http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49316339
It was announced in this last General Conference that the age requirements for men and women has been changed. Young men, who previously served at age 19, will now be allowed to serve at 18, and young women, who previously served at age 21, will now be allowed to serve at 19.
In discussion, I've heard various comments for the reasons behind this change. One woman said it could be a sign of the church starting to treat women a little more equally with men. Whenever I think about a doctrine or policy change for the church, I always think about how it can be tied back to money.
In this case, having the boys serve at 18, or directly after they finish high school, will leave less room for worldly distractions to dissuade them from serving, such as getting a job, finding a girlfriend, or starting college.
I believe their bottom line for this decision is to increase the number of missionaries serving by removing the temptation to stay home.
More missionaries >>> More converts >>> More Mormon babies >>> More tithing. It can always be tied back to money.
Frankly, I'm surprised they didn't make 18 the age for the women as well.
Does this mean we will be approached even more by the clean cut, bike riding, suit wearing, Book of Mormon toting missionaries?
Unfortunately, yes.
I have heard an unconfirmed report that previously the church received about 600 missionary applications a week. After this change was announced, they received 7,000 applications!
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Is a Divorced Mormon Couple Really Divorced?
Not if they were married in the temple!
Years ago, my mother was divorced from my father. He had been excommunicated and was no longer a member of the church. However, when my mother wanted to get re-married in the temple, she had to undergo a "temple divorce". Yes, apparently when a couple divorces, the LDS church still considers them married.
According to my mother, she had to get special permission from the highest ranks of the church in order to get temple divorced. The LDS church does not recognize a legal divorce.
My ex-wife recently got re-married. However, she and I are still sealed. I could go have sex with her right now and it would not be considered adultry. Technically, it probably would, but it's their own doctrine that states that a couple is still sealed even if they are divorced.
I guess their reasoning is that since god joined the two together, only god can un-join them. The civil judges have no right to undo what god has done.
But it is the true kingdom of god on earth and so, OF COURSE, it is above gentile law.
I have a friend who is getting divorced and was married in the temple. Now she is dating a Mormon man and is considering marrying him in the temple. But before she can do that, she has to get a temple divorce from her first husband. So again, even though they will be officially divorced soon, the LDS church still considers them sealed.
How come men can marry all they want in the temple, but women have to get special permission to marry there again?
I was always taught that the sealing ordinance is only in effect as long as all parties are worthy. But what I am seeing here is that even if you are wicked enough to get excommunicated, you are still sealed. Can anyone please explain to me how this works? How can an eternal marriage possibly work if one person is in the highest kingdom and the other person is in the lowest?
Wouldn't it be a lot easier to just teach that if someone in an eternal marriage leaves the church, is excommunicated, or the couple is divorced that their sealing is automatically broken?
I would think so. But god's ways are higher than our ways.
Whatever.
Years ago, my mother was divorced from my father. He had been excommunicated and was no longer a member of the church. However, when my mother wanted to get re-married in the temple, she had to undergo a "temple divorce". Yes, apparently when a couple divorces, the LDS church still considers them married.
According to my mother, she had to get special permission from the highest ranks of the church in order to get temple divorced. The LDS church does not recognize a legal divorce.
My ex-wife recently got re-married. However, she and I are still sealed. I could go have sex with her right now and it would not be considered adultry. Technically, it probably would, but it's their own doctrine that states that a couple is still sealed even if they are divorced.
I guess their reasoning is that since god joined the two together, only god can un-join them. The civil judges have no right to undo what god has done.
But it is the true kingdom of god on earth and so, OF COURSE, it is above gentile law.
I have a friend who is getting divorced and was married in the temple. Now she is dating a Mormon man and is considering marrying him in the temple. But before she can do that, she has to get a temple divorce from her first husband. So again, even though they will be officially divorced soon, the LDS church still considers them sealed.
How come men can marry all they want in the temple, but women have to get special permission to marry there again?
I was always taught that the sealing ordinance is only in effect as long as all parties are worthy. But what I am seeing here is that even if you are wicked enough to get excommunicated, you are still sealed. Can anyone please explain to me how this works? How can an eternal marriage possibly work if one person is in the highest kingdom and the other person is in the lowest?
Wouldn't it be a lot easier to just teach that if someone in an eternal marriage leaves the church, is excommunicated, or the couple is divorced that their sealing is automatically broken?
