PBS special "The Mormons" made me furious!

[sweethot143 2]

Thanks for explaining all that usb. I too am Mormon. It's frusterating when people don't know the whole story about being LDS. Where did you husband serve his mission?

Your welcome, my husband served in the Colorodo, Denver MIssion from 98-2000.

My intent was never to debate faiths, I know that is a complete waste of time. I just wanted to clear up the false statements made, so that others won't be turned away from The Church in the future if approached about it because of something they read.

About that paper that was published, remember, just because an Active Mormon wrote it, doesn't mean it is Church Doctrine. It's merely his oppinion.

[Sunta 5]

About that paper that was published, remember, just because an Active Mormon wrote it, doesn't mean it is Church Doctrine. It's merely his oppinion.

Firstly, did you read the paper?

Secondly, it is his observation as a Phd, about the suffering and mental anguish of women and girls in the Mormon religion. He interviewed hundreds of people to formulate "just his opinion."

So, you discount his observations completely? He's just one lone guy with some random opinion that means nothing?

It's easier to deny something exists than to be upset by its existence. I understand that, but I'm surprised that's all you have to say about his well-researched and compassionate report.

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

Bubble, by "considering the source" I hope and assume you mean the publication Leatha quoted, the article by Hank Hanegraaf, not Leatha herself. Am I right?

Once again, everyone, please let's keep the discussion about the ideas, not the people.

I'm pretty sure Leatha was not the source of the article.

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

Leatha...

Thank you for deleting that other post. You can't really complain about how "mean" everyone is to you after writing a post like that.

[Sunta 5]

Now I know that these people actually "deserve" to go to hell because they failed to find their way to Christianity. I'm really disappointed. It just takes my breath away that my fellow human beings could believe such things. It's even worse than I thought.

I mean no disrespect, but you do realize you're talking about people who's heritage includes the Crusades, right? It's no different today. I am convinced that some (NOT ALL! NOT ALL!) Christians actually feel a sense of glee when they think of other people burning in hell, or when they vote against the hate crimes bill (as if they're saying "whoopee! Maybe another fag will be beaten up today!"), or when they murder abortion doctors.

I honestly believe that their self-righteous glorification of their own person is so twisted that they get pleasure when they think of others who are not "saved" coming to harm. Otherwise, they would never answer that people "deserve" to burn in hell.

Their hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me.

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

I honestly believe that their self-righteous glorification of their own person is so twisted that they get pleasure when they think of others who are not "saved" coming to harm. Otherwise, they would never answer that people "deserve" to burn in hell.

I've had Christians tell me that since I am atheist, someday they will be in heaven looking down at me in hell laughing at me.

Considering it is easy to prove Christianity is a myth borrowed and stolen from much older myths, it will be interesting to see who is looking at the other with a raised eyebrow someday.

[marjon9 6]

by "considering the source" I assume you mean the article by Hank Hanegraaf

Speaking of Hank Hanegraaff, I took a look at the Wikipedia entry on him. A divisive figure, to say the least. You can find the entry here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hank_Hanegraaff

The thing that was most interesting to me about the Hank Hanegraaff article in Wikipedia is to see just how much division and almost vicious competition there is among various Christian denominations, each accusing the other of being false. So, I wonder how Christians would explain this. If each and every one of the many Christian factions believe their way is the only truth, and all others are "lost," what does that mean? There can only be two possible resolutions to that question. Either one is right and all the others are wrong, or they are all wrong. There is no other possible resolution. So, how is a person supposed to know which is the one and only truth?

When a "believer" looks at these issues, how are they reconciled? Even if a person believes in "faith," wouldn't they want to have faith in something that makes sense and reflects love? How is it possible to have "faith" in something that leads to the inescapable conclusion that most of humanity will burn in hell for eternity? Does there ever come a point where it is legitimate to question your belief in something that you accept just because your parents told you it was so? Just wondering.

Here is a short clip from the Wikipedia article on Hanegraaff:

In the early 1990s Hanegraaff came to international notoriety for his strong criticisms of the Word-Faith teachings of Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn and other prominent Pentecostal and charismatic televangelists. In his 1993 book Christianity in Crisis, Hanegraaff charged the Word-Faith movement with heretical teachings, saying that many of the Word-Faith groups were "cults", and that those who "knowingly" accepted the movement's theology were "clearly embracing a different gospel, which is in reality no gospel at all"

[sweethot143 2]

About that paper that was published, remember, just because an Active Mormon wrote it, doesn't mean it is Church Doctrine. It's merely his oppinion.

Firstly, did you read the paper?

Secondly, it is his observation as a Phd, about the suffering and mental anguish of women and girls in the Mormon religion. He interviewed hundreds of people to formulate "just his opinion."

So, you discount his observations completely? He's just one lone guy with some random opinion that means nothing?

It's easier to deny something exists than to be upset by its existence. I understand that, but I'm surprised that's all you have to say about his well-researched and compassionate report.

nope didn't read it. Just saying it's not as if it's official Church Doctrine.

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

nope didn't read it. Just saying it's not as if it's official Church Doctrine.

