I had this "come across my desk" as it were. I figured a good dose of RfM reality might do good old Ethan some good. Some kid thinks he has the answers to bringing us back to church. So, who's going back after this ironclad argument?

http://unklethan.wordpress.com/2013/10/31/an-open-letter-to-anyone-who-has-left-the-mormon-church/

I couldn't get past the First Sentence.
It was a Total Insult to me (RM, temple married)

Mormons either Don't Know -or- Ignore how insensitive/stupid-insulting they are.

Quick note, the first paragraph is sarcastic. I was pissed until I read the second paragraph. He makes the point that he recognizes that people don't leave for those reasons, though he kind of contradicts himself later. It is a terrible literary device, he doesn't make it clear.

Hahaha, I think he turned on comment moderation. Didn't like the apostates coming out and correcting him on his logical misstep.

JK, my long-ass comment posted. I hope he takes it to heart, but it isn't likely, most mormons are too good at the mental pretzelry needed to make this nonsense work.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/31/2013 12:25PM by notnewatthisanymore.

Oh the irony of his blog title -- "Lancing the Windmill". Like Don Quixote, he is delusional and doesn't see reality.

Only a Mormon would write an open letter and then only want faith promoting responses.

I don't think that is fair. He deserves his own little bit of his blog to talk about the things he wants to talk about. Denying him that would be like saying that this website is wrong for asking Mormons not to preach here. This site is open to everybody, but will not allow Mormons to preach the gospel, and that is a good thing, not a bad thing.

If he wants his own little bit of his blog to talk about what he wants to talk about that is fine. But that is not what he did. He put a letter out with an invitation.

Your comparison to RFM is weak. RFM is an online community for people leaving or who have left the LDS church with the protection that they won't be harassed by the very people and things they are trying to escape.

The blogger's post was nothing like RFM. He directed his letter to those who left. If he doesn't like the responses he should not have invited the audience.

The comparison isn't weak at all. The assertion that he doesn't get to censor comments, however, is. There is nowhere in that letter where he indicates that he is open to any and all criticism or comments. In fact, he specifically states in one of his comments that he is not interested in people derailing it.

I'm not saying that RFM and this blog are the same thing, but they deserve to censor as they please and for the exact same reasons.

I'm also not saying that we shouldn't comment on his blog and tell him how we feel. I'm saying that it is unfair to say that this is a Mormon behavior when it is actually a completely normal and reasonable thing that every smart blog/forum, including RFM, does.

Talking about how a person once had faith is pretty much exactly how I dealt with inactives when I was a missionary. He is writing it almost line for line how I used to do it. Coming from a position of understanding is a lot more effective than being overtly judgmental.

That only works on people who still romanticize about God and heaven and all of that. It doesn't work on me, for example. I know I had faith and it felt very real. Faith in something that is false and misleading, however, is not a state of mind I want to be in again. Trying to invoke that in me would be meaningless because I understand who I was when I had faith, but I love being who I am now that I have a clearer understanding.

Experience is a bitch.

The poor kid. If he's as smart as he thinks he is, someday he will stumble across the truth and that letter will haunt him.

I hope so. I know him personally, and (to put this nicely), he is well meaning, but buys into it without question. I hope he someday figures it out, but I see little hope. He was EQ president, and now that he is married and off, will probably rise through the ranks to a life of miserable servitude to the cult. Spending umpteen thousands of hours doing free service in an inherently meaningless capacity, all while his family relationships suffer, hoping someday to be rewarded with some form of spiritual recognition, such as becoming a stake president.

That's exactly what Mr. Strawman is creating for himself. A life of pay, pray, and obey. Waste of mind. Waste of life. It's all about me.

I posted a long reply.

The Korihor story always pushes my button.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/31/2013 03:21PM by AmIDarkNow?.

Here was my reply. We'll see how long it lasts...

"Life is gonna Bitch-slap you at some point. When it does, it’s gonna hurt. We’ll be there for you at RfM. http://exmormon.org/phorum/list.php?2 "

Good reply! But, it being a Mormon's blog, it'll almost certainly get removed or censored.

This is another example of a closed system of thought. He
answers all the questions by assuming that Mormonism is true and
then spouting some typical, Mormon "thought stopper."

See my previous post on "closed systems of thought."

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1062811

He saw this thread (hi Ethan, sorry, but don't post an open letter and not expect your target audience to respond).

Apparently I am actively acting against the church. Hahaha, I suppose I am, never thought about it that way. However, I can be proud to say I stand directly opposed to meaningless hatred and bigotry.

Posted a comment. Poor kid has no idea...

His closing, the REAL reason he wants us to come back is...<drum roll>

"I want you to come back, because I need you here. I need the good that you have. Can you help me out?"