I would think so. But god's ways are higher than our ways.
Whatever.
Saturday, October 13, 2012
I Believe Religion Makes People Behave Worse...
It is generally believed that in order to be a good person, one must believe in god and be religious, because god is the source of all that is good.
I disagree. I got thinking lately (something I tend to do a lot), and I have arrived at the conclusion that religion makes people behave worse.
Want to know why? I assume if you have read this far that you do!
In our justice system, if you commit a crime, you go to jail or serve some other penalty if you are found guilty. Just imagine if there was a person assigned to be your "whipping boy". If you commit a crime, your whipping boy would take the punishment. You could do anything you wanted if you knew someone else would take the fall for you!
But that's not how it works, is it? If you commit the crime, you must pay the time!
Believers view Jesus as their whipping boy. He will take the heat for all your sins and you get off scott free. No effort is required (by many religions). All you must do is accept Jesus and he takes everything away. There is no personal accountability.
Therefore, if a husband cheats on his wife, Jesus can take the punishment. If I covet my neighbor's bike and I steal it, Jesus has me covered.
Religion actually promotes the idea of a "free pass". Some of the most evil things that have been done to other people have been done by religious people.
I am acquainted with a "good" Mormon family. They attend their meetings and appear to be model citizens. However, the mother of the wife in this family has been diagnosed with cancer and this "good" Mormon couple isolated her from the world, refused to give her her cancer-treatment meds, gained access to her money, and neglected her in the hopes that she would die and that they could collect the life insurance money. She got out of this bad situation by calling a friend for help, and this friend had to drive from Utah to California to get her out of there.
Now I am not saying this couple did this because they are Mormons. But I am saying that they are pretty strong hypocrites! They are basically trying to murder their mother for money, all the while bearing their testimonies about how righteous they are.
I propose that the real god that people in this country worship is the almighty dollar!
Religion does not make people good and non-religion does not make people bad. Good and bad come from within each of us. I believe that if religion stopped teaching people that they get a free pass, we would probably see crime rates (and other problems in our society) lessen.
I have no proof of this. It's just my thoughts. It would be interesting to see.
I disagree. I got thinking lately (something I tend to do a lot), and I have arrived at the conclusion that religion makes people behave worse.
Want to know why? I assume if you have read this far that you do!
In our justice system, if you commit a crime, you go to jail or serve some other penalty if you are found guilty. Just imagine if there was a person assigned to be your "whipping boy". If you commit a crime, your whipping boy would take the punishment. You could do anything you wanted if you knew someone else would take the fall for you!
But that's not how it works, is it? If you commit the crime, you must pay the time!
Believers view Jesus as their whipping boy. He will take the heat for all your sins and you get off scott free. No effort is required (by many religions). All you must do is accept Jesus and he takes everything away. There is no personal accountability.
Therefore, if a husband cheats on his wife, Jesus can take the punishment. If I covet my neighbor's bike and I steal it, Jesus has me covered.
Religion actually promotes the idea of a "free pass". Some of the most evil things that have been done to other people have been done by religious people.
I am acquainted with a "good" Mormon family. They attend their meetings and appear to be model citizens. However, the mother of the wife in this family has been diagnosed with cancer and this "good" Mormon couple isolated her from the world, refused to give her her cancer-treatment meds, gained access to her money, and neglected her in the hopes that she would die and that they could collect the life insurance money. She got out of this bad situation by calling a friend for help, and this friend had to drive from Utah to California to get her out of there.
Now I am not saying this couple did this because they are Mormons. But I am saying that they are pretty strong hypocrites! They are basically trying to murder their mother for money, all the while bearing their testimonies about how righteous they are.
I propose that the real god that people in this country worship is the almighty dollar!
Religion does not make people good and non-religion does not make people bad. Good and bad come from within each of us. I believe that if religion stopped teaching people that they get a free pass, we would probably see crime rates (and other problems in our society) lessen.
I have no proof of this. It's just my thoughts. It would be interesting to see.
Saturday, October 6, 2012
Change Is Good, Right?
Something just occurred to me that I thought I'd share.
Throughout history, mankind has had different views and beliefs on a variety of subjects, most of them being incorrect.
