Why People Dislike Mormons

[_Jason Bourne]

I was planning on arguing against much of what has been posted on this thread. But I decided mostly not too for this reason. Everyone's experiences are theirs and not mine. So how can I argue with that?

However I want to make a few comments. First, I have lived most my life and built a very successful career outside of Utah though I grew up there. I have never flet that my non LDS friends, business partners or associates dislike me or the Church. What they say behind my back I do not know. I have taken some friendly jabbing over some of the peculiar things like garments, the Church's opposition to gays, word of wisdom, etc. There was a time that a few of my co-workers liked to call me the "Stormin Mormon." But I felt it was all in fun. Maybe it wasn't really. Another very powerful and respected man in my profession on a national scale that I became very good friends with was always very positive at least to my face about the Mormons he knew as well as the standards Mormons espoused. Recently one of my business partners said to me after one of the recent republican presidential debates "what is it about all you Mormons? You are all good looking, very smart, successful and seem to rise in power frequently." Given that he is Jewish I found his comments interesting since Jewish people tend to be very successful.

Growing up in Utah I did witness some of what Hoops talked about and it used to infuriate me. Maybe I was odd but I had three of my very best friends who where not LDS. One was kid that moved in from California when I was 12 and he got picked on a lot. I hated seeing that so I decided to be his friend. And when I was a senior graduating from Hich School I feel mad in love with a Catholic girl who much to my dismay did not want to pursue our relationship very far. She broke my heart when she ended our short fling by telling me "You need to find you a Mormon girl to take to the temple because I am never joining your Church." Well I was not trying to get her to join and at that point in my life did not all that much care. I was just crazy about her.

As for friends that are non LDS I think it normal that persons with common interests tend to flock together. Anyone, LDS, EV, devote Catholic I think are more likely to hang with those in common. Does that make them bad, or boring because they may have less to talk about than other might? No I think it makes them human.

So are Mormons weird? Yes somewhat. Do they add to their problems by doing some of the things described in these posts. Yes. Is it prevalent? I do not know. As an LDS person I am the minority where I live. In my entire working career I only had a couple years where I there was one other active LDS person where I work. We have had a couple inactive LDS persons there but only one active.

Hoops, I can tell you the my kids have experienced what your kids did from Protestants. They have been teased and ostracized, sometimes brutally. They have put up with comments from teachers, abuse from other students with teacher seeing it and not intervening. There was a group of home school people in the area that at one point when we considered home schooling (we decided against it) that would not let us participate in their extra curricular events because we were Mormons. They were predominantly a Protestant group. I could continue. Hoops, Unfortunately what you describe is note unique when one group is the majority in an area and such behavior is not uniquely LDS. One thing for sure is LDS leaders have condemned and discouraged such behavior by LDS members from the GC pulpit more than once. Do Protestants do the same?

So there is much accuracy in what has been posted and suggestions for change is good.

Kevin I do think some of what you say has much truth but I find you posting about the worst without crediting decent behavior and it creates a characterization that is not totally accurate.

Later maybe I will pull out some comments I think are distorting. But like I said, there is much truth in what has been posted and I think we should work as a people to change it.

[_Kevin Graham]

Kevin I do think some of what you say has much truth but I find you posting about the worst without crediting decent behavior and it creates a characterization that is not totally accurate.

Jason, I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that Mormons try to be nice towards others. I don't think anyone is disputing that Mormons are friendly and charitable towards non-LDS. So I'm not sure what it is you want to argue.

The issue is the ulterior motive behind such actions. Given the LDS focus on "the plan of salvation" it makes perfect sense that faithful LDS folks wouldn't have much time for genuine friendships with Gentiles. To what purpose would these serve anyway? Everything about the Mormon mindset is divisive, socially speaking. Everyone is either referred to as a member or non-member, and more insulting is the word Gentile.

Kids are typically forbidden from dating non-members. I got into an argument with the family that baptized me, because I didn't think this was doctrinal. We had an argument when the missionaries were over for dinner and they insisted it was doctrinal. To quote one of the Elders, "what comes out of the prophet's mouth is law." So their daughters were not permitted to date non-members, which means they didn't allow them to socialize with them outside school activities. The only way they could socialize with them is if they invited them to Church! Every aspect of the Mormon way of life excludes any possibility of meaningful relationships with non-members, unless the ultimate goal is conversion. Mormons could get away with this easier in the past but nowadays people have caught onto their game. Sure, the same is true for other religions to some degree, and the same is true for those trying to recruit Amway marketers.

