that fear. It helps a person to know that there is another out there like them that sees the situation the way they do.

It emboldens them to speak up and that in turn lets others know they are not alone. The church is facing an apostasy like it has never seen. relatively small right now, but the growth rates are comparable to the early church beginnings. if there are say 1000 truth seekers on this board and each of you know of 100 people every year that question in secret or leave outright, that is 100,000 per year. that kind of loss rate is going to be obvious with in 5 years or so no matter how hard you try to fudge the numbers, there is going to be real attrition.

I personally think we are going to see dramatic efforts to retain the membership, changes in policy that will trip up stalwart members (ie gay marriage or women priesthood for example) thing is the amount of time that in the past could be allowed to go by for the next generation to adjust just won't work anymore, information moves to fast now. So personally I think the policy changes will back fire over and over again. We have already seen this happen in just the last few years.

Prop 8 is an example.

releasing the charitable contribution stats is another example. the put out the info to say 'see how charitable we are!' then people do the math and go 'what?' then the church pulls the info all embarrassed.

FB is a huge tipping point driver IMHO. thats because the whole concept is a natural magnet for the type of people that are believers.

other drivers are the fact that there are groups as a whole now organizing to get the real truth out there, that drives people to look at places like FAIR and see the illogic for themselves.

Looking at it from a fairly informal, anecdotal viewpoint I think the tipping point of losing more members than it gains is just around the corner, less than 5 years out.
topic image
How Their Plan Of Salvation Is Broken On A Cross
Monday, Jun 3, 2013, at 07:15 AM
Original Author(s): Elder Berry
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
My former belief that Mormonism was true was conditional if and only if the processes that produced this belief were reliable for determining Mormonism was true enough to develop faith in it.

As well, my environment in which this belief was formed was crucial for my determining whether Mormonism was true.

Are there no reliable processes regardless of environment such that if and only if these processes were used would result in the subject’s believing Mormonism and developing faith in it?

Mormons believe their Plan of Salvation is such a thing. But any faith that developed would be more in the processes and the environments that fostered it than in the process of developing it.

In short, a trial of faith is not needed for Mormons. If God can provide such processes God can determine the faithful in the following of divine, unchanging and unalterable processes towards the salvation God offers.

This is why Mormonism suffers in having Grace. It, like The Catholic Church places import on processes of faith instead of mere hope that Grace is sufficient.

Mormons are less justified in their beliefs than people who believe they are hoping to achieve God's Grace in the receipt of their god's salvation more than a payoff for the trials of their faith. This non-Mormon believer in God takes trials of faith as an environment possibly hostile to their finding grace in developing their faith.

In comes their savior in a person and not a process.

No wonder "Amazing Grace" is not a Mormon favorite.
topic image
Most Of What Comes From The Church Leadership Is Utter Gibberish
Thursday, Aug 1, 2013, at 07:34 AM
Original Author(s): Hitchen's Razor
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
I think one of the biggest challenges for the church though is that their most intelligent and earnest members are the most likely to see through the gibberish, ironically because of the very training they got from the church.

Take me for example. I'm an electrical engineer who went to the darkside and became an attorney. All my training is in logic, structure and now working with language. If you boil it all down to its basics, I now read and write for a living. I read complex things and try to break them down logically so they can be explained to others and I take complex ideas and document them in a way that others can understand (admittedly a lot of attorneys do the opposite).

Anyway, I have to give quite a lot of credit to the church for giving me a start in developing the critical reading skills that I rely on in my job. Specifically, I spent a large part of my youth pouring over the scriptures, seeking deeper meaning in each word, trying to construct a logical framework for how many of the events that church leadership identified as literal would be possible and how parables and stories could relate to human nature. In many ways, that education was similar to the education that my Jewish friends got studying the Torah. These aren't easy texts to read and understand, even if you read them as pure fiction. They're even harder to read if you read them as historical documents with messages from a diety, some hidden within allegory so as to protect them from those who are not ready for "meat."

The challenge for the church is that eventually its intelligent members who follow their direction to dig into the scriptures to find meaning and are intellectually honest (and we're taught to be honest, aren't we?) are going to turn a critical eye towards the assumptions underpinning the very religion that taught them critical reasoning in the first place.

Then it all falls apart.

And, then, when those members approach leaders of the church, those leaders throw out gibberish answers to questions, like "hope it's true, pray until you get a good feeling that it's true, and then tell the world that you know it's true - rinse and repeat." Alternatively, "hope that it's true, tell the world that you know it's true and pray until you get a good feeling that it's true." All of these would be equally useful in proving anything or nothing. To say that all science is trumped by the "Book of Mormon Promise" is such a cop out and certainly not intellectually honest.

If called on their lack of logic and intellectual honesty, the leaders then fall back to the tried and true of all leaders seeking to hold onto power in the face of overwhelming facts showing that they've bamboozled the people - blame the other person. Make being intellectual and inquisitive into a bad thing, paint (in the case of Holland) anyone who questions as hysterical or unstable, do anything to keep the general populace from looking behind the curtain in the same way as that evil intellectual apostate.
topic image
The Sound Of Silence Is Killing The Church
Tuesday, Aug 6, 2013, at 07:12 AM
Original Author(s): Tapir Times
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
The Sound of Silence is Killing the Church In my first post I alluded to the fact that I have done a lot of reading about church history since my disaffection began. My reading has included many scholarly works, but also many online sources. When searching for answers for these issues online, one is almost certain to come across one or more of the many online exmormon communities. These communities themselves are likely a significant part of the equation that puts the church in its current state of crisis. This phenomenon is something I would like to explore further in a future post.

For now though, I'd like to talk about the general sentiment I find in those communities. I can sum it up in a word: Anger. So much anger. Anger that is, in my opinion, justifiable. The main source of anger is the feeling of being deceived by virtue of the church "hiding" bothersome details about its past. Whether the "hiding" was deliberate or not is open for debate.

But another source of anger is the fact that nearly everyone who has gone through a crisis of faith has had a very frustrating conversation with "the church." The conversation varies from individual to individual- for some it was an actual conversation with a bishop or other leader. For others it was an extensive search through official church publications. But for nearly everyone, the conversation happened after finding out about disturbing facts about the church. For nearly everyone the conversation was an attempt to answer the question "What does the church say about {insert controversial issue here}?" Here is an excerpt from my "conversation."

Me: "Hey, people (and history) are saying that Joseph Smith married other members' wives and teenagers and hid the other wives from Emma, and publicly denied it all. . .Is this true? I'm pretty uncomfortable with this, what gives? In what circumstances is polyandry ok?

Church: . . . . . . . . . . . .

Me: "Hmm. . . ok well I'm confused about how to know when the prophet is speaking as God's mouthpiece and when he is speaking as a man. There seems to be an awful lot of "speaking as a man," and that doesn't seem right. What's the deal?

Church: . . . . . . .

Me: I have to be honest, your lack of participation in this discussion is disturbing. Your critics seem to be seeking truth, and make what seem like valid points. They are able to cite primary historical sources to back up their position. Can you give me some clarification?

Church: The missionaries can use Facebook now!! AND GIVE TOURS OF THE CHAPEL!

Me: . . . . . . . . . . . .

The church appears to be very very reluctant to provide any answers to these questions, and I think I know exactly why. Two reasons why, in fact. First of all, for many of the questions, I just don't think there are any satisfactory answers. If there was an easy answer, they would have given it already.

But the second reason is a little more subtle, and interesting. To illustrate it, I'd like to tell you about the oral Torah. The Jewish tradition holds that Moses received the written Torah on Mt. Sinai. This contained the commandments and was, as the name implies, written down. However, God also gave him the oral Torah- basically the Rabbis believe that God told Moses some additional information to fill in the gaps for situations not specifically described in the written Torah. Presumably this was for situations like donkeys falling in pits on the Sabbath and that sort of thing.

The oral Torah was passed down, as the name implies, orally from Rabbi to Rabbi. In fact it was forbidden to write it down. However, after the destruction of Jerusalem, some of the Rabbis were worried that the oral chain would be broken, and decided to write it down. They did so, and it now can be found in what is known as the Mishna. They did so amidst great controversy however, because many of the Rabbis were vehemently against it.

Why would they be against writing it? Seems like the logical thing to do, right? Because having an oral set of guidelines has its advantages. To phrase it gently: it is flexible. To phrase it bluntly: you can make stuff up depending on the situation, in order to best try to help those who come to you with spiritual dilemmas (or to best suit your own needs, unfortunately). But once you start writing things down, they are set in stone. You lose the flexibility. If you try to vary from what is written, people will point to where it is written and call you out on it.

The current LDS leadership finds itself in a very similar situation. The church is awash in doubt, and members are leaving "in droves." And so far they have said very little, if anything, to address the issues that are bothering people. There have been hints of answers. The leaders promised Hans Mattson a document that had the answers. It has not materialized. There have been rumors that the church is going to release a series of essays addressing many of these troubling issues. So far nothing.

The church has sent out Teryl Givens and Richard Bushman, prominent church historians, to speak at various functions where they attempt to answer questions from doubters. While this is a nice gesture, Teryl and Richard each have a giant asterisk on their forehead. The asterisks say "The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this meeting are solely those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of the Brethren. The content of this meeting has not been reviewed or approved by the Brethren. The speakers are solely responsible for this content."