At one point, it was believed that the earth was flat. As new evidence suggested it was round, the flat-earth idea was given up and the round-earth theory was generally accepted.
It was once believed that the Earth was at the center of the universe and that the sun revolved around the Earth. Now we know that is not the case and no one disputes that fact.
With the discovery of bacteria and other microbes, we came to understand that many illnesses are caused by an invasion of these organisms into our bodies. Before this discovery, it was widely believed that witches were the cause, and many innocent people were burned at the stake.
In fact, mankind in general has accepted all the new information which replaces old ideas, with one exception:
RELIGION
Religion does not change. It stubbornly clings to stone-age superstition and teaches these ideas as if they are literally the truth. Religion teaches people to believe in wishful and magical thinking. It teaches them to ignore reality and live in a made-up fantasy world where jibbering "in tongues" is a miracle and falling on the floor means you've been touched by the holy spirit.
Naturally, religious people don't see this as a problem. In fact, they see it as a virtue. Their powerful imaginary friend knows all from beginning to end, and he never changes. Although this is clearly not true, the religious do what they do best and deny, deny, deny. I can show anyone passages in the Bible that clearly contradict each other. I can show conflicting commandments.
Clinging to 2,000 year old myths is not noble or virtuous. It is stupid. We live in the information age. It is time to stop believing in fairy-tales.
So, if most of the ideas about life, earth, and science 2,000 years ago were incorrect, why is religion still held as true when it (Christianity at least) originated during that time? Why is religion the only thing from the past that people just can't give up?
Old ideas are replaced with new. Religion is old...
Throughout history, mankind has had different views and beliefs on a variety of subjects, most of them being incorrect.
At one point, it was believed that the earth was flat. As new evidence suggested it was round, the flat-earth idea was given up and the round-earth theory was generally accepted.
It was once believed that the Earth was at the center of the universe and that the sun revolved around the Earth. Now we know that is not the case and no one disputes that fact.
With the discovery of bacteria and other microbes, we came to understand that many illnesses are caused by an invasion of these organisms into our bodies. Before this discovery, it was widely believed that witches were the cause, and many innocent people were burned at the stake.
In fact, mankind in general has accepted all the new information which replaces old ideas, with one exception:
RELIGION
Religion does not change. It stubbornly clings to stone-age superstition and teaches these ideas as if they are literally the truth. Religion teaches people to believe in wishful and magical thinking. It teaches them to ignore reality and live in a made-up fantasy world where jibbering "in tongues" is a miracle and falling on the floor means you've been touched by the holy spirit.
Naturally, religious people don't see this as a problem. In fact, they see it as a virtue. Their powerful imaginary friend knows all from beginning to end, and he never changes. Although this is clearly not true, the religious do what they do best and deny, deny, deny. I can show anyone passages in the Bible that clearly contradict each other. I can show conflicting commandments.
Clinging to 2,000 year old myths is not noble or virtuous. It is stupid. We live in the information age. It is time to stop believing in fairy-tales.
So, if most of the ideas about life, earth, and science 2,000 years ago were incorrect, why is religion still held as true when it (Christianity at least) originated during that time? Why is religion the only thing from the past that people just can't give up?
Old ideas are replaced with new. Religion is old...
No Matter What Happens, It Means God Answered Your Prayer!
I was given an LDS book for Christmas a few years ago entitled “Why? Powerful Answers and Practical Reasons for Living LDS Standards”. On almost every page is something juicy for me to write about.
I randomly opened the book to page 133 and found myself in the chapter about prayer. On this page is a quote from Elder Gene R. Cook who said:
“I believe that in the whole history of the world God has never failed to answer a humble, sincere prayer – no matter who offered it, whether male or female, young or old, weak or strong, member or nonmember. That’s the way the Lord is. He is so kind. He is so anxious to respond. Of course, his answer might have been ‘No’. Or he may have said, ‘Yes, but not now’. Or he may have responded in a still, small voice that the person failed to hear. But answer he did.”
Amazing, isn’t it?
Think about it… You pray for something and you either get it or you don’t. If you get it, that means god said “YES!” If you didn’t get it, god either said “NO!” or you weren’t listening hard enough.
The funny thing is that if I prayed to a rock, I would get exactly the same results. If I got it, then the rock said “YES!” If I didn’t get it, then the rock said “NO!” Wow, that rock really loves me!