But there is something inherently wrong with this being such an overshadowing agenda in the "One true Church" of Jesus Christ. Christ was genuine in his relationships with others. He didn't throw them aside once they made it clear they couldn't convert. Now am I saying all Mormons are like this? No, of course not. But let's face it. Those who tend to be friendly towards non-Members are generally those who are accused of being borderline apostates. Just look at how Don Bradley and even David Bokovoy have been treated by their own, simply because they refuse to act like the typical Mormon by befriending the lowly apostates. The point is while there are exceptions, this is still the rule. It is why the "wrong" associations can impede one's eternal progress. It is why Dan Peterson and others at FAIR absolutely refuse to have anything to do with me any longer. Other non-members on their forum are viewed as potential converts, so they tolerate them to a degree, thinking maybe one day they'll see the light. But as a recent turncoat, they know I'm not about to return to the Church. I raised too many issues for which they have no answers, and they know this. So the best way to deal with me is to reject me. They have no use for me. They refuse to debate the issues I raise because they know they have nothing to win.

This is why those who leave the faith are immediately labeled apostates. They can't afford to treat us like a typical non-member with respect because they know they'll never convert us. So they show their true colors when they are around former members. We're open for the worst of their attacks because they have nothing to lose.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hello,

The level of mental masturbation required to carry on with this conversation is astounding. The only thing a real Mormon should be thinking is, "Yes. Yes, I totally get this."

Mr. Kevin is correct in his observations, and anyone who wants to sit around and deconstruct his experience is a mental honey badger.

If a True Blue Mormon is reading this and doesn't understanding what Mr. Kevin is saying, it's only because you haven't crossed paths with this kind of Mormon, yet.

Period.

V/R
Dr. CamNC4Me

[_Kevin Graham]

I should also mention the Mormon paradigm of spirituality. Everyone in the Church has an assumed spiritual status. You've all heard people referring to how "spiritual" another member was. The General Authorities are the most spiritual of all of us. Why? Well, because otherwise they wouldn't have been called to be GAs. It is circular reasoning, but it is the kind of thing that dominates Mormon thinking. When I was dating my wife, she called me from Utah to tell me a GA had slept over at her neighbor's house last week, and that she had the honor of sleeping in the same bed the night before. She said when she prayed that night in the same room, she could feel the spirit so much stronger simply because had slept there the week before!

I wanted to throw up.

So everyone in the Church is constantly trying to work their way up the ladder, trying to be more "spiritual" than the next guy. it is why Paul H. Dunn felt pressure to make up stories to impress his audiences. Mormons love stories. It is why so many returned missionaries invent BS stories about their garments stopping bullets. They are expected to come back more spiritual than they were before. When Elder Ballard visited our mission he told a story of the time he was first called to be a GA. He said after he gave a prayer the following day, his wife leaned over and said, "that was a short prayer for a General Authority." How many folks think it is good to seek to be a Bishop and move up the calling ladder? It is all about getting your spiritual noogies, getting closer and closer to having your calling and election made sure. It is all for selfish reasons. So when Mormons are categorizing Mormons according to a spiritual spectrum, then how do you think they view the Gentiles? They don't even have the gift of the Holy Ghost, remember.

When I had my first argument with Dan Peterson back on ZLMB he was posting as Freethinker. He asked me to supply a reference that supported a point I was making. When I supplied numerous sources that supported my point, he backed away from the discussion and informed his audience that he was leaving because he sensed my spiritual deficiencies. Later I found out it was DCP I was arguing with. He would make similar comments in his emails also, informing me that my spiritual deficiencies make me unworthy of his time.

How many times as Mormons were we told never to engage in contentions? The spirit of contention, we were told, prevents the Holy Spirit from doing its work. This is why it is so important for Mormon missionaries to control the environments when teaching. They don't like it when there are other family members who are obviously skeptical. They want as little critical feedback as possible, and prefer to have their sights set on their prospective convert in one on one situations. Or to be more accurate, two on one, since the Elders work in pairs. If they have a quiet "discussion" with no feedback at all, they'll leave thinking they just had an amazingly "spiritual" discussion. They view no feedback as evidence that the spirit has convinced the person of everything they've taught.

