Hinkley interview with ABC News....
RB: There does seem to be though an uncritical acceptance of a conformist style?

GBH: Uncritical? No. Not uncritical. People think in a very critical way before they come into this Church. When they come into this Church they’re expected to conform. And they find happiness in that conformity.

That sounds like it is straight out of a North Korean playbook, undoubtedly written by the Dear Leader.

Anonbeliever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And they find happiness in
> that conformity.

I wonder if John Dehlin has found it?

I agree....with deco.

Wow, that is shocking at how he refers to cultcos' practices that children make the choice he describes at 8 years old to be obedient to the shit they have never heard of.

Creepy, and also BS. It was the most miserable and lonely time in my life... admittedly probably because I am a critical thinker and a liberal so I did not fit in, but equally I just can't imagine what true happiness comes from being a robot who fits in perfectly.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2014 04:56AM by safetynotguaranteed.

Diabolical.

Mormonism purports to be a religion that believes in and supports "agency". Unfortunately, in practice it is a religion whose doctrine and culture thoroughly strips its members of their agency.

It reminds me of the Eddie Izzard sketch about the inquisition-- "Would you like cake or death?" Everyone orders cake so the inquisitors see the error of their ways and start offering just "..or death?" In Mormonism, "Would you like ..or conformity?"



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2014 07:07AM by sassypants.

I still think Pink Floyd said it best, "All in all you're just another brick in the wall." That song always makes me think of my Mormon youth.

So GBH was at least being honest for a moment. Mormonism is mind control. Mormonism is anti-education. Mormonism is mind numbing conformity. Where else can you go to be rewarded for keeping your brain and deepest self on lock-down?

Obedience. Just another ugly word.

When did this interview take place?

This was the same interview where he said that there had been no agitation for giving women the priesthood, which actually justifies Kate Kelly's action in Ordain Women. The interview transcript is here from a 1997 in interview with an Australian tv station, I think.
http://www.abc.net.au/compass/intervs/hinckley.htm

Anonbeliever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This was the same interview where he said that
> there had been no agitation for giving women the
> priesthood, which actually justifies Kate Kelly's
> action in Ordain Women. The interview transcript
> is here from a 1997 in interview with an
> Australian tv station, I think.
> http://www.abc.net.au/compass/intervs/hinckley.htm

My fave part of the interview:

RB: Now up until 1978 I understand Blacks were not allowed to
be priests in your Church?

GBH: That is correct. Although we have Black members of the
Church. They felt that they would gain more in this Church than
any other with which they were acquainted and they were members
of the Church. In 1978 we (the president of the Church)
received a revelation under which all worthy men would receive
all the blessings of the Church available to them as well as to
any others. So across the world now we are teaching the Gospel
to Blacks, Whites, everyone else who will listen.

RB: So in retrospect was the Church wrong in that?

GBH: No I don’t think it was wrong. It things, various things
happened in different periods. There’s a reason for them.

RB: What was the reason for that?

GBH: I don’t know what the reason was. But I know that we’ve
rectified whatever may have appeared to be wrong at that time.



The guy talks like a political handler. "rectified whatever
MAY HAVE APPEARED to be wrong at that time." Right. I also
like the part about how he goes from 126 years of overt racism
to how the few Blacks who joined the Church "felt they would
gain more in this Church than any other with which they were
acquainted."

Yep, before 1978, Blacks were joining Mormonism right and left,
LOL

"Be happy in your work"

- Japanese Prison Slave Camp Commander Colonel Saito in "Bridge on the River Kwai"

"Arbeit Macht Frei."

Granted, I joined the church when ETB was not really functional. Howard Hunter wasn't really there long enough to count. And GBH was at the helm for the rest of the time I was in Mo-ism.

I thought he was an arrogant jerk when I met him, and I thought so from then on. Pompous, condescending, and fiercely tyrannical. And he was still second in command (in name only) at that time.

I couldn't believe some of the stuff that people posted here of how TBM's reacted when he died. A teenaged girl sobbing hysterically about how much she loved him. . .What could she possibly have known about his REAL character?

The quote about people making critical decision BEFORE they join the church and then are expected to conform - that is so typical of him, and so TOTALLY wrong! How many stories have we heard about people (I was one of them) who were emotionally needy and were seeking a refuge and thought they had found one, only to realize that it was a steel-toothed trap clamped around our ankles?

He was a first-rate tyrant, and I'm glad he is gone.

Anyone have a LINK to this particular interview?