The closest thing to a response from anyone in a position to give a response came in Elder Holland's conference talk this past spring when he reassured as all with the words:

"please don't hyperventilate if from time to time issues arise that need to be examined, understood, and resolved. They do and they will."

So far he has been heavy on the snarking, and light on the resolving.

So why has there been such an abundance of silence? Because, like the Rabbis of old, the Brethren know that once they take a position, they can't take it back. And if the apologists' explanations are the only material they have to work with, it is no wonder they have chosen silence.

In the meantime, with each day that goes by, more and more saints are becoming aware of the church's troubled past and contradictory doctrines. As such, more and more will try to have their own conversation with the church in hope of finding answers. Sadly, with each day that goes by, more and more testimonies will be shattered by the sound of silence.
topic image
The Plan Of Happiness
Wednesday, Aug 7, 2013, at 12:18 PM
Original Author(s): Erictheex
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
TSCC advertizes and sell this product: "The Plan of Happiness".

But many of of us failed to read the fine print. The print has been added to the tithing slips, and I gues will soon become more clear. Bit just so we all understand it is not the plan of YOUR happiness they are talking about...

It is their happiness that they achieve. Mormons are generally a lot less happy that other people. They agree to be unhappy with the understading that they will be happy later. This "happy later" attitude allows them to put up with some massive abuse now.

But think about it. Most, if being honest would answer the following question "what would make you happy", in the following way:

I dont have to work

I make a ton of money

You have to admire me for saying I dont make money

People obey whatever I say as if it came from God

I get to have more than one woman

I get priviledges and prestige

I get a chauffeur and a chef on call, 24/7

I get free housing and vacations

I get to teach people my theories and they have to listen

People have to raise to their feet when I enter the room

I get to write books about anyhting and people have to buy them

My family gets free education, vacations, priviledge and access

I get taken care of for life

I cannot go to hell

I am ordained a god, without needing to provide proof that god was involved in the decision

I am officially told that my entrance to heaven is guaranteed

I am never accountable for my mistakes or claims

you have to call me a prophet, president and god's personal exclusive representative on earth and bow and promise by everything you hold dear to do whatever I say

I get to tell everyone what to do with every aspect of their lives

You worship me

If I ever wanted your wife or your daughter for sex, you promise to give her to me and to say thanks for the privilege

you have to give me at least 10% of your income, no questions asked

You have to accept and free work/labor assigment and you have to say thanks and call it a blessing

I am more important than your family

I get to do whatever I want with your money, including self serving bragging, but I get credit, as if it were my money.

I get to be on the board of 14 companies, draw a salary from each one, but I am not accountable as an employee

I dont have to pay taxes

You have to do play simon says for the rest of your life with me, only I cant lose, because I get to use the "I never said that" card and the "I play on behalf of God" card.

So yes, it is the plan of happiness, the mormon leader's happiness. who better to explain it to the poor mormon saps than someone who has found it?! Who better to explain the importance of tithing that those who live off it and dont pay it? who better to explain the power of the priesthood than those who have given themselves 2nd annoiting and can command you to do anything? who better to teach you about honesty and hard work than those who cant drive or pay for their own cars? Who better to expound on sacrifice than those who fly for free on first class? Who better to explain happiness than those who live off your misery.
topic image
"With All Due Respect" To Sarah Shumway - Don't Dismiss Hans Mattson
Thursday, Aug 15, 2013, at 07:32 AM
Original Author(s): Gentlestrength
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
Boston College graduate student, returned missionary Sarah Shumway is having a "knowledge crisis"

Let me explain.

Recently this Millennial blogger who sells herself as a Mormon Millennial intellectual with faith, lied about Mormon operations and doctrines. Rejecting the do's and dont's of Mormonism and selling Mormonism as a faith of finding your own personal Christ and falling in love with Him. For it is Christ that knows our heart and will receive us into his glory, or something like that. (Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie bitch slapped BYU Professor Glen L. Pace for such teachings, watch out he's now in spirit form and can track you down too!)

She also lied about Mormonism being a faith where you are encouraged to ask questions. Apparently her intellectual pursuits did not find the dozens of her disfellowshiped and excommunicated real intellectual sisters upon which the anti-homosexual, feminist, and intellectual hammer of Mormon patriarchy slammed down, the September Six must be known to Mormon intellectuals. How an intellectual could innocently not know these truths makes her a deceiver, through ignorance or intent.

Sarah Shumway you are a lot of things, but you are not an intellectual.

http://fromdctobc.blogspot.com/2013/0...

Please read her analysis of the NY Times front page article on Hans Mattson's doubt on Mormonism. Hans Mattson deserves far more respect than Sarah Shumway gave him in her blog and as an answer to how I labelled this post.

Sarah Shumway you do not have respect due to you as an intellectual, there is no intellect in your writings just faith in the teachings of your parents, not a difficult position. You are having a "knowledge crisis" you know or should know things that conflict with your faith and you blog deceptions of your knowledge to confirm your faith. As an expert on Mormon history, doctrine, faith and society, I find your tactics repulsive and inadequate to inform anyone but the most trusting of primary children. Although your do's and don't claims would have been shot down by me even at age 9, but of course you would have told on me to my mom and dad as a little smarty pants.

Please read her blog about Hans Mattson and his "crisis of faith". I would like to hear your thoughts, but as you can tell, I'm pretty disgusted by her analysis. Maybe this is a good blogger to follow, a Millennial Mormon, a woman with degrees, and an advocate for ignoring truth while following the feelings of familiar comfort and ignoring the feelings of being shamelessly deceived.

I see this style of communication as dismissive. My expertise and instinct is to not allow Mormonism and Mormons to frame the conversation, they will do so in such a matter as to have some presence of reason.

For example it is reasonable to Sarah Shumway to deny knowledge or concede that she will never be able to reconcile her faith with truth, because she prefers her faith in the One True Church of Mormonism above anything else. So to her the task becomes, I want to feel good about Mormonism regardless of knowledge, so be more like me, and Mormonism will work better for you. No thank you Sarah, my principles include intellectual integrity. I will not hold faith in a falsehood and I will not take morality lessons from 80 year-olds that deceive about foundational doctrines and principles.

The insistence of ignoring facts in order to have a faith choice or assignment is beyond tolerable and most definitely not intellectual. If intellect and faith are in conflict and the choice is to ignore intellect to preserve faith, the crisis is an "integrity crisis". Like most all people that are formerly Mormons, the manipulation to make Mormonism an honest faith was not possible for an honest individual. Some like Sarah Shumway can bend her integrity to consider herself both intelligent and faithful. I cannot see any evidence in her writings that she has been successful in addressing her crisis of knowledge. Her faith in Mormonism is entirely unchallenged due to a lack of curiosity on why her religion would deceive about issues that require integrity.
topic image
Devastation Caused By The Church's Immoral Stance On Porn
Thursday, Sep 12, 2013, at 08:22 AM
Original Author(s): Controlfreak
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
First, to be totally clear, I want to point out that I find much of what would be called porn to be very distasteful, frequently degrading and damaging to individuals who become addicted to it.

Having said that, I have been noticing lately just how much devastation is caused by the church's hyperactive stance on pornography. Over and over I hear of couples who are on the brink of divorce or whose marriages are in a shambles because the wife has learned that her husband is "addicted" to porn. The church harps over and over about how porn destroys families, but in most of the cases that I have been personally aware of and I would dare to guess most cases within the church in general, it is not the porn that destroys the family. It is the church's teachings on porn.

The problem is that it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The woman is told over and over about how evil it is. How it will make her husband never be able to look at her normally. How it will shatter her family if he becomes addicted. (OK, let's be fair and say that it can happen the other way to, but I'll keep saying "he" anyway) So what happens when the wife finds out the husband has looked at porn? Her world is totally rocked. She is sure that it is all coming crashing down around her. But let's take a step back. What has really happened here? Her husband looked at a picture of a naked lady and masturbated. Is he now a sex addict? Hell, no. He's a man. It's pretty much the definition.

Regardless of whether or not you feel that porn should be discouraged (largely due to the many despicable industries involved and its effect on the perception of women, I think it should), it seems obvious to me that most of the problems experienced by couples where a husband has been involved with porn is NOT that the he is now a sex addict. It is the huge overreaction and misunderstanding that the church has groomed in the wife her whole life.

I hate seeing couple after couple completely devastated and getting torn apart over what are really very mild issues. I look at them and want to tell the wife that if she would just relax and accept that as a man her husband likes naked ladies and there is nothing inherently wrong with that, there might not even be an issue at all! Sure there are legitimate cases of sex addiction and I absolutely believe that every couple should discuss the boundaries they mutually wish to respect, but honestly, I think in most cases the harm from the church's preprogrammed overreaction far outweighs any real harm caused by the viewing of porn.

That is not even getting to any of the masturbation/body shame and intimacy issues the church has dumped on its members via this and similar avenues.
topic image
Massive New Mormon Temple In Florida
Tuesday, Sep 24, 2013, at 08:07 AM
Original Author(s): Frogdogs
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
Wow. They hit all the high (low) points but I loved how they trotted out the "fastest growing religion" meme right at the gate. ROFL.

See: http://m.local10.com/Massive-Mormon-t...