My point is that Mormons are judgmental and discriminate all the time according to a presumed level of spirituality in others. When it comes to non-Members it is assumed that they are potential converts, but in the case of former members, well, we're the worst of the lot because we are the "covenant breakers" who are hell bound as a result. They think we deserve to suffer for turning our backs on the Church and the Temple, etc. What could they possibly teach us that we don't already know about Mormonism? So they reject us out of hand because in their view we're just Satan's servants now. The best evidence for this can be found in virtually every post written by Will Schryver or Pahoran.

[_ajax18]

How many exmormons really want Mormons to befriend them? I think a lot of them have already heard the pictch, and simply want to be left alone regarding the issue.

[_Yoda]

Hey, Kevin,

I have really enjoyed reading your thoughts on this thread.

I agree that there are a lot of Mormons who act in the way you described.

However, I do take issue with this comment:

The best evidence for this can be found in virtually every post written by Will Schryver or Pahoran.

Why? Because I refuse to believe that either of these men are primary representatives for my Church. In my opinion, they give Mormons everywhere a bad name.

Jason is a former bishop. He led his ward in a very similar fashion that my current bishop leads my ward.

I think that Jason is an example of what a priesthood leader should be.

You bring up some excellent points, though. We have a lot of work to do.

I will comment in more detail later when I have more time.

Thank you so much for starting this engaging topic. I think it is probably one of the most important threads in the history of the board.

[_Kevin Graham]

Why? Because I refuse to believe that either of these men are primary representatives for my Church. In my opinion, they give Mormons everywhere a bad name.

Jason is a former bishop. He led his ward in a very similar fashion that my current bishop leads my ward.

I think that Jason is an example of what a priesthood leader should be

You bring up Jason as a fine example of Mormonism and I would agree. But Jason is obviously not a typical Mormon. Not only because of the way he treats others, but also because of his openness to criticism of the faith. Other great examples would be David Bokovoy or Don Bradley, but again, same thing applies with them. They are not typical. They are the exceptions. Just look at how Mormons are more likely to disagree with them or attack them, simply for befriending the apostates. And then look at how many Mormons openly condemn the repulsive actions of Schryver and Pahoran. That's my evidence.

You say Schryver and Pahoran don't represent the Church, and this is true, but their attitudes towards former members is, I believe, overwhelmingly embraced by the general membership of the Church. Apostates are just bitter people who chose sin over truth, remember? That's what the Encyclopedia of Mormonism tells us. So given this premise, who has any use for those kinds of people? We're mean. We're bitter. We're evil. That's the idea. Now we can be disgusted with Schryver's caricatures all we want, but the fact is he is simply citing his own Church's scriptures when he condemns us all to hell. This "war" mentality resonates with Mormons who sit through LDS conferences and are conditioned to view the world through the "us vs. them" lens.

[_Hoops]

Hoops, I can tell you the my kids have experienced what your kids did from Protestants. They have been teased and ostracized, sometimes brutally. They have put up with comments from teachers, abuse from other students with teacher seeing it and not intervening.

I have no doubt of this. I've seen it myself when we lived in a predominantly Prot area.

Hoops, Unfortunately what you describe is note unique when one group is the majority in an area and such behavior is not uniquely LDS.

No, it isn't. With one critical difference. What makes Protestantism so strong and attractive is also its greatest weakness. That is that Protestants do not have a unifying, governing authority that can address these issues. Its autonomy, to what ever degree, is what makes it vibrant and exciting, but also susceptible to these kinds of behavior. LDS and RCC do not have this advantage/disadvantage. However, I've also lived where RCC were a very strong voice in the community, I never, ever had the same experience with them than I had with LDS. Nothing even within the same universe. My family and I were treated very fairly and there was quite often lots of good natured ribbing much back and forth.

One thing for sure is LDS leaders have condemned and discouraged such behavior by LDS members from the GC pulpit more than once.

This sounds wonderful, but in practice it really means nothing. I would be much more inclined to think that LDS take this seriously if the local Bishop or Stake President were to stand up and condemn this behavior. In fact, that never occurred. And virtually every LDS (I'll grant, it wasn't many, I quickly became too jaded) with whom I discussed this situation said that they couldn't speak up for fear of retribution from LDS leaders. I would add another point: we have sermons about this. We talk about it and define it within the Bible and many try to live it. LDS services don't have this advantage, as I understand.

Do Protestants do the same?