I could use Elder Cook’s example to prove that anything can answer my prayer.
Notice how Elder Cook also mentions how god is “so anxious to respond”. So does that mean that god already knows what you are going to ask for but withholds it until you come groveling to him? You know, that sounds more like a mean big brother than a loving father.
Ever since my eyes were opened about religion, I have had one major problem with prayer. What good does it do? Why do people think that just by asking god for something, they can alter his will? What good is an all-knowing god if all it takes is one simple, weak, naïve, human prayer to change his mind? That means god is a puppet and humans are really running the show. What’s the point of having a god then?
Here’s a scenario. What if someone’s mother was sick and god knew that her kids would pray for her to get better. He already knew that the answer would be “no” and that she would die. First of all, if god already knows what his answer will be, then why ask for it? Secondly, what if the kids didn’t pray for her to get better but she died anyway? Did god answer the prayer that they were going to say? Would god keep her alive forever until they ask for her to live and then take her? Either way, what’s the point of prayer?
If the world was to stop praying, would the earth stop spinning? Nope. Life would go on. Some sick people would get better and some would die. People would still have good days and bad days. Nothing would change. Some people would get great jobs and some people would lose great jobs.
Life just happens and it’s not the almighty up there pulling strings for you. It sucks, but get over it.
I randomly opened the book to page 133 and found myself in the chapter about prayer. On this page is a quote from Elder Gene R. Cook who said:
“I believe that in the whole history of the world God has never failed to answer a humble, sincere prayer – no matter who offered it, whether male or female, young or old, weak or strong, member or nonmember. That’s the way the Lord is. He is so kind. He is so anxious to respond. Of course, his answer might have been ‘No’. Or he may have said, ‘Yes, but not now’. Or he may have responded in a still, small voice that the person failed to hear. But answer he did.”
Amazing, isn’t it?
Think about it… You pray for something and you either get it or you don’t. If you get it, that means god said “YES!” If you didn’t get it, god either said “NO!” or you weren’t listening hard enough.
The funny thing is that if I prayed to a rock, I would get exactly the same results. If I got it, then the rock said “YES!” If I didn’t get it, then the rock said “NO!” Wow, that rock really loves me!
I could use Elder Cook’s example to prove that anything can answer my prayer.
Notice how Elder Cook also mentions how god is “so anxious to respond”. So does that mean that god already knows what you are going to ask for but withholds it until you come groveling to him? You know, that sounds more like a mean big brother than a loving father.
Ever since my eyes were opened about religion, I have had one major problem with prayer. What good does it do? Why do people think that just by asking god for something, they can alter his will? What good is an all-knowing god if all it takes is one simple, weak, naïve, human prayer to change his mind? That means god is a puppet and humans are really running the show. What’s the point of having a god then?
Here’s a scenario. What if someone’s mother was sick and god knew that her kids would pray for her to get better. He already knew that the answer would be “no” and that she would die. First of all, if god already knows what his answer will be, then why ask for it? Secondly, what if the kids didn’t pray for her to get better but she died anyway? Did god answer the prayer that they were going to say? Would god keep her alive forever until they ask for her to live and then take her? Either way, what’s the point of prayer?
If the world was to stop praying, would the earth stop spinning? Nope. Life would go on. Some sick people would get better and some would die. People would still have good days and bad days. Nothing would change. Some people would get great jobs and some people would lose great jobs.
Life just happens and it’s not the almighty up there pulling strings for you. It sucks, but get over it.
Saturday, September 29, 2012
LDS Marriages
Non-LDS marriages are fun and joyous occasions. The bride and groom are able to enjoy their engagement anyway they want without all the pressure to “stay worthy”. If they did have sex before marriage, it is not a big deal. Even if people know they “did it”, no one cares and no one judges. They are still allowed to have a happy wedding. It is a happy occasion.
In a Mormon marriage, it’s just the opposite. If the couple has “fooled around” at all (and we know that 99% of them have), they must keep it secret and have to lie to their bishops in order to get a recommend to get married in the temple. After all, if they confess their sins, the bishop will deny them their recommends and since they aren’t getting married in the temple, everyone will know they “did it”. Since sexual sin is very serious in Mormonism, it is kept secret. I suspect that many “unworthy” couples go through the temple anyway, because confessing brings a ton of public shame on them.