Would LOVE to see how many of the mormons who have 'doubled' in number in south Florida actually stay active in two years, or even in just one. I'm sure they get converts from vulnerable immigrant populations - of which there are many. Instead of 3 mormons in South Florida, there are now 6! The rosy picture presented in the video is pure, unadulterated PR. Where oh where did that squeaky clean footage come from, I wonder?

And the reference to "Solomon's Temple" with such seriousness. I can only imagine the Jewish population falling all over themselves laughing (or cursing) at that contorted attempt at self-authentication. Every time that sober, serious "we are so very holy, just like God's chosen people, the ancient Hebrews" script is trotted out, I shake my head in wonder and disgust.

Just goes to show that news reports are nothing more than fluff and ratings-grabs, with little attempt to present factual information.

I wonder how many locals who saw the newscast said to themselves privately, "Ah, crap. Clearwater has scientology and now we'll have more mormons..."

You can't run and hide, TSCC. Too many people know precisely what goes on behind those closed doors, and what it costs to get there.

How very surprising it's being built smack next to a busy highway. Clearly the Lard will need all the help he can get these days in brand visibility.
topic image
"The Lost Latter-Day Saints"
Thursday, Sep 26, 2013, at 07:55 AM
Original Author(s): Truth B Told
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
In the latest Ensign the Mormon Church has yet another, even more offensive label: "The Lost Latter-Day-Saints." (Be sure to use the church's full name here.)

It would be more correct to call us the 'found' LDS.. But I do feel it a step forward that we're being referred to as something other than the generic 'inactives' and something less derogatory than the 'anti-mormons'.

I think its a step forward because when I chose to accept truth, i simultaneously chose, although unintentionally, to alienate myself from all of my friends, family and community. Its more of an acknowledgment of our presence than other terms.

I, like many of you, come from generations of mormons. Its as much a part of my family as is our brown hair or my male pattern baldness.. I couldn't completely extract the mormon church from my life even if I wanted because all the rest of my family are still TBMs and even my kids are being raised in it. Extracting the mormon church form my life completely would ultimately mean extracting the life out of me.

I've often thought about this as the years have passed since I renounced the faith. My decision to leave put me at odds with this thing that defines my family. Kind of like if a Jew were to renounce his Jewishness. Was it that individuals fault that they were born Jewish? That they can't participate in the heritage of their family because they've taken issue with it? Wouldn't it be such a feel good if a person in this position were to help change the religion in such a way that they could once again align themselves with the organization and thereby once again participate in their family's heritage?

I guess that's why I hold out hope that the mormon church will, over time, transform radically. That it will change into a constructive, truth loving organization that I wouldn't mind being affiliated with again (or watching my children participate in). If this were to happen, I could be at peace that my family's name is associated with something that wasn't right in the beginning, but then changed into something that ultimately was constructive. And that I could feel good that I had a small part in changing the shape of both my family and this thing that defines my family so much.

I think this is why I stir the pot around my family and on social media. We are just as much 'LDS' as any of the TBMs are whether they realize it or not. And the more voice we're given within the organization, the more we will be heard. And the more we're heard, the more things will change.. That's my hope anyway.

Perhaps a vain hope.. but its one that would allow me to reconnect with the heritage of my family in a way that's suitable with me.
topic image
Do Not Doubt Your Doubts!
Monday, Oct 7, 2013, at 07:24 AM
Original Author(s): Just Thinking
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
In light of the recent odious church admonition to 'doubt your doubts', I offer this apt quote from Robert Weston:

"Cherish your doubts, for doubt is the attendant of truth. Doubt is the key to the door of knowledge; it is the servant of discovery. A belief which may not be questioned binds us to error, for there is incompleteness and imperfection in every belief.

Doubt is the touchstone of truth; it is an acid which eats away the false. Let no one fear for the truth, that doubt may consume it; for doubt is a testing of belief.

The truth stands boldly and unafraid; it is not shaken by the testing; For truth, if it be truth, arises from each testing stronger, more secure.

Those that would silence doubt are filled with fear; their houses are built on shifting sands. But those who fear not doubt, and know its use; are founded on rock.

They shall walk in the light of growing knowledge; the work of their hands shall endure. Therefore let us not fear doubt, but let us rejoice in its help: It is to the wise as a staff to the blind; doubt is the attendant of truth."

- Robert Weston, Unitarian Universalist minister
topic image
Your Divorced Your Not Welcomed at LDS
Monday, Dec 2, 2013, at 09:08 AM
Original Author(s): Themaster
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
25 plus years ago I was told by my sp as well as my bishop to divorce my then current wife. While the advice was indeed sound, the ramifications of being a divorced man in the world of mormons, was something I was totally unprepared for.

I was denied church callings, temple recommends, shunned by the rank and fill members. During almost every bishop interviewed I was accused of committing sexual sins with single women, married women, members, non members, etc. For three years, I endured abuse at the hands of mormons simply because I was not married but divorced. I was told by one bishop that since I was single that I should find another church. I moved multiple times and had 7 different bishops across the USA during my 3 years of being single. Some of the moves across country were work related and others were local because I wanted a nicer apartment which meant a new ward and a new bishop. The way I was treated and abused was not isolated to one rogue bishop but was systemic of how LDS treats divorced men and women throughout the USA.

After I married again, I thought the abuse would stop but no way. Every new bishop and every new sp wanted to know all the details of why I had gotten divorced and all the juicy details of any and all sexual sins committed during the marriage and after the divorced even if they had been repented of. They also demanded the same answers from my wife about her divorce. I remember telling one bishop, I have been married to my current wife for over 15 years, when are you guys going to quite asking for details about my divorce? It has nothing to do with who I am now. They never stop wanting to judge and wanting to punish.

Fast forward 25 years after my divorce and I was having breakfast with a TBM couple when the wife's TBM brother (Ted) joins us. I learn Ted is now divorced, has teenagers, was in the bishopric, still believes in LDS and that TSCC is the true church. As I listened to him, I realized he was saying the exact same things I said about being divorced in TSCC 25 years ago. Ted mentions he has been going to different LDS web sites searching for answers as to why he is being treated so poorly by lds leaders.

After a quarter of a century, I believe TSCC still does not want divorced people to belong to their cult. If they did, they would not treat single/divorced people so poorly. It used to be and I doubt this has changed. You could take a ward list and a simple count would show that about 25 to 35 percent of a "married ward" was actually single and that almost this entire segment of "members" did not attend TSCC meetings. For those reading this blog that still attend TSCC, take your ward list and see what your wards percentage is and if these singles are active.

The leaders of the LDS version of TSCC once again show they have not received a single revelation from their ALIEN SPACE GOD. For a true god would know that treating divorced people with love, care and respect would grow the money coffers at TSCC much faster than a missionary surge trying to baptize the children of those that TSCC shunned after divorce and those non members that do not check the internet for facts.

Breakfast with some TBM's reminded me that after a quarter of a century, the leaders of TSCC still have not received a single revelation from their mythical god and they still have no love or concern about their members. Instead they love the filty lucre they steal from their devoted followers.
topic image
Who Is Responible For Mormons Being Mormons: The Church Or The Members?
Monday, Dec 2, 2013, at 08:07 AM
Original Author(s): Rt
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
Yes, the LDS church is an authoritarian cult using tactics like mind control, shunning and preying on the mentally impaired, the emotionally unstable and the socio-economically weak, but it is not an all-powerful machine that holds all its adherents against their will.

Think about how few people actually are Mormons. Despite having the largest religious sales force in the world - by far - Mormonism is not even a blimp on the radar, barely a couple of tenths of one hundreth of the earth's population.

Of all the people that do join the Mormon church, roughly three quarters will have left it within one year after baptism.

More recently, we have the admission from church administrators that strong members descending from multiple generations of Mormon ancestors, the young, the desillusioned, the disenchanted, the betrayed, the deceived, they are leaving the church in droves.

Whenever Mormonism is in the spotlights, because of Mitt or the BoM musical, the church's PR machine works overtime but despite the millions of dollars they pour into these efforts, most if not all people still think Mormons are weird polygamist freaks.

For all the manipulative and deceptive influence which the church wields over its members, the responsibility to remain a member is ultimately theirs.

The information is out there. I'm not talking about the more arcane aspects of Mormonism that became generally accessible with the advent of internet, but simple things like revelations to build a house for Joe and give Joe money and let Joe have sex with lots of women, or Jaredite barges, or cureloms and cumoms, or occult death oaths, or funny underwear, etc.

The scam is so bleeding obvious that anyone who falls for it must accept the brunt of the responsibility.

I don't know if emotional attachment is the only reason why people remain Mormons, just like I don't think manipulation is the only reason. It could be more passive than that, just being fine with the way things are.

Whatever the reason, it is ultimately the members' own choice and as such, it should be respected.

People have a right to be stupid and no people are better at excercising that right than the Mormons, who even pride themselves in it (although they call it "being peculiar").
topic image
Mormonism Is A Religion Of Surface Appearance
Friday, Jan 10, 2014, at 07:58 AM
Original Author(s): Runtu
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
I've come to believe that Mormonism is a religion of surface appearance in that people measure righteousness and happiness according to a list of outward behaviors, such as drinking or attending church or paying tithing. As long as those outward behaviors are observed, everything is copacetic. Dig beneath the surface in Mormon homes, and you see the same problems that every other family deals with.