You keep writing this yet nobody is claiming that it is church doctrine. It's been made clear from the beginning this is a research study, a study that I suspect most involved will refuse to read and if they do, pretend they never read it.

Facts.. those darned pesky facts.

[Sunta 5]

Facts.. those darned pesky facts

ROFL! Yep, they'll getcha every time

I'm not surprised at all that the Mormon people on here are not going to read the paper.

I half expected that, but hope still springs eternal.

[green 6]

nope didn't read it. Just saying it's not as if it's official Church Doctrine.

This paper wasn't intended to critique or even comment on church doctrine except as to its impact on women who have certain personality types. The author was born and raised and still is a practising member of his church. He clearly states that he himself has found his own life within the church to be a very satisfying one. He also states that the Mormon environment is an enviroment in which many women find great moral and emotional satisfaction. Indeed he has a daughter who is happy in her faith.

He has chosen to examine through professional optics - he is a psychiatrist - the situation of those Mormon women who do run into psychological difficulties and he figures that their relationship with the teachings of the church and the role assigned to them through this belief system does play a role in their unhappiness.

Why these women are unhappy, how significant the role of the church plays in this unhappiness, and how this distress manifests itself are issues which the author of this paper discusses. He himself is still engaged in his church. He is merely, as a medical man, describing a problem. By choosing not to read this paper you are choosing to close your mind, I think, and that may be a loss to you.

[marjon9 6]

By choosing not to read this paper you are choosing to close your mind, I think, and that may be a loss to you.

I don't know how to raise this issue without offending, which is unfortunate because I don't intend to. But I'm really curious, isn't a closed mind a virtue in many religious contexts? Isn't it more or less the same thing as "faith"? If you have faith, you don't need to think things through for yourself. Indeed, if you do question, and wonder, and think, you are demonstrating a lack of faith. Is that not true? Am I missing something? I'm really curious.

[sweethot143 2]

This paper wasn't intended to critique or even comment on church doctrine except as to its impact on women who have certain personality types. The author was born and raised and still is a practising member of his church. He clearly states that he himself has found his own life within the church to be a very satisfying one. He also states that the Mormon environment is an enviroment in which many women find great moral and emotional satisfaction. Indeed he has a daughter who is happy in her faith.

He has chosen to examine through professional optics - he is a psychiatrist - the situation of those Mormon women who do run into psychological difficulties and he figures that their relationship with the teachings of the church and the role assigned to them through this belief system does play a role in their unhappiness.

Why these women are unhappy, how significant the role of the church plays in this unhappiness, and how this distress manifests itself are issues which the author of this paper discusses. He himself is still engaged in his church. He is merely, as a medical man, describing a problem. By choosing not to read this paper you are choosing to close your mind, I think, and that may be a loss to you.

I did read it now, i can agree with some of it. However, some of that is incorrect. just one example, the sexual interviews, doesn't happen. Also most seminary teachers are female from my experience, the one in my Ward now is and so was my husband's and his 3 younger siblings.

I can say that, if i had 8 children running around, I would be depressed too. I do know woman who have that many children and are on Prozac. Even if they weren't Mormon they would still be stressed out and become depressed with that many young ones.

He also didn't mention the authoritive roles that woman play in the church, like in the Relief Society. He mentioned HOme teachers which are men but not the Women's visiting teachers which are Woman.

I'm also a little bit surprised that he included a lot of theory's that are not taken as fact in the Church. And are not taught at Church.

Overall, I think he had a lot of truth's and that article could be beneficial to other LDS Woman who are struggling and it would give them the opportunity to know that they are not alone and it's common. But being a non member and reading this, I think people can get the wrong idea about many things. I don't think it's a good article to post on the internet to be analyzed by others.

[green 6]

I don't know how to raise this issue without offending, which is unfortunate because I don't intend to. But I'm really curious, isn't a closed mind a virtue in many religious contexts? Isn't it more or less the same thing as "faith"? If you have faith, you don't need to think things through for yourself. Indeed, if you do question, and wonder, and think, you are demonstrating a lack of faith. Is that not true? Am I missing something? I'm really curious.

Haha:nervous Good point! I forgot about that. I'm an atheist, you see....:tired

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

...But being a non member and reading this, I think people can get the wrong idea about many things. I don't think it's a good article to post on the internet to be analyzed by others.

It is your opinion to hide truth from people. It is not the mainstream opinion. Amazingly, most value the opinions and ideas of another. It may not be YOUR take on issues but hiding it from people isn't going to make it go away and it isn't going to take away from the fact that you might just be wrong and it is a teaching for others. It is their interpretation.

I said from the beginning that some people won't be able to look at issues objectively and that is the church teaching. They don't WANT you to look outside the box because when that happens, people leave the faith. Not just Mormon, but all faiths.

There is a reason Christianity is dropping by about 1% annually and going to Wicca and atheism. This has been going on since the 80s. It isn't anything new.

When we encourage people to look, think, listen, and not run to a church official each time they are asked their personal opinion on something, they DO think. You are suggesting in your overall tone and theme that people shouldn't explore and think.

Are there other issues you believe people should not be exposed to due to a fear they might question and deny?