BIC children who stray.

[_Maxrep]

'Love the sinner, but hate the sin' - lets be clear, its sin that precedes the loss of testimony.

As much as I've heard this phrase, I've always had the impression that the 'Hate' spills over just a wee bit onto the person labeled as the 'sinner'. BIC children are raised under the umbrella expectations that the church has manufactured. These are pretty clearcut, high demand expectations as well!

I am not at the age where my children can make the choice to believe or not. I do have relatives, however, that are in such a position. I know that they carry a real disappointment in regards to their children's level of activity. It is sad that parents can be made to feel as failures for this, and that children can be made to feel like failures for the exact reason. For a family focused religion, this seems divisive. There are many educated and worthwhile individuals who have still managed to let down their LDS parents despite leading productive and happy lives.

On another note, I wonder if apologists who have inactive children or grandchildren, reserve the same disdain for them as they do for the critic? Not that I would at all advocate that position. Do they realize that their offspring may have the same feelings as some critics? Its not hard to picture the kids not sharing the depths of their feelings with mom and dad, in order to avoid trampling beliefs that their parents hold dear.

[_guy sajer]

'Love the sinner, but hate the sin' - lets be clear, its sin that precedes the loss of testimony.

As much as I've heard this phrase, I've always had the impression that the 'Hate' spills over just a wee bit onto the person labeled as the 'sinner'. BIC children are raised under the umbrella expectations that the church has manufactured. These are pretty clearcut, high demand expectations as well!

I am not at the age where my children can make the choice to believe or not. I do have relatives, however, that are in such a position. I know that they carry a real disappointment in regards to their children's level of activity. It is sad that parents can be made to feel as failures for this, and that children can be made to feel like failures for the exact reason. For a family focused religion, this seems divisive. There are many educated and worthwhile individuals who have still managed to let down their LDS parents despite leading productive and happy lives.

On another note, I wonder if apologists who have inactive children or grandchildren, reserve the same disdain for them as they do for the critic? Not that I would at all advocate that position. Do they realize that their offspring may have the same feelings as some critics? Its not hard to picture the kids not sharing the depths of their feelings with mom and dad, in order to avoid trampling beliefs that their parents hold dear.

It is of interest to me how my zealot siblings will respond should one of their own children stray. I suspect that the daughter of one of my siblings is lesbian. If I am correct, this will be interesting to watch. I certainly hope for both their sakes that his current hard line rhetoric doesn't translate into practice. Nothing quite like it when the theotrical "them" is transformed into the concrete "us."

[_the road to hana]

'Love the sinner, but hate the sin' - lets be clear, its sin that precedes the loss of testimony.

As much as I've heard this phrase, I've always had the impression that the 'Hate' spills over just a wee bit onto the person labeled as the 'sinner'. BIC children are raised under the umbrella expectations that the church has manufactured. These are pretty clearcut, high demand expectations as well!

I am not at the age where my children can make the choice to believe or not. I do have relatives, however, that are in such a position. I know that they carry a real disappointment in regards to their children's level of activity. It is sad that parents can be made to feel as failures for this, and that children can be made to feel like failures for the exact reason. For a family focused religion, this seems divisive. There are many educated and worthwhile individuals who have still managed to let down their LDS parents despite leading productive and happy lives.

On another note, I wonder if apologists who have inactive children or grandchildren, reserve the same disdain for them as they do for the critic? Not that I would at all advocate that position. Do they realize that their offspring may have the same feelings as some critics? Its not hard to picture the kids not sharing the depths of their feelings with mom and dad, in order to avoid trampling beliefs that their parents hold dear.

It is of interest to me how my zealot siblings will respond should one of their own children stray. I suspect that the daughter of one of my siblings is lesbian. If I am correct, this will be interesting to watch. I certainly hope for both their sakes that his current hard line rhetoric doesn't translate into practice. Nothing quite like it when the theotrical "them" is transformed into the concrete "us."

I was as BIC as they come, as I imagine were many posting on this message board. Some of my siblings were less active, but became more so when they started having children.

I'm starting to witness the same thing as guy--siblings whose children are reaching an age that they're possibly going a different direction. And since some of my siblings became more active in the church precisely because they thought it was a good place to raise children, it will be interesting to see how they react.

A relative of ours is a well known authority in the church and has several rebellious children, which I'm sure would surprise many who don't know him personally.

[_karl61]

BIC is not that cool: you enter the world and likely the first thing they do is attack you with a knife and mutilate your penis. Then at eight they decide what religion you should have as your foundation, knowing (or not knowing) what the early leaders of the Church really did in their life, believing that modern man communicates with Angles, God and you too can have that relationship, - they are given a false goal of what a good person is - someone who is mean and a bully all their life but waits until they get married to have sex is better than a person who treats people kindly all their life but makes some "mistakes" during their teenage years. The latter is almost a murderer.