I believe that this causes people to disconnect from how they feel inside. They look at their lives and see that they are doing everything by the book. They may even feel the spirit sometimes.

They see "happiness" and "joy" as products of obedience to these surface commandments, so by the church's standards, they should be happy. If they're not (and many aren't), it can't be that their participation in the church isn't making them happy, but it must be something else. Usually, that something else is a nagging feeling that they must not be doing enough, or doing it right, because if they were, they'd be happy. So they feel guilty and try even harder, and still they aren't happy. So they feel guilty and try harder, and the cycle repeats itself.

I was in that cycle for years, and it wasn't until I broke free from it that I realized I wasn't happy or unhappy because of my ability to keep the commandments and seek the spirit and so on. I was unhappy because I was genuinely unhappy (not to mention clinically depressed).

I'm happy now because I like myself, I am content with what I am doing in life, and I have developed a capacity to forgive myself that I never had before. Oh, and I'm financially better off, too, though I can't say that is or isn't a factor in my happiness. I'm supposed to be miserable because I walked away from Mormonism. But I was miserable as a Mormon. I'm supposed to be missing out on joy because I'm an apostate, but I feel much more joyful and happy now.

I know. I just think I'm happy.
topic image
The Psychology Of Mormonism Group Think
Friday, Jan 10, 2014, at 08:01 AM
Original Author(s): Craig Paxton
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
As one would expect ones perspective i.e. worldview takes a dramatic shift when one comes to the realization that the world does not revolve around Mormonism. When I finally jettisoned my heart and gave into what I knew in my mind to be true.I was amazed at how many of the premises I had been taught to believe in were not based in reality.

For example, I had been taught and believed that because of Mormonism, those who followed the tenants of Mormonism had superior families. Once I opened my eyes I was stunned to discover how many wonderful and oft times superior family bonds there were outside of Mormonism. Yes Mormon can and often do have wonderful families.but so do those outside of the church. In other words Mormon's do not have a lock on wonderful families.

Since my disaffection I have confronted other premises I was taught and found many lacking in any reality. Such Mormon group think assertions that those who drink alcohol are A. Evil, B. depraved, C. Destined to alcoholism and ending up in a gutter and D. the real false notion that those who drink are unhappy. None of these assertions are based in reality.

Another assertion is the false distinction between Happiness and Joy. (Think Mans search for happiness) Mormon's assert that Joy is transcendent and far superior to mere happiness which is transient and fleeting. This is another Mormon group think lie.

Still another is the assertion that living the gospel gives you financial blessings beyond your ability to receive them. What a pile of bull s***. Speaking anecdotally, my financial status has blossomed into a substantial retirement fund since I've been able to divert those funds from tithing to my own selfish retirement fund. How paying tithing helps one in this life is beyond me and since there is no empirical proofs of a post life.how paying tithing creates anything other than sacrifice for the individual is beyond me.

Another assertion is the wickedness never was happiness.... again a out and out lie....for one thing wickedness ONLY exists within the walls of religion... outside religion there only exits evil.

I'm curious what other premises you were taught that have turned out to be completely false.
topic image
A Medieval Muslim Freethinker Comments On The Book Of Mormon Challenge
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014, at 07:06 AM
Original Author(s): Californiakid
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
I've been reading a book called Doubt: A History, and I'm currently in the section on medieval Muslim doubt. There are some fascinating parallels between the history of Muslim and Mormon apologetics.

For instance, a ninth-century Muslim apologetic work called Proofs of Prophecy "gives much attention to the idea that the Koran was so beautiful that it was the miracle that validated Muhammad's word. He also argued that the Koran showed knowledge-knowledge of the history of the Jews, for example-that Muhammad could not have known by natural means." This sounds remarkably like the awed mantras of the Mormon apologist: "How could an uneducated farmboy produce such a work?" and "How could Joseph have known?"

The skeptics' response to this apologetic should also sound familiar. Ibn Al-Rawandi, also writing in the ninth century, mused, "Any astrologer can make correct predictions. In the same way, the fact that Muhammad could predict certain events does not prove that he was a prophet: he may have been able to guess successfully, but this does not mean that he had real knowledge of the future. And certainly the fact that he was able to recount events from the past does not prove that he was a prophet [because he could have read about those events in the Bible] and, if he was illiterate, he could still have had the Bible read to him."

As in Mormonism, the Islamic defense of scripture sometimes expressed itself in a challenge to doubters to produce a similar text. Sura 2:23-24 says, "And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful. But if you do not-and you will never be able to-then fear the Fire, whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the disbelievers."

Dandamp;C 67:5-8, of course, employs the same doubt-challenge-warning formula. "Your eyes have been upon my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and his language you have known, and his imperfections you have known; . . . Now, seek ye out of the Book of Commandments, even the least that is among them, and appoint him that is the most wise among you; Or, if there be any among you that shall make one like unto it, then ye are justified in saying that ye do not know that they are true; But if ye cannot make one like unto it, ye are under condemnation if ye do not bear record that they are true." Hugh Nibley famously extended this challenge to the Book of Mormon, asking doubters to try their hand at producing a scriptural text of similar length, complexity, and consistency in as short a time as it took Joseph to dictate the book.

Tenth-century free-thinker Muhammad ibn Zakariya- Ra-zi-'s incredulous response to this challenge will again sound familiar to doubters of Mormonism. "You claim that the evidentiary miracle is present and available, namely, the Koran. You say: 'Whoever denies it, let him produce a similar one.' Indeed, we shall produce a thousand similar, from the works of rhetoricians, eloquent speakers and valiant poets, which are more appropriately phrased and state the issues more succinctly. They convey the meaning better and their rhymed prose is in better meter. . . . By God what you say astonishes us! You are talking about a work which recounts ancient myths, and which at the same time is full of contradictions and does not contain any useful information or explanation. Then you say: 'Produce something like it?!'" Hmm. Indeed.
topic image
The Problem The Church May Not Be Thinking About
Thursday, Jan 23, 2014, at 07:32 AM
Original Author(s): Lloyd Dobler
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
So we all know about how the internet is exposing the truth claims of the Church and revealed how the Church lies to their members. I mean this is a problem and it is killing the Church. However, finding out about the truth claims of the Church seems to be revealing what may be an even bigger problem for them. The problem would be this:

Discovering the truth claims of the Church empowers members to question the value they are getting out of their Church experience.

I actually have had a lot of exerience being friends with many tbms as they have transitioned away from the Church over the past several years. Men and Women who were as tbm as you can get and who had a lifetime of faithful Church service and big calling under their belt. For pretty much all of them, their dissafection only started with the problematic truth claims. The coup de gras was when they then asked themselves what they and their family members were getting out of their Church experience. In other words, if the church were not true, but was also a really awesome place that drove a lot of value, many people would move on from the truth claims and stay.

They all speak now about how when they evaluated the value they were getting from their Church experience and then compared that to the value they could derive from doing other things, they all came to the conclusion that Mormonism is really a bad use of their time.

Something does not have to be true in order to be meaningful and fulfilling. Organizations don't have to be true in order to be a healthy and happy place to grow a marriage or raise kids or in which to individually participate.

The real problem for the Church is not that it is not true, it is that it blows. Church sucks. Of course, the Church compounds this problem with tying most of their programs, lessons and activities and calling around reinforcing the truth claims.

In other words, the Church experience is so bad that it NEEDED to be true in order to get people to actively participate. On their own and unsupported by the authority of the truth claims, the product of the Church is innadequate, it is boring and it is pointless. Hell, I know of three former tbms who still love Jesus and they are like "man, if I want to worship the Savior, the last place I would go is to the LDS Church". I mean the Church is even losing people who just want to learn about Jesus.

The Church has been a bad product for god knows how long. Just how bad this product is has be hidden and propped up by the truth claims. The disintigration of the truth claims has exposed and laid bare the product the Church produces and puts the Church on a level playing field with all of the other alternative ways to spend ones time.

The Church is not only not true, it is not competitive.

And so former tbms, who have every reason to stay and participate are leaving the Church because it is not fun, it is not fulfilling, it is not relevant, it is not sophisticated or interesting, it is an inneficient use of time, it is not spiritual and on and on.

So while the Church releases essays trying to come clean on their lying past and while they try to preserve their authority and their precious one true Church paradigm, the product of the Church remains antiquated, painfully predictable and boring. Members are leaving anyway. What makes matters worse is that as a tbm, you don't even have to fully come to the conclusion that the Church is not true in order to begin to empower yourself to question the value Mormonism is providing you and your family. I have seen this process begin well before the Church is not true conclusion has been made. Infact, many times the truth claim problems are exacerbated by the fact that the product and value the Church produces is innadequate on its own and when compared to outside alternatives, embarrassing.

I think the Church has a real problem on their hands and I think that problem is way bigger than just rocks and a hat etc.
topic image
So What If Mormons Descecrate The Dead?
Tuesday, Jan 28, 2014, at 07:17 AM
Original Author(s): Cheryl
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
Many don't care, but just as many are outraged, especially Jews.

Mormons claim the dead have a choice but deep inside, no Mormon believes this. If they did, their rituals would reflect it.

The baptism would have a caveat. "I baptize John Levy who is dead if he chooses to accept it."

