Mormon couple on Moment of Truth

[_Alter Idem]

Beastie, I have been watching Ex-Mormonism for years and I can tell you assuredly that the Mormon cult teaches that a member should choose the Cult over a wavering member.

I have seen Ex-Mormons testify that bishops have counseled their spouses to divorce.

The Cult always comes first.

The Cult sees one member leave as a loss of tithing. Why make it two? Divorce the spouse, and marry another, thus guaranteeing the money continues to flow in.

Mormonism is, and shall ever be, Money, Power, Control.

\

First off, Bishops are not supposed to counsel people to get divorced. I know this because my husband is a Bishop. If some Bishops do give this counsel, they are on their own.

I don't expect you to understand this because you are not able to be objective when it comes to the LDS church, but there are a number of reasons why a person will decide to divorce. Losing one's faith--any faith will no doubt put severe stress on a marriage if the other person is devout. It will also exacerbate other problems within the marriage--causing a breakdown of the relationship. Note also that when the marriage is entered into, it is done so by the "power" and "authority" of that particular religion. If one person turns their back on the religion--the very organization which bound the couple together in marriage, then you can see how the devout spouse would see rejection of the church and it's "authority" as a rejection of the marriage as well. The unbelieving spouse is essentially sending the message to the other spouse that if the religion is a sham, then the marriage it performed is a sham as well. That would put any marriage on the rocks.

In short, what it comes down to is that a person weighs the pros and cons in their marriage. When the cons list--or the negatives of remaining in the marriage overtake the positives, that's when the person will bolt. And the truth is, marriages break up for more than one reason and it isn't all one person's fault.

[_Tarski]

But the weird thing - she was asked if she'd ever had sexual fantasies about her best friend, and also answered YES to that and explained how that's "normal".

Was she hot?

Yes!

[_Moniker]

It's on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QARkKPjm6w4

[_Alter Idem]

I think if you are talking about the perfect marriage then of course love comes before religion, but honestly, not all marriages are like that. I know mine has seemed fragile at times. Many marriages, or even most marriages, are propped up by things like children, family expectations, financial dependency, sexual fidelity, and yes, religion. Take away any one of those things and many marriages, even most marriages, would have a good chance of failing. If the marriage doesn't fail then it comes away stronger for a time. You can't just declare "love" and take things for granted thereafter.

To make a totally geeky Dungeons & Dragons analogy, it's like you have to make a marriage saving throw when you hit a crisis. If you make it, you stay together; if you don't, you divorce. Apostasy is one of the things that forces a saving throw. Death of an only child could be a similar crisis. Or bankrupcy. I think they are quite comparable, in fact, and it isn't fair to say apostasy is a stupid reason just because we are the apostates. That's a self-serving POV.

On the other hand, when I hear about Bishops telling broken-hearted wives that they should divorce because of a husband's loss of faith, that pisses me off. Get some real marriage counseling for pete's sake! It's just as self-serving to think religion is the end-all and be-all of a marriage.

The geeky Dungeons and Dragons thing was good. I know a number of couples in my ward whose marriages have weathered loss of faith on the part of one. It doesn't have to mean the end of the marriage--and frankly, I think some just use it as an excuse to get out of an already struggling marriage. Their spouse gives them the excuse they've been looking for.

But I have to question how many Bishops are out there trying to break up marriages!! As I said, and Jason mentioned, Bishops are not supposed to counsel couples to divorce--even when they'd like to.

My husband had a couple in our ward having marital difficulties--and the wife left. The husband came to him and insisted that as her Bishop, he should tell the wife that she had to return. The husband was very upset when my husband refused. As a Bishop, he doesn't counsel people to leave and in the same vein, he doesn't tell them they have to stay either.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Closing Tarski's thread with 0 responses.

I'm not the biggest fan of the moderating, either, but for what it's worth, there were several responses to Tarski's thread before it was locked.

At the risk of sounding crazy, there weren't any responses when I peeked into the freshly-closed thread.

Orpheus wrote in the final post "I could have sworn I closed this."

For once, I agree with him/her—I could have sworn he closed it, too. I don't know what to make of the post-initial-closure, pre-secondary-closure responses.

?

Maybe I am crazy. Or, maybe I'm Orpheus.

Chris

Good point, especially the Orpheus comment. I didn't see it closed, it let me post, so I don't know what happened.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

I'll verify that tarski's thread was originally closed before a single comment was made. Then somehow it magically opened back up and comments were added before the final closure.

Weird. A glitch or another mod unlocked it. Mod war? Prob a glitch.

[_Dr. Shades]

Would the MA&D mods spontaneously combust if they suddenly lost their power to lock threads?

[_Sethbag]

It's on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QARkKPjm6w4

I wish they'd show the part where she's asked if she'd leave her hubby if he left the church.

edit: actually here's the recap link where they show that question and more

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfEY4ynpQX4&feature=user

[_cinepro]

How, exactly, does "The Moment of Truth" work?

Since lie detectors don't work reliably anyway, and the people aren't hooked up during the show, have they already answered the questions and been "fact checked" with others? Many people are able to fool lie detectors, so how do you exclude them from the show?

And what is the recourse if the show is wrong? For example, when the woman said she wouldn't pose nude for $100k and the show said she was lying, she just had to say that she was telling the truth, and tell the show to prove her wrong by offering $100k for her to pose nude. If someone makes the offer (I'm sure Larry Flint has already called her), and she turns it down, does she get to go back to the show?

Also, many of the questions are ambiguous and open to wide interpretation. Again, when asked if she would "pose nude", is that in a nationally distributed magazine? How about private pictures just to give to her husband? I don't know how the question was worded, but I would be asking a lot of follow up questions in that situation.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Again, when asked if she would "pose nude", is that in a nationally distributed magazine? How about private pictures just to give to her husband? I don't know how the question was worded, but I would be asking a lot of follow up questions in that situation.

I'll bet you would!