DiscussMormonism.com

Prior to the engineered conflict between me and my step-dad, I still was able to maintain a mild respect for the Mormon faith and his belief. After that fiasco, I thought about the grieving process, and if I was really being as foul as I was being accused of.

Even though it was only the followers of that horny dowser Joe Smith that accused me of it -- I considered the criticism.

Even though the email was completely anonymous and unlikely to see any in-real-life daylight -- I still have decided to reconsider what I said in that email and what I have said to him following that email.

Conclusion: If only I could have been more blunt - and from the very beginning. If only I had hit "reply to all" instead of posting my thoughts here, sheepishly.


The more I think about it, the more I am compelled to believe that religious parents are a threat -- to myself, and everyone else (and by everyone else, I mean the sane people who don't hope for Armageddon, a theocracy, more conservative legislation, the dramatic return of Jesus Christ, etc).

While my dad certainly was grieving (as was I, and many others) he was not just grieving. He was not just bragging about the supernatural powers Mormonism grants its male membership. He was setting a bad example. And lying. Consider the following quote from Sam Harris:

One of the greatest problems with religion is that it is built, to a remarkable degree, upon lies. Mommy claims to know that Granny went straight to heaven after she died. But Mommy doesn't actually know this. The truth is that, while Mommy may be rigorously honest on any other subject, in this instance she doesn't want to distinguish between what she really knows (i.e what she has good reasons to believe) and 1) what she wants to be true, or 2) what will keep her children from grieving too much in Granny's absence. She is lying -- either to herself or to her children -- but we've all agreed not to talk about it.
Rather than teach our children to grieve, we teach them to lie to themselves.

This passage made me realize I was never taught how to grieve properly. I was taught that the dead were destined for one of four places -- and that depended mostly on what church they joined.

So as a kid, while I spent summers with my favorite relative - my uncle - I was horrified that my Uncle hadn't joined the right church yet. I remember asking him why. I was scared that when he would die, a horrible destination awaited him.

While a rational adult can handle this sort of brain raping - as a kid, it poisoned my mind.

When I was 12 years old I knew what an "anti-Mormon" was - I knew that homosexuals were an "abomination" - I knew that Joe Smith translated the plates (with the Urim and Thumim, not a top hat and a rock).

Knowing these things is absurd -- even for adults, but when I think about what I should have been concerned with as a 12 year old -- absurdity takes on a whole new meaning.

My parents likely felt justified in telling me that they know the church is true, or that they know God hates homosexuals, or that they know the priesthood power could heal medical emergencies. They likely felt justified in telling me that I was a descendant of two modern homo sapiens who resided in a enchanted garden less than 10,000 years ago -- in what is now Missouri.

They likely felt justified in telling me rainbows were a sign from God - promising not to flood the Earth again. They likely felt justified in forcing me to talk about sexuality with other business men who lived in the same community as me who happened to hold a position of leadership in my parents church.

I don't doubt that they feel justified every time they clobber me with their faith (and by "their" I mean "my step-dad" -- my mom would usually sadly, and submissively sit on the sidelines).
That is hardly an excuse.

They likely felt justified in sending me to a Mormon gulag for a year and a half - where the Mormon religion is literally forced on adolescents (for more on this, stay tuned).

So, my point was and is not to rehash - as a certain LDS poster so cleverly dubbed - the GoodK Epistles. My point is to declare my contempt for parents who burden their offspring with religion. I don't think parents should have the right to cause so much psychological and emotional damage.

I don't know what a reasonable solution would be - but I am going to find one.

Hi Grosskreutz...

From another perspective that supports your ideas...

My father, (who is one of the most amazing of all people on the planet), is not a member. I joined the church as a child, then my mother and sibs joined as well. My father is agnostic.

Now... how does a child cope with the "fact" that her father will never be with her in heaven? What does it do to a child to tell her that she will not be with her family because her father and mother are not sealed? What does it do to a child to tell her that even if she makes it to the CK, she will be alone, without siblings or loved ones? What does it do to a child to tell her that her father is not one of the chosen, or is a sinner, or is not righteous because he has not joined the right church? And what does it do to a father/daughter relationship?

I think it is cruel.

Even if the church is true, what sort of God allows this sort of cruelty to be taught and preached to children?

Families can be together forever? Nope. :-(

td

Wow, that is cruel, TD.

Another concern of mine is illustrated well by the posters Gazelam, BCspace, and my personal favorite - Droopy. I insist that those posters are a better representative of the Mormon male population than posters like DCP. While they look like fools and fanatical to us here, these are the type of people sitting in Elder's Quorum on Sunday afternoons. Think about the type of parent Gazelam would be. Or Droopy. Imagine what the effects might be when a bigot constantly pounds homophobia into a young boys head. Not only is he saying that he hates homosexuals, he is telling the child that God - who the child automatically assumes exists - commands him to hate homosexuals.