The confirmation ritual would not declare him absolutely to be Mormon but would say, "if he so chooses."

All of the dead rituals would have similar "outs" in case the dead refused to go along. Instead, every rite is recited as fact. So the only reason Mormons think these rites wouldn't be eternal is if the dead soul was found unworthy to be Mormon. To a Mormon any gentile is "unworthy" since they're not a fully participating morgbot.

In the world of earth, Mormons finally relented and provided a resignation process. In the spirit world, there's no such thing. How would a spirit go about refusing to accept a proxy baptism, confirmation, anointing, endowment, marriage? He'd need a Greg Dodge spirit office.

Volunteer spirit, "Brother Dodge, we have another irate soul who wants out. Claims having his name removed from proxy baptisms in the SLC, Manti, Gilbert, and Mesa temples are completely removed, but he's still listed as a member in Hawaii and Rexburg. He's mad because his callings in the CK are cleaning toilets and pulling weeds. Goodness me, do these earthlyu slackers expect to be SS teachers or ward clerks when they used to drink tea on earth??"
topic image
What Is "The Gospel" Anyway? Seems Like Such An Ambiguous Term
Tuesday, Jan 28, 2014, at 07:18 AM
Original Author(s): Greyfort
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
"I know that the Gospel is true"...what do they actually mean by that?

If you asked the Church for a definition, they would keep it simple. They'd tell you that the Gospel is that Jesus was born, he died for your sins and that he restored his church through Joseph Smith. That's it.

Everything else after that is just extra icing on the cake.

But it's often used by members of the Church to be practically synonymous with "the Church." That would include everything from Jesus dying for you, to not wearing sandals in church.

You might often hear a member say that something can't be true because it's not in sync with 'the Gospel,' such as, say, Evolution. They're saying that if it can't be squared with what they've learned in church, then it can't be true.

You'll hear, "Not according to the Gospel ..." meaning not in accordance with Church teachings.

"I'm so thankful for the Gospel," usually means, "I'm so thankful for the Church."
topic image
"We Need It For Our Records." A Big Lie.
Thursday, Jan 30, 2014, at 07:17 AM
Original Author(s): Cheryl
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
A Mormon shows up to ask granny for her grandson's address. Why? "We just need it for our records.

Someone claiming to be a Mormon phones a parent to say they've lost their daughter's address. "Why do you need it? To harass or bother her when she's busy?"

"Oh no. We need it for our records."

An inactive moves and doesn't tell any Mormon where they're going. A search ensues and they tell the landlady with the deposit check.

"We need the whereabouts. It's just for our records."

Here's the reality. The Mormon church "needs" no information on anyone unless they willingly hand it over to show they want to be kept in the Mormon loop.

There is no legitimate reason for the morg to have contact information on 1000s of former members who have quit and want to be left alone.

Why does the church "want" this information? Here are possible reasons:

1. They want to hound them and catch them in crisis in hopes of luring them back.

2. They like the power and control of knowing where former members are and knowing they can step in and intimidate them if they choose.

3. They think everyone who has been blessed, baptized or participated is under their jurisdiction. Any or all of them might return and swell the church's numbers and power.

4. A few toadies think these "lost souls" actually need "help" of some kind from the church they're trying to avoid.

5. Two or three lowly members might think these "sheep" want the attention because they have nothing much going for themselves except that they used to be Mormons.

In truth Mormons might need white bread, water, ward houses, temples, and ugly underwear to practice their faith. They don't need my records.
topic image
Let The Dead Horse Die
Monday, Feb 10, 2014, at 12:04 PM
Original Author(s): Jeff Ricks
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
Over the last couple of days I've been in the early stages of a new project at work and when I'm in those stages I can put on my headphones and listen to whatever I want and still be productive, so I've been listening to Mormon Stories podcasts. It's given me an opportunity to become acquainted with an aspect of Mormon culture that was all but non-existent when I was last an active Mormon about 13 years ago. The contrast between what Mormon culture was like then with what it is today has made me aware that there's a cultural shift happening within Mormonism that I've not exactly been aware of. I have been aware that the church leaders are gradually trying to steer Mormonism away from its odd roots and more toward mainstream Christianity but there's another shift happening that I wasn't aware of. There seems to be a growing body of people who are substituting their past testimony with a new one. Whereas they once said, "I know that the Church is true," they're now saying, "I know that the Church is good."

I don't think any of those I've listened to, except maybe Richard Bushman, have explicitly stated that as their new testimony but now that I'm aware of it I think I understand better the perspective of people like Bushman, Grant Palmer, church apoligists and others. I think I now understand how it is that they can be fully aware of the lies, deceit, exploitation, manipulation, etc. that leaders of the Church have been and are guilty of and still choose to remain a Mormon. It's almost as if they've unconsciously set aside the leadership of the Church as no longer credible but they still believe in Mormon culture.

From one perspective I admire these people for trying to fix what's broken instead of leaving it behind but from another perspective it pains me to watch their struggle to find some way to keep Mormonism propped up. If aware former Mormons beat a dead horse then certainly aware but active Mormons are trying their damnest to keep a dead horse propped up. It pains me when I've heard statements like, "struggling to understand what Mormonism now means to them," "finding the good in Mormonism," "the leaders are human but that doesn't mean that Mormonism isn't good." I want to tell them to let it go. Let go of the boundaries of Mormonism because they no longer have any real meaning. Explore life and the possibilities beyond it. Quit trying to pound a square peg in a round hole. I think they'll find a much richer, more fulfilling life if they do. Let the dead horse die and we who are former Mormons will no longer feel motivated to continually say, "Hey people, the horse is dead!"

I realize that everyone is in a stage of development in their lives and shouldn't be judged as stupid or wrong for being in any particular stage. They are perfectly who they are at any given moment in their lives and so am I, with all my warts and faults. But I think there's nothing wrong with encouraging someone to move beyond a stage they seem to be stuck in. I hope others will always do the same for me.

My thoughts, for what they are worth.
topic image
"Lying For The Lord" And Pattern Of Deception In UK Law
Monday, Feb 10, 2014, at 07:46 AM
Original Author(s): Drw
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
On other threads, bcspace and other staunch defenders of Mormonism continue to insist that the Church is blameless as to the charges in the UK legal action and that the case will be thrown out, or that Tomas S. Monson and the LDS Church will at least be be found innocent if it proceeds. As stated previously, I am not so sure.

One cannot help but wonder if the less than honest behavior by the LDS Church, and the well earned reputation of the prominent Mormons in terms of "Lying for the Lord" will work against the LDS Church in the UK Courts should the case continue.

"Lying for the Lord" is a phrase that is inexorably and exclusively associated with Mormonism. Before BCSpace pops up with his normal knee jerk denial, he should simply Google "Lying for the Lord" as a search term and see what proportion of the hits refer to Mormons and Mormonism. (The answer is 100% - at least on my computer).

Some of the earliest contacts between Utah Mormons and the good citizens of the Great Britain were characterized by misrepresentation and lies on the part of the Utah Mormons. In addition to the (perhaps unintentional) lies about the veracity of LDS foundational truth claims, there are recorded instances of polygamous Mormon missionaries assuring potential converts in the UK that rumors of polygamy in Utah were lies spread by anti-Mormons.

Prominent Mormons have lied to the public throughout the history of the Church, starting at the very beginning with Joseph Smith, continuing through the manifesto years, and re-emerging as strong as ever to be practiced by Gordon B. Hinckley and Mitt Romney. The most prolific of them all in recent times, though, has to be Jeffrey Holland, who managed to get off two whoppers in the first minute and 17 seconds of a recent TV interview with a reporter from none other than the BBC.

A bit of research into official documents of the CoJCoLDS shows that missionaries are specifically instructed not to tell investigators all they know (to lie) about certain meaty or advanced Church doctrine and to provide only milk for as long as possible (with the clear implication that as long as possible means until long after baptism, if ever). Further research reveals written instructions to mission presidents not to disclose the (generous) financial support provided to them by the LDS Church.

All of this, and other information readily available to the Court(s) in the UK, such as a finding of guilty on 13 counts by the California Ethics Commission looking into illegal financial support of Prop 8, could well be interpreted as a pattern of deception by the LDS Church.

Deception was a term of legal art in defining statutory offenses in the the UK under the Theft Acts of 1968 and 1978. Until 2007 (when the Fraud Act of 2006 actually went into effect) a pattern of deception was legally actionable under these two former Acts.

Given the recent importance of the concept of pattern of deception in UK jurisprudence, I cannot help but wonder if the long history and ongoing pattern of deception by the LDS Church will work against it in the UK Courts, should the case continue.

One can only hope.
topic image
Selling Mormonism
Wednesday, Feb 12, 2014, at 06:39 AM
Original Author(s): Bazooka
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
A man walking along the street one day decides he is interested in buying a car. As he is walking along he is approached by a salesman who talks to him about an American built Cadillac that his firm sells. It's a great machine, will do a top speed of 140 MPH, achieves 55 miles to the gallon, has leather seats and a Bang and Olufsen sound system. He is introduced to some others who have already bought this car and they testify that it is indeed a great car and that everything the salesman has told him is true. Eventually the man is convinced and decides to buy the car.