In the wedding itself, only worthy family members can attend and there is not a Bride’s Maid or a Best Man. There are no rings exchanged and there are no flowers. There is no special music. There is no giving away the bride and there are no vows. The ceremony takes place with the bride and groom fully dressed in their temple garb; the bride’s gown is not even visible. The ceremony is verbatim and is preformed while the couple kneels across from each other at an altar, holding each other’s hand in one of the secret handshakes they learned earlier in the endowment ceremony. Afterward, there is no “you may kiss the bride” and there is no applause from those in attendance. The couple is hurried out of the sealing room, and the next couple is hurried in.
This cookie cutter ceremony is the pinnacle of Mormon existence. It is your purpose for living, literally. There is a great deal of shame and gossip if someone’s kid is married outside of the temple. For the couple, especially if they have done “anything” before hand, there is a great deal of guilt. If they lied to their bishop to have a temple wedding, they feel guilty. They feel dirty and wicked.
On top of that is the tremendous pressure to marry as soon as possible. So many Mormon youth rush to the temple for their marriage before they are mature enough for marriage (that would be me) or financially ready (that would be me too). The LDS council to marry young and pop out babies before you are financially ready is STUPID ADVICE!
As a side note, members of the LDS church are taught that their leaders have what they call “the gift of discernment”. This means that if you go into an interview, the bishop will know if you are lying to him. They can see into your soul and tell if your “light” is very bright or very dim. Interestingly enough, every time I fibbed to a bishop, he never figured it out. But this is one of the “scare tactics” they use to keep the members in line.
No, a Mormon wedding is not a happy experience*. When I got married in the temple, my fiancé and I fooled around a little before. She used to cry and we would pray together for forgiveness. We decided together that we would not confess our sins. After all, what would the family say if we announced that we were having a “civil” wedding?
*On the surface a Mormon wedding is happy. Everyone is thrilled that another "celestial family" has been created. But under the surface, it is sad, depressing, and lonely.
To a non-member it is difficult to explain just how serious this is. Your existence for the rest of eternity depends upon this one event. If you do not carry it out (or if you carry it out unworthily), you will be alone for eternity. You will be cut off from all your worthy loved ones. You will live in guilt and shame forever!
A Mormon temple wedding is not performed as “until death do you part”, but “for time and all eternity”. A couple married in the temple is only temporarily parted by death. In the hereafter, they will be married for eternity and will progress together to godhood. This is called a “sealing” or being sealed. It is one of Mormonism’s main selling points: Eternal Families. This idea by itself is not a bad one. It’s just that the process to get there is so full of stress and sacrifice.
Every Mormon home has at least one picture of the temple on the wall and the children look at it adoringly, looking forward to the day when they will go inside and learn about its marvelous secrets. The only thing they really know is that they will go inside and make special covenants with god. Before a person goes to the temple, they have no idea what those covenants are. In the ceremony, they are presented and the receiver must commit to live them on the spot.
Even in a blessing of a new infant born into Mormonism, the child is blessed that he or she will someday marry in the temple. It is the ultimate goal of Mormonism. The only thing that must be done after that is staying worthy and enduring to the end. If you die faithful, you have passed the test. Those who leave the church and fall away, “It will be better for them had they never been born”.
That’s the way it is in Mormonism.
In a Mormon marriage, it’s just the opposite. If the couple has “fooled around” at all (and we know that 99% of them have), they must keep it secret and have to lie to their bishops in order to get a recommend to get married in the temple. After all, if they confess their sins, the bishop will deny them their recommends and since they aren’t getting married in the temple, everyone will know they “did it”. Since sexual sin is very serious in Mormonism, it is kept secret. I suspect that many “unworthy” couples go through the temple anyway, because confessing brings a ton of public shame on them.
In the wedding itself, only worthy family members can attend and there is not a Bride’s Maid or a Best Man. There are no rings exchanged and there are no flowers. There is no special music. There is no giving away the bride and there are no vows. The ceremony takes place with the bride and groom fully dressed in their temple garb; the bride’s gown is not even visible. The ceremony is verbatim and is preformed while the couple kneels across from each other at an altar, holding each other’s hand in one of the secret handshakes they learned earlier in the endowment ceremony. Afterward, there is no “you may kiss the bride” and there is no applause from those in attendance. The couple is hurried out of the sealing room, and the next couple is hurried in.