I definitely want to show it to my DD. She, age 20, in December, decided to start going back to TSCC - LOVES it, is headed to the "Y" in the fall. AND --- told me yesterdayshe just got a temple recommend. UGHHHH!! I am TOTALLY outnumbered regarding any influence I can have on her. She has a mormon ward loving on her and plenty of mormon friends, including some return misshie she's never met, but has been skyping, texting and talking with on the phone. They have almost completely successfully reeled her in with love bombing and mind control. I HATE seeing this happen to her!!!!! Boo - becoming more and more disgusted and mad at this cult.

See above reply.

Same story as my daughter. She went back at about age 20 or 21. The ward reeled her in. She has been a celebrity ever since because they got one of the _____ family back. Even if she comes and goes, she is still a favorite.

I have NO NO NO NO influence over her at all. I'm a bitter old woman.

Funny thing is--one of her Mormon moms agreed with me on some advice I gave my daughter recently. It created a lot of problems between my daughter and I. I only recently found out that this Mormon mother told my daughter she agreed with ME. I love it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2014 08:33PM by cl2.

Why is this surprising? When you join and organization that has rules -- the military, a sports team, a diet program, a job, a religion, etc. -- the organization expects you to conform to their rules. It's just that some organizations are more conformist than others.

The problem with Mormonism is that people born into it didn't make a choice to join, and few would have made the choice if they hadn't been born LDS. And converts have no clue what they signed up for.

"The problem with Mormonism is that people born into it didn't make a choice to join, and few would have made the choice if they hadn't been born LDS. And converts have no clue what they signed up for."

YES. Exactly. Spoonfed, mind-controlled bit by bit, without them even knowing it. This may be currently happening to my wonderful DD and it makes me NUTS! Of course, she doesn't think it's happening to her at all.

Check out this excellent youtube video about Mormonism and Mind Control - by a young physician who recently left TSCC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUsOHsZIiA4

I just spent half the day writing a letter to my DD about the subject of Mind Control and church censoring. We had gone to breakfast yesterday morning and she wanted to talk about TSCC and my views on it. (She's gone back, loves it, I've been out for 7 years and share the view of most people on this board.)

One thing DD told me is that she recently got a temple recommend - but hasn't gone yet. I don't ever swear - it's just not my stlye - but this deserves it: FUCKING CULT - reeling my daughter in, like this. Okay - I said it - pretty much the first and only time I've used the F-bomb. THANKFULLY, she IS more thought-ful than many her age, and is still A LITTLE open to listening to the other side - but not much. She loves the culture and structure and feels she'd be fine attending, and not conforming fully. I doubt it - seems to me it's a pain in the butt for any of the NOMs, etc. who live this way.

In case anyone's interested, here's the letter I wrote to her:
July 22, 2014

(Name of DD)– – Thanks for the discussion this morning. I, as always, am so impressed by your open-minded, very thought-ful thinking – on this, and on other important life-subjects. I believe that as you continue to evaluate, explore, and investigate these (spriritual/religious) and other matters using your “critical thinking” skills, and with an open mind – you will succeed at finding a life path that fits for you, your personality and your integrity.

Later this morning, I briefly checked out the website “Mormon Matters.” There are indeed many very interesting topics listed under the podcast section. They all looked good, but one topic, in particular, caught my eye because of something you and I discussed this morning at breakfast:

When I mentioned that action is taken against those who publicly decent against church viewpoints there was some wondering about whether or not this really happens. According to the “Mormon Matters” website, it did just recently happen in June – as highlighted on 5 different podcasts.

TOPIC: Perspectives on News of Possible Excommunications of LDS Activists

June 11 brought news that Kate Kelly, founder of Ordain Women, and John Dehlin, prominent public LDS voice through Mormon Stories and other podcasts and venues, have been called to face church disciplinary councils for “apostasy,” as evidenced through their activism and public expressions of concern regarding various issues facing today’s Mormonism. Alan Rock Waterman has also apparently been notified of pending action, though he has not yet been contacted directly by his stake president. There is also reference made to the “September 6” – which I had mentioned – from the 1990s.

(Name of DD)–, below are a few points I’d like to share, as well as a few other people’s viewpoints as well – from “Mormon Matters:”

As you read, perhaps consider these points yourself – first – for a long time, before bouncing them off of Mormon friends who MAY LIKELY – because of human nature - gravitate rather quickly straight towards minimizing or JUSTIFICATION of church wrong-doing, DEFENSE of church wrong doing, or who may actually decide nothing wrong has been done.

Sometimes, people who want to hold on to their current beliefs, gravitate towards mental gymnastics which are sometimes necessary in order to justify or defend something which – in any other case – they would consider wrong. (my / Mom’s observation)

Sometimes we even unknowingly toss our CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS aside in order to accommodate what we we want to believe.