For no particular reason the man, driving along in his new car, stops admiring the view through his windscreen and turns his attention to the sound system. He notices that the 'Bang and Olufsen' badge has come loose and, as he removes it, sees another brands (of more dubious quality) label underneath it. Feeling slightly concerned he presses the accelerator and notices that after a quick uplift in velocity the car won't get past 80 miles per hour. Increasingly worried now the man flicks through the on board computer reigns to check his settings and it becomes clear he is only achieving 30 miles to the gallon. He goes home very concerned. He decides to research his vehicle and so goes onto the manufacturers website. The technical specs are all still there - American built, 140 mph claimed top speed, 55 miles to the gallon economy, Bang and Olufsen sound system, the lot. He challenges the firm who sold him the car - but they stand by their original claims and tell him he is mistaken and he just isn't driving the car right. He tries talking about what he has noticed to the other people in the Cadillac owners club. They seem somewhat aggressive and tell him to stop being anti Cadillac and to just look at the lovely view from the windscreen as he drives along.

Which he does, for a while.

The nagging at the back of his mind telling him he has been ripped off won't go away. He has tried ignoring the displaced sound system badge, tried not checking the on board consumption computer, he has resisted the temptation to press the accelerator too far and has stopped talking to his fellow owners. He has also pretended not to notice that the 'real' leather seats sen to make his back sweat rather more than it should when in contact with 'real' leather. But eventually, his doubts take over and he seeks advice from some consumer groups. It becomes clear from a number of reviews that the car he is driving is not American built, it is merely American assembled, The sound system is made by the inferior brand and has been merely labeled with a Bang and Olufsen badge. The top speed and miles per gallon numbers are conjecture based on a number on unrealistic factors such as the atmospheric conditions being similar to those on the moon. And the leather? Well it is faux leather - plastic with a sprayed on leathercoating. He is cross. He is still making the HP payments. He points these problems out to his fellow owners, most reject what he is saying out of hand and inform him (strongly) not to talk to any of the other owners about his concerns. Two of them approach him separately and express that they too have similar concerns.

The firm that sold the car, under increasing pressure from bad customer reviews and poor industry ratings, engages its senior executives to release some very slight amendments to its claims. Which basically hint that what the independent reviews have been saying may have some substance to it, albeit not in a significant way. That maybe, the car isn't American built but it is technically 'made' in America', it's not per se a Bang and Olufsen system but it is made from the same electronics, no the seats aren't pure leather but we didn't claim the word 'pure', there's no evidence to suggest that the car could possibly achieve a top end of 140 MPH or an economy of 55 miles to the gallon but it will definitely achieve those at some point. He becomes cross. He tries to return the car and get a full refund. "Sorry, no chance" says the salesman, "it was sold as seen and it's your fault for interpreting what I said as being an official declaration of fact." His fellow club owners, alerted to his angst, criticize him for complaining and for challenging their own person view of their Cadillac. Despite what the Executives have said, they still believe it is American built, real leather etc and anyway, even if it isn't they still enjoy driving it, so he should just shut up about it and move on.

He and his fellow disgruntled owners cannot move on. They bought the car on the basis of what has turned out to be claims about it that they believe simply aren't true. Fortunately, the law in their country allows consumers some rights of redress. In the event of being sold a car on the basis of information about it that subsequently turns out to be knowingly incorrect, if you cannot get satisfaction from the vendor then you can ask the court to intervene to 'force' the vendor to settle the matter. So they do. Some of his fellow club owners point out that he doesn't treat his family right, the firm instigates press releases to minimize the credibility of his technical issues with the car and quietly they release amendments to their technical data to try and show that they told him the truth in the first place.

Fortunately the men are made of sterner stuff and decide to take on the firm that sold him the car, regardless of the cost to themselves and how he is perceived by the other owners, some of whom he is related to...he has to, because after all, unless he does so he believes the firm will continue to knowingly mis-sell vehicles to unsuspecting members of the public and he has to have his own peace of mind that he did what he felt he had to do.
topic image
Church Vs. Religion
Wednesday, Nov 18, 2015, at 07:57 AM
Original Author(s): Kishkumen
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
OK, now, granting that this is not going to be an appealing or useful idea to many here, the idea of the distinction between a church and a religion is something that I believe LDS people need to spend more time thinking about. The recent policy debacle has raised this issue yet again. Many members have reconsidered their affiliation with the LDS Church after reading the monstrous policy LDS leaders placed in the new Church Handbook of Instructions. Good! They should reconsider their affiliation with a group that discriminates against gay people--discriminates against its own members, its own children.

Some people find the idea of leaving the LDS Church unthinkable, even though they are rocked to the core by the policy. I am sympathetic to them. Leaving a cherished community can be extremely painful. Some LDS folk have placed this struggle in writing, and have shared their conclusion that they will not leave their faith. I can respect that. But, I can't help but be struck by the extent to which their faith seems rooted in the church. Indeed, I have seen writings in which the distinction between religion and church in this situation is almost unthinkingly ignored, and I marvel at that.

You may think me a little dense for saying so. "Does Kish not know that the LDS Church teaches that it is the only true church and the only real Mormonism?" Yes, it is true that the LDS Church teaches these things and many people believe they are true. Of course, the LDS Church's claims today do not represent absolute truth, and it would be healthier if more would recognize that, in this case, there is a very good reason to think that the LDS position is wrong.

It is absolutely the case that Christians have long assumed that Jesus founded a church, and that membership in this church has been deemed to be important for centuries. The widespread sense that such a church was no longer on the earth pushed people to form new churches. Joseph Smith founded a church based on the premise that Christ's Church was not on the earth; he claimed to be God's agent in fixing that problem.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Smith's claim was true (I don't believe it was literally true, but allow me to proceed with the premise, in any case). When Joseph Smith died, he had no successor. Brigham Young was one of a handful of claimants, and through his ability he was able to persuade many Mormons at the time that he and the other apostles were to be the caretakers of the Church moving forward. He did not claim to be Smith's replacement. He would be a guardian of the Church. Over time, however, Young moved into the position of successor. We see him making this claim during the Reformation in the 1850s.

I propose that at the death of Joseph Smith, and maybe even before his death, Mormonism was already a religion that was not identical with the LDS Church. Certainly, after Joseph Smith died, and there were a handful of groups whom one could legitimately call Mormon, Mormonism was no longer a single church. It is natural that disagreement and competition led some of the different groups to reject each other and view themselves as the only true Church.

Old habits die hard. But increasingly I find the straightjacket of this kind of thinking unacceptable. History shows quite clearly that the succession was a mess, and that Brigham Young's claim to be the second prophet of Mormonism is a deeply problematic one. So, let's not make the mistake of saying that the LDS Church is the only way to be a Mormon, or a child of the Restoration (whichever term one prefers). I see the people who have left the LDS Church to be as potentially Mormon as any other person who embraces some version of religion that Joseph Smith and his associates constructed.

So, Rosalynde Welch has written a heartfelt statement about how she cannot leave Mormonism even though the new policy deeply troubles her. To her, leaving the Church would be like denying reality. Mormonism is the ground of her existence. Her identity is, she believes, contingent on Mormonism. Although I find this extremely ill-advised and problematic, I would ask her: "why does being Mormon necessarily mean being LDS to you?" Although I anticipate what her response would be, I question the tenability of the assumption that the Mormon religion/identity and the LDS Church are one and the same thing.

Gina Colvin expresses sorrow that "we" (LDS people) are losing so many from "our" community. Again, I challenge the assumption that resigning from the LDS Church necessarily means that one is no longer Mormon. Sure, if a person chooses to eschew Mormon identity, whether I agree with them or not, I will respect and honor their decision. But I am troubled that even liberal Mormons like Gina assume that being LDS and being Mormon have to be the same thing, and thus we need to mourn the resignation of LDS members as though it represented some awful catastrophe.

The LDS Church is not the Mormon religion or the Restoration movement. It is one church. Leaving that one Church will not result in the eternal damnation of the person leaving. Such an idea flies in the face of some of the most humane teachings of Joseph Smith, the principal founder of Mormonism.
topic image
PSA To TBMS: Non-Mormons Are Not Impressed With Your Religion
Thursday, Nov 19, 2015, at 11:39 AM
Original Author(s): Missionprez
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
I have lived my whole life, except for college, outside of Utah. When I was a Mormon, I thought that everyone respected me so much. "I'm going on a mission to Africa to teach people about my church!" I'd say to my non-mormon friends and their parents. "That's, uh, pretty cool!" they'd say, usually looking around, trying to come up with something else to talk about.

I knew why. They were so impressed with my faith and courage, they could hardly talk about it. Deep down, they felt something. Something told them that what I was doing was true and right. They didn't quite know how to ask; I would look for opportune times to bring up the gospel for those who were perhaps too ashamed of their own imperfect past to ask directly. They admired my family's abstinence of coffee and alcohol, and they respected our refusal to participate in sports on Sunday. They wanted to come to church with me, they were just to embarrassed to ask. If only I could come up with a seamless way to invite them, they'd be thrilled to come! Deep down, in a place even they themselves didn't understand, they admired my religion and would eventually want to join it.

Turns out I was wrong.

I have talked to many of my non-mormon friends from growing up. They liked me well enough, but they thought my religion was stupid. A book that chronicles the journey of an Israelite family sailing to America to populate that continent? Found on gold plates by a guy in New York in the 1820s? Who later married tons of women because 'God told him so'? Who started a church that has secret temples and a 10% tithing requirement? Yeah, they thought it was empty and stupid. They just didn't really want to say anything.