If I smothered my son with doctrine according to the Nation of Islam -- if I taught him that the white race was invented by the mad scientist Yakub, engineered for the sole purpose of opposing the black man and ruling over him -- would no one oppose? What if I sent my child to public school, where he constantly encountered children he was programmed to hate? Is there a difference between what the Nation of Islam teaches and what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? They both have shared similar messages regarding homosexuals. And Jews.

For those of you who are parents: Would you feel comfortable letting your child play at a friends house - a friend whose parents happened to be members of the NOI?
What about Droopy or BCspace or Gazelem? Would you let them go play with their kids?

GoodK wrote:Wow, that is cruel, TD.

Another concern of mine is illustrated well by the posters Gazelam, BCspace, and my personal favorite - Droopy. I insist that those posters are a better representative of the Mormon male population than posters like DCP. While they look like fools and fanatical to us here, these are the type of people sitting in Elder's Quorum on Sunday afternoons. Think about the type of parent Gazelam would be. Or Droopy. Imagine what the effects might be when a bigot constantly pounds homophobia into a young boys head. Not only is he saying that he hates homosexuals, he is telling the child that God - who the child automatically assumes exists - commands him to hate homosexuals.

If I smothered my son with doctrine according to the Nation of Islam -- if I taught him that the white race was invented by the mad scientist Yakub, engineered for the sole purpose of opposing the black man and ruling over him -- would no one oppose? What if I sent my child to public school, where he constantly encountered children he was programmed to hate? Is there a difference between what the Nation of Islam teaches and what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? They both have shared similar messages regarding homosexuals. And Jews.

For those of you who are parents: Would you feel comfortable letting your child play at a friends house - a friend whose parents happened to be members of the NOI?
What about Droopy or BCspace or Gazelem? Would you let them go play with their kids?

My parents never once taught me by word or deed that it is okay to hate anyone. I was taught that homosexuality was wrong but I was taught the same thing about lying, promiscuity, cheating, etc. and have interacted with people participating in all those sins without coming to hate them all.

Also, I may have read you wrong but if not then where the hell did you get the idea that the LDS Church teaches anti-Semiticism?

Very interesting thoughts, GoodK. Thanks especially for the Sam Harris quote.

I'm very, very much looking forward to your upcoming "Mormon Gulag" thread.

Dr. Shades wrote:Very interesting thoughts, GoodK. Thanks especially for the Sam Harris quote.

I'm very, very much looking forward to your upcoming "Mormon Gulag" thread.

Me too.

And I liked the quote as well. It was timely for me, as I just finished a conversation with my seven y/o daughter about religion and thinking for herself (I reminded her again today that she should question everything she hears, including what she hears from her mommy and daddy). She visits her cousins in our neighboring state occasionally and they take her to their Baptist church on Sundays. When she comes home, she'll sometimes ask me about the things she's heard from her cousins or in church. She asked me about something she heard there. Apparently:

"All the animals know god."

That one was new to me, and I told her that must be a Baptist thing (or that maybe there was more to it). She told me it didn't make sense to her, and asked why they think that. I said I didn't know why, but that a lot of religion was like writing a story. What makes a story interesting is often the details that a writer creates to make it more compelling, and that's exactly the same thing religions do. They make crap up.

It's one thing to say there's a god, but if that's all a religion had to offer, it wouldn't be very interesting. The difference between a story and religion, however, is that story writers acknowledge that they're writing fiction. Religions pass it off as knowledge. I told her that this was one of my primary criticisms of religion, because when they do that, they are simply lying.

I really dig these conversations with her, because she asks such simple, fundamental questions about religion from a child's perspective that truly get to the heart of its problems.

Some Schmo wrote:I really dig these conversations with her, because she asks such simple, fundamental questions about religion from a child's perspective that truly get to the heart of its problems.

My son, who was 6 at the time, had one of these simple questions. He asked, "If Adam named all the animals, but dinosaurs existed before Adam, how could he name them?"

My answer, "Hmm...doesn't make much sense, does it?"

I feel confident that he will see through the lies.

GoodK wrote:Prior to the engineered conflict between me and my step-dad, I still was able to maintain a mild respect for the Mormon faith and his belief. After that fiasco, I thought about the grieving process, and if I was really being as foul as I was being accused of.

Even though it was only the followers of that horny dowser Joe Smith that accused me of it -- I considered the criticism.

Even though the email was completely anonymous and unlikely to see any in-real-life daylight -- I still have decided to reconsider what I said in that email and what I have said to him following that email.

Conclusion: If only I could have been more blunt - and from the very beginning. If only I had hit "reply to all" instead of posting my thoughts here, sheepishly.


The more I think about it, the more I am compelled to believe that religious parents are a threat -- to myself, and everyone else (and by everyone else, I mean the sane people who don't hope for Armageddon, a theocracy, more conservative legislation, the dramatic return of Jesus Christ, etc).