This cookie cutter ceremony is the pinnacle of Mormon existence. It is your purpose for living, literally. There is a great deal of shame and gossip if someone’s kid is married outside of the temple. For the couple, especially if they have done “anything” before hand, there is a great deal of guilt. If they lied to their bishop to have a temple wedding, they feel guilty. They feel dirty and wicked.
On top of that is the tremendous pressure to marry as soon as possible. So many Mormon youth rush to the temple for their marriage before they are mature enough for marriage (that would be me) or financially ready (that would be me too). The LDS council to marry young and pop out babies before you are financially ready is STUPID ADVICE!
As a side note, members of the LDS church are taught that their leaders have what they call “the gift of discernment”. This means that if you go into an interview, the bishop will know if you are lying to him. They can see into your soul and tell if your “light” is very bright or very dim. Interestingly enough, every time I fibbed to a bishop, he never figured it out. But this is one of the “scare tactics” they use to keep the members in line.
No, a Mormon wedding is not a happy experience*. When I got married in the temple, my fiancé and I fooled around a little before. She used to cry and we would pray together for forgiveness. We decided together that we would not confess our sins. After all, what would the family say if we announced that we were having a “civil” wedding?
*On the surface a Mormon wedding is happy. Everyone is thrilled that another "celestial family" has been created. But under the surface, it is sad, depressing, and lonely.
To a non-member it is difficult to explain just how serious this is. Your existence for the rest of eternity depends upon this one event. If you do not carry it out (or if you carry it out unworthily), you will be alone for eternity. You will be cut off from all your worthy loved ones. You will live in guilt and shame forever!
A Mormon temple wedding is not performed as “until death do you part”, but “for time and all eternity”. A couple married in the temple is only temporarily parted by death. In the hereafter, they will be married for eternity and will progress together to godhood. This is called a “sealing” or being sealed. It is one of Mormonism’s main selling points: Eternal Families. This idea by itself is not a bad one. It’s just that the process to get there is so full of stress and sacrifice.
Every Mormon home has at least one picture of the temple on the wall and the children look at it adoringly, looking forward to the day when they will go inside and learn about its marvelous secrets. The only thing they really know is that they will go inside and make special covenants with god. Before a person goes to the temple, they have no idea what those covenants are. In the ceremony, they are presented and the receiver must commit to live them on the spot.
Even in a blessing of a new infant born into Mormonism, the child is blessed that he or she will someday marry in the temple. It is the ultimate goal of Mormonism. The only thing that must be done after that is staying worthy and enduring to the end. If you die faithful, you have passed the test. Those who leave the church and fall away, “It will be better for them had they never been born”.
That’s the way it is in Mormonism.
Saturday, September 22, 2012
A May 2012 Calendar
Unfortunately, I have found myself on the mailing list of the local ward in which I reside. The following image is the calendar schedule for the month of May (yes, I am a little slow getting it up here). Notice how nearly every day has something planned.
Meetings, religion classes, mutual, scouts, temple trips, etc.
No wonder I felt exhaused as an active member! On top of the famous 101 Mormon Commandments, there is a ton of extra to do!
I have not altered this list in any way other than to remove a few items that were not related to the ward. Is Mormonism a demanding religion?
Decide for yourself.
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Sacrifice for the Church
One of the covenants that LDS members make in the temple is to “sacrifice anything with which the lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
While this has not actually been asked of the members that I am aware of, the church does require some of its members to sacrifice immensely. The main goal of Mormonism is to get to the temple. Here in Zion, it is a hop, skip, and a jump to any temple, but in other places, it is a MAJOR undertaking to get there.
They proudly publish stories of families living in third-world countries who literally have to sell everything they own just to get to the temple, including their homes. They then undertake a two-week journey through the jungle to the temple. They face starvation, the elements, insect bites, illnesses, and more. Once the precious saving ordinances are complete, they undertake the return, two-week journey home, only they have no home to return to. Some of them do not survive the trip. For all of them, this will be the only trip they ever make to the temple in their lifetime.
Should the LDS church be allowed to encourage their faithful members to sacrifice so much? A lot can be said about the dedication of these members. If the temple truly was what the LDS claim, then these members would surely receive the highest rewards for their faithful dedication. But what kind of a god would want a family to be homeless just for a chance to attend the temple?