Families can be together forever! What a great message! Except everyone else realizes that the Mormon church is the only one who doesn't let people into their temples, which represent heaven. Mormon heaven is VERY exclusionary, they think, if family members can be left out of wedding ceremonies in your temple.

Non-mormons are NOT going to be impressed with your stalwart defense of the new policy on gays and their children. "Oh, look at these mormons! They support anything their leaders do and say! How amazing and faithful are they!" No, that's not what they are thinking. Even the most conservative Christians think the policy banning baptism for children of gay people is wrong and un-Christian. If you are a mormon right now, your non-mormon neighbors think you are stupid.

"Oh, non-members just don't understand!" the mormons tell themselves. If Non-mormons just understood how much mormonism is about love and families, they'd all want to join the church! "If we put out a movie showing 5 diverse, successful, faithful mormons living their religion, people will realize how great we are!" No. Non-mormons see Meet The Mormons as just another piece of propaganda. It's about the same as those Scientology commercials.

Mormons think they are misunderstood. It is actually the mormons who misunderstand everyone else. No one is impressed with your advertisements on facebook and YouTube. No one thinks your doctrine of eternal families is anything special. No one respects the words of your beloved prophet (who hasn't said anything special in decades - if ever). No one is impressed with your proclamation on the family. All they think is that your religion is shallow and does not answer any real questions. The controls the church puts on you go contrary to what Jesus clearly taught in the Bible. Your Book of Mormon is so obviously not true it's not even really worth talking about (how many archeologists - even MORMON archeologists - use it at all in their work?) Your priesthood blessings are not more effective than any other religion's prayers or blessings.

Oh yeah, and your missionaries are annoying. They don't know what they're talking about.
topic image
Regrets Over Resigning?
Thursday, Nov 19, 2015, at 07:01 AM
Original Author(s): Runtu
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
By my count, about two dozen long-time friends of mine have resigned from the church in the last week or so. Most of them had been inactive for some time, but there were a few who surprised me. An American couple who lived in Bolivia when I was a missionary and took care of us when we were sick or needed something; they have a gay son, and they had until now believed that the church could be a loving, welcoming place for their son. A friend who had gone back to church a couple of years ago, believing he could find a spiritual home in the church and help to make the church more inclusive. A friend from my college days who had not seemed like he was on the fence at all. And a few others I could note.

Then I got an email from one of my friends from childhood. His father had been our bishop for years and, as stake president, had set me apart as a missionary. He had stopped believing in the church years ago, but he had stayed on the records because his mother told him she couldn't bear it if he resigned. She passed away a year or so ago, but he had kept his promise until now.

Since then, I've seen people online speculating that those who resigned because of the anti-gay, anti-children policy might feel regret for having acted hastily; after all, the church is only hurting some children and dividing some families, not as many as it had originally appeared.

I asked my friend about this, and he laughed, saying he was just happy to be done with it. No regrets, no sadness. If anything, he said he felt a little relieved, as he had long felt his church membership was hypocritical.

I used to think I would feel sad if I resigned from the church--not because I would feel sad at the loss of salvation or whatever, but because it would close the door on the more innocent me of my youth, the kid who believed the church was not only God's true church but was the key to happiness.

But I realized, talking to my friend, that I've already grieved for my loss of belief. It was a loss, and I grieved over it for a long time. I've gotten past the anger, the hurt, the feelings of betrayal. Since the "policy" came out, I have felt genuine disgust for the church, as is appropriate to feel about any organization that deliberately uses children as tools (weapons, really) to divide families and hurt people.

But I don't feel regret. I do feel sorry for people who feel obligated to defend cruel policies, but mostly I feel sad for the families already divided and hurt by the church. And I feel a little stupid for not realizing until now that the church was capable of deliberately hurting people, even targeting children, to further its aims.
 
mcimg
HOME
FAQ
CONTACT ME
332 TOPICS
THE EX-MORMON FORUMS
MORMON RESIGNATION
Google
Search The
Mormon Curtain





MormonCurtain

How to navigate:
  • Click the subject below to go directly to the article.
  • Click the blue arrow on the article to return to the top.
  • Right-Click and copy the "-Guid-" (the Link Location URL) for a direct link to the page and article.
Archived Blogs:
Book Of Abraham And The Facsimiles Into The Future
Osmonds To Rock The Utah Capitol With A Love Bomb Of Hate
Commandments Which The Mormon Church And Its Leaders Disregard
Tipping Point Is Social Media Driven
How Their Plan Of Salvation Is Broken On A Cross
Most Of What Comes From The Church Leadership Is Utter Gibberish
The Sound Of Silence Is Killing The Church
The Plan Of Happiness
"With All Due Respect" To Sarah Shumway - Don't Dismiss Hans Mattson
Devastation Caused By The Church's Immoral Stance On Porn
Massive New Mormon Temple In Florida
"The Lost Latter-Day Saints"
Do Not Doubt Your Doubts!
Your Divorced Your Not Welcomed at LDS
Who Is Responible For Mormons Being Mormons: The Church Or The Members?
Mormonism Is A Religion Of Surface Appearance
The Psychology Of Mormonism Group Think
A Medieval Muslim Freethinker Comments On The Book Of Mormon Challenge
The Problem The Church May Not Be Thinking About
So What If Mormons Descecrate The Dead?
What Is "The Gospel" Anyway? Seems Like Such An Ambiguous Term
"We Need It For Our Records." A Big Lie.
Let The Dead Horse Die
"Lying For The Lord" And Pattern Of Deception In UK Law
Selling Mormonism
Church Vs. Religion
PSA To TBMS: Non-Mormons Are Not Impressed With Your Religion
Regrets Over Resigning?
5,717 Articles In 332 Topics
TopicImage TOPIC INDEX (332 Topics)
TopicImage AUTHOR INDEX