While my dad certainly was grieving (as was I, and many others) he was not just grieving. He was not just bragging about the supernatural powers Mormonism grants its male membership. He was setting a bad example. And lying. Consider the following quote from Sam Harris:

One of the greatest problems with religion is that it is built, to a remarkable degree, upon lies. Mommy claims to know that Granny went straight to heaven after she died. But Mommy doesn't actually know this. The truth is that, while Mommy may be rigorously honest on any other subject, in this instance she doesn't want to distinguish between what she really knows (i.e what she has good reasons to believe) and 1) what she wants to be true, or 2) what will keep her children from grieving too much in Granny's absence. She is lying -- either to herself or to her children -- but we've all agreed not to talk about it.
Rather than teach our children to grieve, we teach them to lie to themselves.

This passage made me realize I was never taught how to grieve properly. I was taught that the dead were destined for one of four places -- and that depended mostly on what church they joined.

So as a kid, while I spent summers with my favorite relative - my uncle - I was horrified that my Uncle hadn't joined the right church yet. I remember asking him why. I was scared that when he would die, a horrible destination awaited him.

While a rational adult can handle this sort of brain raping - as a kid, it poisoned my mind.

When I was 12 years old I knew what an "anti-Mormon" was - I knew that homosexuals were an "abomination" - I knew that Joe Smith translated the plates (with the Urim and Thumim, not a top hat and a rock).

Knowing these things is absurd -- even for adults, but when I think about what I should have been concerned with as a 12 year old -- absurdity takes on a whole new meaning.

My parents likely felt justified in telling me that they know the church is true, or that they know God hates homosexuals, or that they know the priesthood power could heal medical emergencies. They likely felt justified in telling me that I was a descendant of two modern homo sapiens who resided in a enchanted garden less than 10,000 years ago -- in what is now Missouri.

They likely felt justified in telling me rainbows were a sign from God - promising not to flood the Earth again. They likely felt justified in forcing me to talk about sexuality with other business men who lived in the same community as me who happened to hold a position of leadership in my parents church.

I don't doubt that they feel justified every time they clobber me with their faith (and by "their" I mean "my step-dad" -- my mom would usually sadly, and submissively sit on the sidelines).
That is hardly an excuse.

They likely felt justified in sending me to a Mormon gulag for a year and a half - where the Mormon religion is literally forced on adolescents (for more on this, stay tuned).

So, my point was and is not to rehash - as a certain LDS poster so cleverly dubbed - the GoodK Epistles. My point is to declare my contempt for parents who burden their offspring with religion. I don't think parents should have the right to cause so much psychological and emotional damage.

I don't know what a reasonable solution would be - but I am going to find one.

It's a dilemma. But I tend to think that parents have a more or less absolute right to to pass their beliefs, values, etc. down to their children. If fact, I'd go further and argue that this process of intergenerational belief/value transfer serve a vital function in creating stable societies. I know that stability isn't all it's cracked up to be at times (particularly when the status quo, for example, is to dehumanize women), but one can only wonder at the outcome of a process in which each succeeding generation was, in effect, a blank slate. I'm not sure that would be better, particularly in cases where values and beliefs being handed down are 'good' ones (e.g., respect for diversity, tolerance, etc.)

It's complicated, but I draw the line not at passing ones beliefs and values downward a generation, but in whether it is appropriate for parents to expect/demand that their children adopt the said beliefs and values. I believe that each person had the right to determine his/her own life. The job of the parent is to get the child to adulthood, equip him/her with the means to be productive, happy, etc., but then step aside and let the child forge his/her own path.

So, Goodk, if your father has a fault it is not that he passed his belief in religious magic and mythology down to you, but that he holds expectations that you find it as meaningful, useful, binding, etc. as he does. He should respect your moral agency and allow you to forge your own path and work through your own beliefs, and if it means you reach different conclusions than he did, well then that's ok too.

Anything less than this is, IMHO, unrighteous dominion.

The Nehor wrote:My parents never once taught me by word or deed that it is okay to hate anyone. I was taught that homosexuality was wrong but I was taught the same thing about lying, promiscuity, cheating, etc. and have interacted with people participating in all those sins without coming to hate them all.

Also, I may have read you wrong but if not then where the hell did you get the idea that the LDS Church teaches anti-Semiticism?

You can word it however you want to - teaching a child to be judgemental of the sexual preferences of others is not as innocent as teaching a child that lying is "wrong." That you would try and equate the two only shows that you too seem to feel uncomfortable with the teaching of hate to children. Let me ask you, would you allow your child to be friends with the child of parents who were members of the NOI?

Also, you do appear to have read me wrong. If you'll remember, I said :

They both have shared similar messages regarding homosexuals. And Jews

I'm afraid I never said that the church actively teaches it, I said that they have shared similar messages. Which is undoubtedly true. I find it hard to believe that you have no idea what I am talking about. How about Bruce R. McConkie?

I read the opening post.

There's another side to this story.

That shouldn't be surprising or controversial, but it will be easy to forget.

And that's all I'm going to say on this thread.