For him. It's all about HIM!

Yeah, it's a cheesy sales tactic that anyone who has ever read a book about influence or persuasion knows. I'm sure he thinks he's clever, but it makes him look like a naive, narcissistic simpleton.

With these kinds of arguments, which seem to be the most prevalent amongst mormons, when they find out that our departure from the church had nothing to do with desire to sin, or being offended by anyone, will they then doubt their own faith because their argument against exmormons is founded in faulty logic? If not, then why even bother with that argument. It's founded in pure unadulterated ignorance. Come on people, at least visit John Dehlin's site to find out from a mormon perspective why people actually leave the church. But nope, mormon leadership would much rather their members remain ignorant and blindly submissive.

Confiding in your Bishop may be a quick way to have your sins made known throughout the ward and possibly beyond. From my experience, having travelled and been exposed to the workings of Bishoprics and ward meetings, confessing my sins to a Bishop is not something I would do readily. Unlike a Catholic priest who will keep to himself what is divulged to him, Mormon Bishops have been known to go home to their wives and let out a few things that are then spread to the four quarters of the earth. Ward meetings also have a way of bringing out the dirty washing as well.

Luckily for me, I've never confessed a damn thing to a bishop. It's none of his god damn business.

You're right though, there is little or no emphasis with mormon bishops about confidentiality. In that sense, I have so much more respect for catholic priests who will reveal nothing to anyone.

When I haven’t finished my home teaching, I need you to call me and ask me why I haven’t come to visit you yet.
~ No, the last thing I want is to guilt you into coming to see me. If you care about me, stop by. If you don't, then don't. I don't need fake friends, and I really don't need to beg my fake friends to come see me.

When you make the sacrifice to go to the temple, even though working a 60-hour week makes it hard, I need your example so that I can get my unemployed student butt of the couch and get there with you.
~ Well actually, I'm probably not going to waste my time going to the temple, and what your unemployed student butt needs isn't to get off the couch and attend the temple, it is to get of the couch and study and apply for jobs so that you aren't unemployed anymore. This is the kind of drivel we get from people that think faith fixes things as opposed to application and hard work.

I need you to teach the youth; they have a lot to learn from you.
~Perhaps. Perhaps not, but what I am going to teach them is not rainbows and unicorns so be careful what you ask for.

I need you to be there to help me bless my children.
~Actually no. This is why the church teaches personal responsibility but then doesn't actually mean it. Radical concept, I know, but your children are your responsibility. One you should have perhaps thought of...being an unemployeed student and all.

I need to call you when my wife is sick so you can help me give her a priesthood blessing.
~If your wife is so sick that you need to call for help, I am not what you need. Instead of looking my number up in the ward directory look for the nearest ready care or doctors office. That is what your wife needs. Do that instead. She and I will both thank you for it.

Oh goodness, this is hard to get through. I was turned off by the first paragraph, realized it was sarcastic, and continued reading.

"It’s probably because you didn’t understand the Gospel." (from the sarcastic paragraph)
"... you must endure to the end via faith in Christ we all know that. But there’s an important part that a lot of people miss..."

"Sin is something to be ashamed of, and it’s probably the reason you left." (sarcastic paragraph..)
" It’s embarrassing and shameful. In my experience, [sin's] supposed to be. The biggest problem with sin is that it makes you want to leave."

"You had a problem with the bishop? Clearly you were in the wrong, I mean he’s the bishop! Don’t you trust your leaders? Don’t you trust God?" (first paragraph..)
" I’m not saying all bishops are perfect...What I can say is that all those bishops who are worthy and who keep the commandments have authority and power from God.."
So am I supposed to blindly trust them all?

Seems that sarcastic opening wasn't so sarcastic after all, was it? I regret being able to say that this blog post is the kind of thing I would have written as a tbm. So glad I don't think that way anymore.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/31/2013 08:36PM by msp.

Been lurking for two years. Y'all have taught me much about how my significant other was wired as a child. I thank you for that. Couldn't resist responding this guy. Here is what I posted:

Here is some perspective from the husband of someone who resigned from the church many years ago. She was raised in Utah, married in the Temple and had the requisite number of children. I am grateful that they accept me as their step-father and they consider me the Grandfather of their children. NONE of them are LDS, although they are still counted on LDS rolls as they were born into the Church.
As to your issues…
Offended?

I am sure she was offended when her Bishop told her to be more submissive to the Priesthood holder who beat her with his fists. “What did you do to offend him?” he asked. When she divorced this still-worthy Priesthood holder who never paid a penny of support to his children her life in the Church just got harder.