The LDS corporation, which is loaded to the gills with cash, could easily finance these members on their journey. Hell, by American standards, these expenses are very low. But no, the members must sacrifice everything in order to go. They must suffer nearly the ultimate price for the privilege of a few hours in the house of god. Again, while their dedication for doing so is truly noteworthy, this just sits wrong with me.
The general authorities of the church fly around the world in private jets and live in lavish penthouses. There is no reason the church could not spare the expense of these humble families to attend the temple.
I have been in a third-world country and I have seen the poverty. A family that does well will only make the equivalent of USD $5.00 a day. And they battle ever increasing inflation, making it difficult to even put food on the table. Americans do not realize how much people in other countries suffer. While we are worried about keeping up with the Joneses, they are worried about where their next meal will come from. And they do not have any welfare programs.
Should people already living in conditions like this be burdened with the extra stress and expense of a trip to the temple? I don’t think so. No loving god would require that much sacrifice from his most humble of subjects.
But when these expeditions to the temple occur, the church uses it as propaganda to the rest of its members, telling them that if the poorest of people in the world can make it to the temple, then they can sacrifice more too. One would think that the church would finance these people. But they won’t. They would rather have families with starving and homeless children so that they can use it to motivate their members to give more.
And that just sits wrong with me.
In fact, it pisses me off!
While this has not actually been asked of the members that I am aware of, the church does require some of its members to sacrifice immensely. The main goal of Mormonism is to get to the temple. Here in Zion, it is a hop, skip, and a jump to any temple, but in other places, it is a MAJOR undertaking to get there.
They proudly publish stories of families living in third-world countries who literally have to sell everything they own just to get to the temple, including their homes. They then undertake a two-week journey through the jungle to the temple. They face starvation, the elements, insect bites, illnesses, and more. Once the precious saving ordinances are complete, they undertake the return, two-week journey home, only they have no home to return to. Some of them do not survive the trip. For all of them, this will be the only trip they ever make to the temple in their lifetime.
Should the LDS church be allowed to encourage their faithful members to sacrifice so much? A lot can be said about the dedication of these members. If the temple truly was what the LDS claim, then these members would surely receive the highest rewards for their faithful dedication. But what kind of a god would want a family to be homeless just for a chance to attend the temple?
The LDS corporation, which is loaded to the gills with cash, could easily finance these members on their journey. Hell, by American standards, these expenses are very low. But no, the members must sacrifice everything in order to go. They must suffer nearly the ultimate price for the privilege of a few hours in the house of god. Again, while their dedication for doing so is truly noteworthy, this just sits wrong with me.
The general authorities of the church fly around the world in private jets and live in lavish penthouses. There is no reason the church could not spare the expense of these humble families to attend the temple.
I have been in a third-world country and I have seen the poverty. A family that does well will only make the equivalent of USD $5.00 a day. And they battle ever increasing inflation, making it difficult to even put food on the table. Americans do not realize how much people in other countries suffer. While we are worried about keeping up with the Joneses, they are worried about where their next meal will come from. And they do not have any welfare programs.
Should people already living in conditions like this be burdened with the extra stress and expense of a trip to the temple? I don’t think so. No loving god would require that much sacrifice from his most humble of subjects.
But when these expeditions to the temple occur, the church uses it as propaganda to the rest of its members, telling them that if the poorest of people in the world can make it to the temple, then they can sacrifice more too. One would think that the church would finance these people. But they won’t. They would rather have families with starving and homeless children so that they can use it to motivate their members to give more.
And that just sits wrong with me.
In fact, it pisses me off!
Saturday, September 8, 2012
It's One Thing to Have Your Own Set of Personal Morals...
... but it's another thing to force them on everyone.
I spent a few days out of town with family a few weeks ago, and, of course, they are Mormon. It's amazing to me how they expect everyone to follow THEIR morals all the time.
Case in point... Several other family members were staying there as well and on Sunday morning, the patriarch of the family was grumping because not everyone had brought church clothes. He offered to let me wear some of his. Several of the grandkids have not been raised LDS and grandpa was even trying to make them go, even though they clearly didn't want to. Although grandpa was quite unhappy about it, I ended up staying home with all the unfit-for-church-because-of-their-clothes grandchildren, and they all expressed their relief at not having to go.