For Example:
• Was it wrong for the White House to fabricate a lie about Benghazi? YES, it was wrong. Period. (Fabricating lies and reporting those lies as fact to the public is wrong. Whether in government, or in a church.)
• Was it wrong for Obama to lie about Obamacare? Yes. Wrong. Period. (See above)
• Was it wrong for Lois Lerner and her team to do what they did with the IRS and the targeting of conservative groups? Yes. Wrong. Period. (Singling out and punishing individuals and groups who do not agree with your opinion is wrong. Whether in government, or in a church. )
• If the U.S. Government started taking away our first amendment rights - DISCIPLINING Citizens for reporting FACTUAL information, or for disagreeing or speaking out, or CENSORING the media – would it be wrong? Yes, absolutely. Wrong. Period. (Censoring opinions which disagree with yours – controlling the flow of information in this way is wrong. Whether in government, or in a church.)
There is NO difference here with the Mormon Corporation – DISCIPLINING it’s members, telling them they need to take down their websites, etc.
• By the way, this kinds of censoring has been going on since the beginning. When some early church members accused Joseph Smith of practicing polygamy – which he was FACTUALLY doing, but constantly denied – J. Smith had the printing press which was exposing this information BURNED DOWN (The Nauvoo expositor).

I personally CANNOT condone (or view neutrally) an organization like this which manipulates and lies, and then controls its members in this way. Can you? I can’t condone it any more than I could condone the actions of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. The lack of integrity is appalling. I personally could not feel good knowingly placing myself under the leadership of an organization like this. (This IS what most Mormon church members do. Notice in the comments on the Mormon Matters website, and AT CHURCH how often people refer to “their LEADERS” or the BRETHEREN / PROPHETS.” Fully believing Mormons (most Mormons) willingly put themselves under the authority of these leaders.

THIS IS JUST ONE TOPIC. But it speaks to the topic of “Control” I was talking about this morning. Some people may say “Well, they HAD to do this, otherwise everyone would leave. No. They didn’t HAVE to do it. Lots of people – due to their integrity - are willing to go through great difficulty BECAUSE – in keeping with their integrity, it’s the only right thing to do. (Example – Jesus.) There’s even a Mormon Hymn that says “Do what is right, let the consequence follow.” When has it ever been okay to do the wrong thing just because the right thing is too difficult? Wrong is wrong. Right is right.

Those are my thoughts – above. Below are a few thoughts / information from others, below.

A few quotes from the “Mormon Matters” website:

Note: These quotes and the information contained in them come straight from what I’ve seen on this website. So I fully admit that I haven’t yet verified any of this. But my hunch is – it’s probably pretty accurate. (Also – I haven’t yet listened to the podcasts – just read the statements and comments visible on each of the 5 podcast pages.)
From Jim June 12, 2014 at 1:46 pm:
I’ve felt sick to my stomach since I saw the announcements about John and Kate. It’s troubling for many reasons. Dan–I’ve enjoyed your discussions and the way that you have been free to engage in discussion with saints and scholars who bring different perspectives to the table. Those perspectives don’t always line up 100% with the traditional message we get from LDS authorities. It seems that the church can see fit to punish people who discuss those ideas in the open. I’m fearful to think what that means for honest seekers of truth everywhere.
From Jay Griffith, June 12, 2014 at 2:21 pm:
“Sadly John Dehlin and Kate Kelly are apostates under the accepted definition by George Q Cannon.”
From Morning Glory, June 17, 2014 at 7:52 am:
Jay said: “Let the institution teach and make a great case for the very basics that Jesus taught and then encourage open discussion on the rest. Under this model we would all become more loving and less didactic and calcified in our opinions and our ability to have the spirit work within and among us. It would reduce pride and encourage acceptance and meekness. Our numbers could grow as people feel understood, loved, un-judged, and accepted as they are.”That is a beautiful vision, Jay. I joined the church at one time believing what you wrote and it what it stood for. And then 25 years later left it, realizing it stood for none of those things.
The rigidity of the church comes from the top down, so it will always be there.
From Morning Glory, June 17, 2014 at 7:59 am:
What I forgot to add was this: Kate and John seem to have been believing in an unconditionally open and loving church when they look at the LDS church. They are now feeling the shock and betrayal that comes when learning it is not.
From Katie L: (when I copy –pasted this and the rest below, I hadn’t thought to copy-paste the date, time for reference.)
I’m sorry, but this podcast really stressed me out. Maxine is making all these apologies for the church at a time when the church is behaving super unfairly. It’s all well and good to call for kinder discourse and for relationship building (which I would agree with), but Maxine completely ignores the fact that THERE IS NO RELATIONSHIP to be had with church leaders. Church leaders refused to dialogue with Kate Kelly, and now they’re cutting her off *in abstentia.* It’s wrong, it’s not okay, and it’s not at all Christlike.
It seems to me that Kate Kelly has been more than willing from the very, very beginning to sit down and dialogue. Kate Kelly isn’t Maxine Hanks in 1993. She hasn’t been angry. She hasn’t been disrespectful. She’s been kind and assertive. The only thing she’s refused to do is stop saying her truth in public. For the most part I’ve been extremely impressed with the fairness and kindness of the tone of her discourse.
So by all means, let’s call for improved conversation, but you can’t have a conversation with someone who won’t engage you. Period.