[_Maxrep]

BIC is not that cool.

As a young man gets up in his teen years, there is a strange sort of 'love' that the ward extends to him. There is a pretty clear point where his place in the ward becomes awkward. As he reaches mission age, the much advertised 'choice' to serve becomes a disguised ultimatum. Nobody tells him to quit attending if he doesn't want to serve, and nobody really wants the young man to quit attending church, its just that he is left with few realistic options.

The conditioning that the young women receive puts this young man on the unofficial black list. He is really not date material, because as we all know, you're supposed to use dating as a vehicle for marriage. A young man of mission age doesn't have a lot of life experience, but is bright enough to figure out the new position he occupies in his ward is not a comfortable one if he does not leave home and serve for two years. His youth has been spent among some of his church peers, and now he is somewhat marginalized.

[_charity]

'Love the sinner, but hate the sin' - lets be clear, its sin that precedes the loss of testimony.

Let's be clear. It isn't sin that precedes the loss of testimony. The loss of testimony precedes sin. The man who has a testimony of celestial marriage isn't gonig to cheat on his wife. He loses the testimony, he cheats.

As much as I've heard this phrase, I've always had the impression that the 'Hate' spills over just a wee bit onto the person labeled as the 'sinner'. BIC children are raised under the umbrella expectations that the church has manufactured. These are pretty clearcut, high demand expectations as well!

The call is there for all who heed it. We are taught that we are all children of God. That is the highest epectation of all. I have never heard it taught or preached the BIC children have any higher expectations than a non-BIC child.

I am not at the age where my children can make the choice to believe or not. I do have relatives, however, that are in such a position. I know that they carry a real disappointment in regards to their children's level of activity. It is sad that parents can be made to feel as failures for this, and that children can be made to feel like failures for the exact reason. For a family focused religion, this seems divisive. There are many educated and worthwhile individuals who have still managed to let down their LDS parents despite leading productive and happy lives.

This is such an incorrect idea. Parents, of course, will likely feel guilt if they have not done everything they can, and even if they are very conscientious will assume they could have done better. Guilt is a natural consequence of having a well-developed sense of responsibility. It is what makes society better. Guilt is only a problem when it is over done.

On another note, I wonder if apologists who have inactive children or grandchildren, reserve the same disdain for them as they do for the critic? Not that I would at all advocate that position. Do they realize that their offspring may have the same feelings as some critics? Its not hard to picture the kids not sharing the depths of their feelings with mom and dad, in order to avoid trampling beliefs that their parents hold dear.

I have 2 (out of 6) inactive children. I have 15 grandchildren. 5 of them are over age 16. 2 of them are inactive. Oneof the two inactives has a brother on a mission. The other has a sister at BYU. I have had long talks with my inactive children and grandchildren on their feelings. They are open with me. They know my love for them is not dependent on activity in the Church.

I am sure that some families do not function as well. Parents can blame their children, blame themselves. They can refuse to discuse their feelings. But that isn't the fault of the Church. That is an individual personality and famiy dynamic. It could as easily turn up in a family of vegans whose kid eats meat.

[_the road to hana]

I have never heard it taught or preached the BIC children have any higher expectations than a non-BIC child.

That's because you are a convert. By the time you joined the church, your opportunity for being raised a BIC child in an LDS home had passed, so you can't speak to that experience personally.

[_Maxrep]

[quote="charity]

The call is there for all who heed it. We are taught that we are all children of God. That is the highest epectation of all. I have never heard it taught or preached the BIC children have any higher expectations than a non-BIC child.

.[/quote]

How does the church regard a BIC child who chooses to adopt a different belief system? I find it odd that you state, rather matter of factly, that the loss of testimony precedes sin. It is my experience that the exact opposite has been the party line. One sins and then loses the testimony.

Were it possible to prove the church false, is there any accountability for leaders, parents, etc, who established expectations in their children to maintain a belief founded on fraud? It is not that parents want their children to lead moral lives that causes family issues, it is the fact that morality has been given a brand specific label to be acceptable.

[_Trinity]

What can I say about this. I have deliberately waited until my parents have died before outing myself to my family so that my parents would be spared the pain of knowing they had a child that left their beloved Mormonism. I don't know if it was the family dynamic or the belief dynamic that inspired me to break down communication in such an intimate area. Either way, I spent a decade of putting space between me and them. Absurd.

[_guy sajer]

Let's be clear. It isn't sin that precedes the loss of testimony. The loss of testimony precedes sin. The man who has a testimony of celestial marriage isn't gonig to cheat on his wife. He loses the testimony, he cheats.

This quote is breathtaking in its simple-mindedness. You can't possibly mean, as your quote implies, that true believing members are not capable of, and never commit, adultery or that apostacy necessarily leads to adultery?

By the way, women cheat on their husbands too. It's been known to happen.