As they were walking out the door for church, the only instruction I received was, "Don't let the kids watch PG-13 movies because they MIGHT have sex in them. Their parents let them watch it at home, but I don't let them watch it here." That's all fine and good. I respect their right to choose which movies are watched in their home, but what does she think we're going to do? Pull out the pornos and have a family incest fuck fest? Really! If a PG-13 movie shows nudity, it is always brief and usually only shows boobies. For crying out loud, we all sucked our mommies titties when we were babies; what is so evil about seeing a pair?
These same non-LDS grandchildren went swimming with the family and one 10-year-old granddaughter wore a bikini swimming suit, and she is not even starting to sprout her feminine features yet. Even though the child's mother was there (who is an ex-Mormon), grandma made her put on a shirt over her immodest body.
This bothers me. What gives grandma the right to go above the head of this child's parents and demand what she wears, especially when they are NOT at grandma's house? If grandma doesn't want to wear a bikini, then she doesn't have to. But to force your views on others, especially those who are not of your faith, really bothers me.
Mormons claim that we all have our free agency, which is the god-given right to make our own decisions. Yet at every turn, all I saw was Mormons trying to force their views and standards on everyone. I am an atheist and yet I still allow them to pray to their god and say a blessing on their food when they eat dinner at my house. I don't force them to eat unblessed food, even though I don't believe blessing food is necessary. When they bless the food at their house, I sit quietly and respectfully. I don't throw a fit that not everyone is staunchly following my religious standards.
In my opinion, this type of behavior is very unChrist-like.
This is the very reason why I am terrified of having a Mormon in the White House. They can believe whatever silly nonsense they want all day long, but they are not happy until their standards have been shoved down the throats of every person in America.
I spent a few days out of town with family a few weeks ago, and, of course, they are Mormon. It's amazing to me how they expect everyone to follow THEIR morals all the time.
Case in point... Several other family members were staying there as well and on Sunday morning, the patriarch of the family was grumping because not everyone had brought church clothes. He offered to let me wear some of his. Several of the grandkids have not been raised LDS and grandpa was even trying to make them go, even though they clearly didn't want to. Although grandpa was quite unhappy about it, I ended up staying home with all the unfit-for-church-because-of-their-clothes grandchildren, and they all expressed their relief at not having to go.
As they were walking out the door for church, the only instruction I received was, "Don't let the kids watch PG-13 movies because they MIGHT have sex in them. Their parents let them watch it at home, but I don't let them watch it here." That's all fine and good. I respect their right to choose which movies are watched in their home, but what does she think we're going to do? Pull out the pornos and have a family incest fuck fest? Really! If a PG-13 movie shows nudity, it is always brief and usually only shows boobies. For crying out loud, we all sucked our mommies titties when we were babies; what is so evil about seeing a pair?
These same non-LDS grandchildren went swimming with the family and one 10-year-old granddaughter wore a bikini swimming suit, and she is not even starting to sprout her feminine features yet. Even though the child's mother was there (who is an ex-Mormon), grandma made her put on a shirt over her immodest body.
This bothers me. What gives grandma the right to go above the head of this child's parents and demand what she wears, especially when they are NOT at grandma's house? If grandma doesn't want to wear a bikini, then she doesn't have to. But to force your views on others, especially those who are not of your faith, really bothers me.
Mormons claim that we all have our free agency, which is the god-given right to make our own decisions. Yet at every turn, all I saw was Mormons trying to force their views and standards on everyone. I am an atheist and yet I still allow them to pray to their god and say a blessing on their food when they eat dinner at my house. I don't force them to eat unblessed food, even though I don't believe blessing food is necessary. When they bless the food at their house, I sit quietly and respectfully. I don't throw a fit that not everyone is staunchly following my religious standards.
In my opinion, this type of behavior is very unChrist-like.
This is the very reason why I am terrified of having a Mormon in the White House. They can believe whatever silly nonsense they want all day long, but they are not happy until their standards have been shoved down the throats of every person in America.
Saturday, September 1, 2012
Adorning Your Churches
 |
| I bet the Mormons just hate it when a passage from the Book of Mormon is used to show what hypocrites they are! |
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)