From Maxine H:
Many of the requirements in the letters to John and Kate are totally unrealistic — that they should take down their web sites and renounce their public views. While all of us can improve our communication, temper ourselves in ways that are more sensitive or professional or effective, none of us should ever silence ourselves, our truth, our convictions in the public sphere of ideas, which is where they belong.

From LilyTiger, June 12, 2014 at 3:14 pm :
Thanks for doing this Dan. I just finished reading the Sunstone piece on the “September Six” and was disheartened at how little has changed in almost 21 years. Even much of the rhetoric is the same. And I had thought we were making progress! I hope that those of us who care about these issues and the church continue to press forward, but it’s difficult not to wonder whether it really makes a difference. At least we have the internets and podcasts like this one to help us through this time around.
From Ed:
Wow, this podcast was an utter disappointment. I’d never listened to or read Maxine Hanks before but (incorrectly) assumed that like the September 6, she had a serious critique of the church. Unless she has (as it appears from this feed that others have suggested)indeed sacrificed her feminist views in order to come back to the church, she probably didn’t have a serious critique to begin with.
Her point that these two periods (the 1990s and 2010s)were “completely different” especially in terms of the content of demands is absurd. Paul Toscano, Margaret Toscano, Lynne Kanavel Whitesides, and D. Michael Quinn, for instance, were making as powerful or even more powerful critiques of the church than Kate Kelly.
Unfortunately, Dan, I have to call you out a little bit as well. *You appear to push back (politely, of course, because you are always polite) proportionate to an interviewee’s hostility to the church. And you are accommodating in proportion to how accommodating an interviewee is to the church. Of course, you want analysis and some alternative voices but you seem uncomfortable with serious critique. Which marks Mormon Matters as only marginally useful to formulating critiques of truly horrible things that happen as common practice in the church.
My / (Mom’s) note: Note – I can’t say for sure since I haven’t spent much time on the website yet, but:
It’s possible that the church does not crack down on the “Mormon Matters” website because ultimately - when all is said and done – at the end of the discussions – I’m guessing things end up pretty friendly towards the side of the church. So for now, the people who work this website are probably safe.

_________ (Name of DD)– thanks again for the discussion. I love you very, very much. I know that only you will decide what course your life will take, but I am grateful for the opportunity to share some opinions and information with you.

Mostly: I have always been so happy for you – because of your desire and ability to make good choices - for a good life. A good, happy, peaceful, joyful, fulfilling life is what I know you are seeking, and what I, as your Mom (who is crazy about you) wants for you as well.

Love always and forever, Mom

OOPS!!!!!!

So sorry - I just scanned through the letter I sent and had TOTALLY forgotten that it contained some political subject matter. I am VERY SORRY - this was not intentional and I know this board is supposed to be free of politics.

I completely respect each and every person's right to their own political viewpoint and in no way was trying to push mine on anyone. (DD and I share the same political view, so I put that in there thinking it would resonate with her.)

Please forgive my blunder. It won't happen again.

Nice letter. Does your daughter really think she won't be required to "conform" at BYU? Has she read the list of rules?

Does she realize that they WILL throw her out for not conforming? They don't care if you're a week away from graduating. They will be more than happy to take her money and her education from her.

Hopefully she watches the temple videos. If not, maybe the temple experience will open her eyes.

Alternatively, you could just throw in a few Republican lies and voila! you could publish your letter anywhere!

Most of us "bitter old women" have lived long enough to realize that corruption is an equal opportunity vice and is practiced by both political parties.

My daughter describes it best with this quote (don't know source), which I find strangely comforting:

"The political parties are just two wings of the same predatory bird, feeding off the hopes and dreams of Americans."


Good job, Mama, you've done your best and that's all anyone can ask of you. Don't lose heart, though, because you have truth, love, and time on your side. These are the most powerful forces in the world.


Kathleen waters

There's my motive for leaving, right there!

+100