  · ADAM GOD DOCTRINE (4)
  · APOLOGISTS (53)
  · ARTICLES OF FAITH (1)
  · BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD (31)
  · BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD - PEOPLE (16)
  · BLACKS AND MORMONISM (12)
  · BLACKS AND THE PRIESTHOOD (11)
  · BLOOD ATONEMENT (4)
  · BOB BENNETT (1)
  · BOB MCCUE (144)
  · BONNEVILLE COMMUNICATIONS (2)
  · BOOK OF ABRAHAM (50)
  · BOOK OF MORMON (66)
  · BOOK OF MORMON EVIDENCES (18)
  · BOOK OF MORMON GEOGRAPHY (24)
  · BOOK OF MORMON WITNESSES (5)
  · BOOK REVIEW - ROUGH STONE ROLLING (28)
  · BOOKS - AUTHORS AND DESCRIPTIONS (12)
  · BOOKS - COMMENTS AND REVIEWS (44)
  · BOY SCOUTS (22)
  · BOYD K. PACKER (33)
  · BRIAN C. HALES (1)
  · BRIGHAM YOUNG (24)
  · BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY (54)
  · BRUCE C. HAFEN (4)
  · BRUCE D. PORTER (1)
  · BRUCE R. MCCONKIE (10)
  · CALLINGS (11)
  · CATHOLIC CHURCH (5)
  · CHANGING DOCTRINE (12)
  · CHILDREN AND MORMONISM (48)
  · CHRIS BUTTARS (1)
  · CHURCH LEADERSHIP (3)
  · CHURCH PUBLISHED MAGAZINES (51)
  · CHURCH TEACHING MANUALS (10)
  · CHURCH VAULTS (4)
  · CITY CREEK CENTER (23)
  · CIVIL UNIONS (14)
  · CLEON SKOUSEN (3)
  · COGNITIVE DISSONANCE (2)
  · COMEDY (128)
  · CONCISE DICTIONARY OF MORMONISM (14)
  · D. MICHAEL QUINN (1)
  · D. TODD CHRISTOFFERSON (6)
  · DALLIN H. OAKS (101)
  · DANIEL C. PETERSON (88)
  · DANITES (4)
  · DAVID A. BEDNAR (23)
  · DAVID O. MCKAY (8)
  · DAVID R. STONE (1)
  · DAVID WHITMER (1)
  · DELBERT L. STAPLEY (1)
  · DESERET NEWS (3)
  · DIETER F. UCHTDORF (13)
  · DNA (23)
  · DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS (8)
  · DON JESSE (2)
  · ELAINE S. DALTON (5)
  · EMMA SMITH (5)
  · ENSIGN PEAK (1)
  · ERICH W. KOPISCHKE (1)
  · EX-MORMON FOUNDATION (33)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 1 (35)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 10 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 11 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 12 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 13 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 14 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 15 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 16 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 17 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 18 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 19 (26)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 2 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 20 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 21 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 22 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 23 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24 (28)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 3 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 4 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 5 (23)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 6 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 7 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 8 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 9 (26)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 1 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 10 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 11 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 12 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 13 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 14 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 15 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 16 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 17 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 18 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 19 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 2 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 20 (24)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 21 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 22 (24)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 23 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 24 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 25 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 26 (61)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 3 (21)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 4 (22)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 5 (24)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 6 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 7 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 8 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 9 (26)
  · EXCOMMUNICATION AND COURTS OF LOVE (19)
  · EZRA TAFT BENSON (30)
  · FACIAL HAIR (6)
  · FAIR / MADD - APOLOGETICS (70)
  · FAITH PROMOTING RUMORS (11)
  · FARMS (30)
  · FIRST VISION (23)
  · FOOD STORAGE (3)
  · FUNDAMENTALIST LDS (17)
  · GENERAL AUTHORITIES (29)
  · GENERAL CONFERENCE (14)
  · GENERAL NEWS (5)
  · GEORGE P. LEE (1)
  · GORDON B. HINCKLEY (68)
  · GRANT PALMER (8)
  · GREGORY L. SMITH (9)
  · GUNNISON MASSACRE (1)
  · H. DAVID BURTON (2)
  · HAROLD B. LEE (1)
  · HATE MAIL I RECEIVE (23)
  · HAUNS MILL (2)
  · HBO BIG LOVE (12)
  · HEBER C. KIMBALL (4)
  · HELEN RADKEY (17)
  · HELLEN MAR KIMBALL (4)
  · HENRY B. EYRING (5)
  · HOLIDAYS (13)
  · HOME AND VISITING TEACHING (9)
  · HOWARD W. HUNTER (1)
  · HUGH NIBLEY (13)
  · HYMNS (7)
  · INTERVIEWS IN MORMONISM (18)
  · J REUBEN CLARK (1)
  · JAMES E. FAUST (7)
  · JEFF LINDSAY (6)
  · JEFFREY MELDRUM (1)
  · JEFFREY R. HOLLAND (32)
  · JEFFREY S. NIELSEN (11)
  · JOHN GEE (3)
  · JOHN L. LUND (3)
  · JOHN L. SORENSON (4)
  · JOHN TAYLOR (1)
  · JOSEPH B. WIRTHLIN (1)
  · JOSEPH F. SMITH (1)
  · JOSEPH FIELDING SMITH (8)
  · JOSEPH SITATI (1)
  · JOSEPH SMITH (101)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - POLYGAMY (43)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - PROPHECY (8)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - SEER STONES (7)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - WORSHIP (13)
  · JUDAISM (3)
  · JULIE B. BECK (6)
  · KEITH B. MCMULLIN (1)
  · KERRY MUHLESTEIN (9)
  · KERRY SHIRTS (6)
  · KINDERHOOK PLATES (6)
  · KIRTLAND BANK (6)
  · KIRTLAND EGYPTIAN PAPERS (17)
  · L. TOM PERRY (5)
  · LAMANITE PLACEMENT PROGRAM (3)
  · LAMANITES (36)
  · LANCE B. WICKMAN (1)
  · LARRY ECHO HAWK (1)
  · LDS CHURCH (19)
  · LDS CHURCH OFFICE BUILDING (9)
  · LDS OFFICIAL ESSAYS (22)
  · LDS SOCIAL SERVICES (3)
  · LGBT - AND MORMONISM (44)
  · LORENZO SNOW (1)
  · LOUIS C. MIDGLEY (6)
  · LYNN A. MICKELSEN (2)
  · LYNN G. ROBBINS (1)
  · M. RUSSELL BALLARD (13)
  · MARK E. PETERSON (7)
  · MARK HOFFMAN (12)
  · MARLIN K. JENSEN (3)
  · MARRIOTT (2)
  · MARTIN HARRIS (5)
  · MASONS (16)
  · MELCHIZEDEK/AARONIC PRIESTHOOD (9)
  · MERRILL J. BATEMAN (3)
  · MICHAEL D. WILLIAMS (1)
  · MICHAEL OTTERSON (1)
  · MICHAEL R. ASH (26)
  · MITT ROMNEY (71)
  · MORE GOOD FOUNDATION (4)
  · MORMON CELEBRITIES (14)
  · MORMON CHURCH HISTORY (8)
  · MORMON CHURCH PR (13)
  · MORMON CHURCH PROPAGANDA (5)
  · MORMON CLASSES (1)
  · MORMON DOCTRINE (35)
  · MORMON FUNERALS (12)
  · MORMON GARMENTS (20)
  · MORMON HANDCARTS (12)
  · MORMON INTERPRETER (4)
  · MORMON MARRIAGE EXCLUSIONS (1)
  · MORMON MEMBERSHIP (38)
  · MORMON MISSIONARIES (142)
  · MORMON MONEY (73)
  · MORMON NEWSROOM (5)
  · MORMON POLITICAL ISSUES (5)
  · MORMON RACISM (18)
  · MORMON TEMPLE CEREMONIES (38)
  · MORMON TEMPLE CHANGES (15)
  · MORMON TEMPLES (116)
  · MORMON VISITOR CENTERS (10)
  · MORMON WARDS AND STAKE CENTERS (1)
  · MORMONTHINK (13)
  · MOUNTAIN MEADOWS MASSACRE (21)
  · MURPHY TRANSCRIPT (1)
  · NATALIE R. COLLINS (11)
  · NAUVOO (3)
  · NAUVOO EXPOSITOR (2)
  · NEAL A. MAXWELL (1)
  · NEAL A. MAXWELL INSTITUTE (1)
  · NEIL L. ANDERSEN - SECTION 1 (3)
  · NEW ORDER MORMON (8)
  · OBEDIENCE - PAY, PRAY, OBEY (15)
  · OBJECT LESSONS (15)
  · OLIVER COWDREY (6)
  · ORRIN HATCH (10)
  · PARLEY P. PRATT (11)
  · PATRIARCHAL BLESSING (5)
  · PAUL H. DUNN (5)
  · PBS DOCUMENTARY THE MORMONS (20)
  · PERSECUTION (9)
  · PIONEER DAY (3)
  · PLAN OF SALVATION (5)
  · POLYGAMY (60)
  · PRIESTHOOD BLESSINGS (1)
  · PRIESTHOOD EXECUTIVE MEETING (0)
  · PRIMARY (1)
  · PROCLAMATIONS (1)
  · PROPOSITION 8 (21)
  · PROPOSITION 8 COMMENTS (11)
  · QUENTIN L. COOK (11)
  · RELIEF SOCIETY (14)
  · RESIGNATION PROCESS (31)
  · RICHARD E. TURLEY, JR. (6)
  · RICHARD G. HINCKLEY (2)
  · RICHARD G. SCOTT (7)
  · RICHARD LYMAN BUSHMAN (11)
  · ROBERT D. HALES (5)
  · ROBERT L. MILLET (7)
  · RODNEY L. MELDRUM (15)
  · ROYAL SKOUSEN (2)
  · RUNTU'S RINCON (78)
  · RUSSELL M. NELSON (14)
  · SACRAMENT MEETING (11)
  · SALT LAKE TRIBUNE (1)
  · SCOTT D. WHITING (1)
  · SCOTT GORDON (5)
  · SEMINARY (5)
  · SERVICE AND CHARITY (24)
  · SHERI L. DEW (3)
  · SHIELDS RESEARCH - MORMON APOLOGETICS (4)
  · SIDNEY RIGDON (7)
  · SIMON SOUTHERTON (34)
  · SPAULDING MANUSCRIPT (8)
  · SPENCER W. KIMBALL (12)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 1 (18)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 10 (17)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 11 (15)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 12 (19)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 13 (21)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 14 (17)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 15 (12)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 2 (21)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 3 (18)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 (25)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 5 (22)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 6 (19)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 7 (15)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 8 (13)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 9 (19)
  · STORIES (1)
  · SUNSTONE FOUNDATION (2)
  · SURVEILLANCE (SCMC) (12)
  · TAD R. CALLISTER (3)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 1 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 2 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 3 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 4 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 5 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 6 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 7 (9)
  · TALKS - SECTION 1 (1)
  · TEMPLE WEDDINGS (6)
  · TEMPLES - NAMES (1)
  · TERRYL GIVENS (1)
  · THE PEARL OF GREAT PRICE (1)
  · THE SINGLE WARDS (5)
  · THE WORLD TABLE (3)
  · THOMAS PHILLIPS (18)
  · THOMAS S. MONSON (33)
  · TIME (4)
  · TITHING (63)
  · UGO PEREGO (5)
  · UK COURTS (7)
  · UNNANOUNCED, UNINVITED AND UNWELCOME (36)
  · UTAH LIGHTHOUSE MINISTRY (3)
  · VALERIE HUDSON (3)
  · VAN HALE (16)
  · VAUGHN J. FEATHERSTONE (1)
  · VIDEOS (30)
  · WARD CLEANING (4)
  · WARREN SNOW (1)
  · WELFARE (0)
  · WENDY L. WATSON (7)
  · WHITE AND DELIGHTSOME (11)
  · WILFORD WOODRUFF (6)
  · WILLIAM HAMBLIN (11)
  · WILLIAM LAW (1)
  · WILLIAM SCHRYVER (5)
  · WILLIAM WINES PHELPS (3)
  · WOMEN AND MORMONISM (86)
  · WORD OF WISDOM (7)
  · WORLD CONGRESS OF FAMILIES (1)
Donate to help keep the MormonCurtain and Mormon Resignation websites up and running!

Note: Dontations are done via my AvoBase, LLC. PayPal Business Account.
Copyright And Info
Articles posted here are © by their respective owners when designated.

Website © 2005-2016

Compiled With: Caligra 1.119

HOSTED BY