I am sure she was offended when her Bishop told her not to sue a recommended contractor that stole tens of thousands of dollars from her and left her without a livable house for herself and her children. “We all go to church together but I will stop recommending him as you are not the first to tell me this…and keep paying your tithes.” he explained. As a businessman I see the value of his transaction. Priesthood holders can steal from the single Moms as long as they kickback 10%. It is a win-win for everyone but the woman and she can’t get to celestial heaven on her own anyway.

By the way, I am offended that you believe this man was a conduit for God. The God I believe in would not do any of these things. If indeed “all those bishops have authority and power from God” and directed them to do these things then the God you believe in is offensive.

Sin? Really? “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Jesus didn’t make them sit at the back of the bus. He invited them front and center and told the rest of us to “Judge not”. The belief that people “just want to sin” is, to me, a judgmental statement that Jesus would consider a sin in and of itself. But I believe in a different God than you. By the way…wouldn’t you consider shunning to be a sin? Turning your hearts away from your own flesh and blood because they found the science and drew logical conclusions?

Don’t get me wrong…she hasn’t been shunned because she won’t allow it. She has too much love in her heart. As the guy who is only related by legal entanglements, I think they would like to shun her but even good saints who found education silly (we are in the end of times aren’t we) need a loan from the professionally degreed big Sister from time to time. I admit to cynicism in that regard.

She didn’t leave because of these things. She read, and studied and found out the truth of the people who started this Church. She knows from Science that the “Laminites” were not Jewish. DNA scientifically proves it. She knows from archeology that there were no genocidal conflicts with steel swords. There are no relics and steel wasn’t invented yet. The Book of Mormon is not true, although it is a hilarious Broadway show. Joseph Smith was not a prophet and you don’t need to know secret handshakes to get into Heaven.

She left because God would never tell a man in his thirties to have sex with a 14 year-old girl. She left because God would never tell a man that blood atonement is the only punishment for marrying a black person. She left because God would never consider a Black man to be inferior to a white man and conversion to LDS did not make them lighter and more “delightsome”. She left because you think God told your “prophets” these very same things. Indeed, your Prophets” have said these very things. It is not comforting that you think God has changed his mind in the past 175 years or so.

I stand.
Begin a slow but stong and steady hand clap.
Tears.

BRAVO!!

+1

What a wonderful husband you are, just a bee. Please post more often--as suits you, of course.

p.s. Did he approve your comment?

Kind of made me laugh.

"Let me share with you some thoughts that I have about you leaving."

REALLY. He's going to make assumptions about a whole group of people that he's never met.

I've been out of the church for over a decade, and met a LOT of exmos at conferences and meetups in restaurants and coffee groups. And I've heard a LOT of different reasons people have for leaving. I would NEVER assume to know anything about how much faith someone did or didn't have, or what their reason for leaving was. Because there are SO many damn problems with the doctrine, the history, and the social hierarchy in the church, that there are probably 100 good reasons to leave. And just when I've thought I've heard them all, I'll hear another one.

Honestly, I think the guy is really enjoying his little blog speech. Whatever. It's his blog, it's for him. Enjoy, dude.

But if you REALLY want to help people come back, how 'bout you talk to individuals, find out why they REALLY left, and give them real answers instead of this pablum and sugar stuff?

And also keep in mind that maybe YOU are the one with the problem. Maybe YOU haven't looked close enough at your own beliefs. And even if you have and you are happy with them, maybe you need to consider that it's arrogant to assume you have the corner on on truth, and that you know what's best for other people.

Let's put this all in perspective for a moment: most of the world can easily discount the story of the 14-yr old boy seeing God in the Woods (or was that Nephi? Or was it angels? . . . gee . . I guess it depends on what version you read). Gold plates that the angel took back? Dude, YOU need a reality check.

releve - I agree with you. I think that someday this kid is going to come to the truth somehow, some way and then he is going to be just as adamant for the other way of thinking. His open letter will haunt him.
But, to each his own. I also agree that he has the right to whatever he wants to say. We don't have to read it.

Who died and made this kid God??

I found this amusing

"He had become very involved in pagan and idolatrous rituals, declared himself an atheist,"

So he became involved in paganism (defined as any various religion other than Christianity, Judaism, or Islam) and that equals atheist.

Right.

Also, what "Idolatrous Rituals" did he engage in? Was he performing blood sacrifices? Or maybe dressing on strange clothes and standing in a circle chanting in some strange made up languag-.....no wait.....

He first tries to discount that people might leave because they're sinning, then poisons the well with the "atheist pagan" story, which shows he really believes what he tried to pretend not to believe.... What a tool. He's attempting to use the same smooth sophistry that the GA's use, but frankly, he needs a lot more practice. He's still not nearly as douchey as Holland or Oaks...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2013 04:54AM by rationalist01.