Yes. I can only speak to my experience, but of course they do. Aggressively. Often, on many Sundays, this kind of behavior is addressed and we are admonished or encouraged. In fact, I would say most sermons fall into two camps 1) our standing with God, 2) our relationship with our neighbors. And that, imho, mirrors what much of the New Testament is about. There are exceptions of course, but that's really where we are.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Wow, Kevin--that was quite a devastating OP. What you described, in my experience, is largely correct. When people talk about Mormons in private--i.e., when they feel relaxed enough to say what they really feel--their impressions tend not to be positive. What you tend to get in public, I think, is what you see with the South Park guys. They say things like, "We love Mormons! Mormons are really nice people!" But obviously they think that much of Mormonism is ridiculous, and I'm sure there is absolutely no way that either of these guys would even begin to contemplate converting.

But you bring up a point about the basic selfishness that the Church seems to cause/demand. I remember getting into a kind of debate with my seminary teacher at one point. I argued that there really couldn't ever be legitimate charity in a Mormon framework, due to the fact that generous acts are always connected to this quest for eternal salvation. She kind of argued back in forth with me about it, but basically had to concede the point in the end.

I think one of the most egregious examples of Mormon selfishness comes in the form of temple marriages where a portion of the family is not TBM. Again and again I've seen LDS delude themselves into thinking that the apostates, inactives, and non-LDS are somehow "okay" with the fact that they're essentially being excluded from this critical rite of passage. The most inclusive, selfless, and accommodating thing to do would be to hold a secular service and wait the one year (or whatever it is) before doing the temple thing, but of course hardly any LDS couples do this.

[_mentalgymnast]

KG,

I think you're thoughts are spot on about how non-Mormons outside the greater Mormon region think about Mormons. Begin rant:

We see them as weird, and the face of the Church to 90%+ of all non-Mormons are the missionaries, who come off as either naïve or dorks or salesman for a product that not many people want. Sorry but that's Mormonism in the eyes of most people, a bunch of naïve dorks. Maybe smart, maybe educated, but big dorks. Ken Jennings from Jeopardy? Smart educated dork. Sorry but there is no hipness anywhere in Mormon culture. Mormonism doesn't allow people to live like mainstream Americans live their adult, filthy, dirty-mouthed lives. You say "fetch" and "heck"...we call dork. And peculiar. Get out in the real world, away from Mormon message board paradigms of reality and get a reality check about what the average American person is. Half the s*** mentioned on this board, really anytime that people talk about church members interacting with church leadership would signal WTF! to a regular person.

The average American adult watches R-rated movies and live R-rated lives. We tell dirty jokes, we drink beer, we bone our lovers, we watch football, and we don't want to go to Church except for one or two hours a week and never at night. Night church is for old people who are trying to get right before the end. We watch Bridesmaids and Horrible Bosses and every other gross out comedy that involves s*** piss and the word "f***!". We love the word "f***". We f*****g love it. And we definitely want to wear regular underwear. You want to sell Mormonism? Switch to regular underwear and you're 34.6% there. You want to sell Mormonism? Don't make getting into heaven require mandatory tithing. Most people are casual about their religion when you get down to it, they want to go to church and get a warm fuzzy and go watch football. They don't want another 401k payment, especially one that doesn't match and that they can't withdraw at 59 1/2. You want to sell Mormonism? You have to find a casual middle ground for people. You have to have an area in the church discourse for casual members. People who want to feel like they're doing something "moral" and yet aren't going to be accosted on Sunday during football because they skipped church a couple times and s***.

You say go on a 2-yr mission? That's pretty extreme. You say wear those underwear. Extreme. 10% of my money? Xtreme. And on and on all the way down to the part where you want to pull me and my gf who are in our 20s into an office with some random guy and discuss our sex lives. He'll tell us we should get married and only have natural vaginal sex and that we should be having little kids who you can then ask about their sex lives. f*** that. Xtreme. And that s*** isn't going to happen with most Americans. Wake up. That's reality. And that's Mormonism, extreme to most people.

I think that you've pretty much given the reason that many active LDS members who are trying to live the gospel might feel a bit uncomfortable around you as a "hanging out" kind of friend. I think that you also, inadvertantly perhaps, show a linkage between behavior and rationalization for association with those of like mind vs. "the other". It works both ways, members towards non-believers and non-believers towards active believing members. The believer may find it uncomfortable to associate with someone who doesn't have the same standards of morality and life style, and a non-believer may tend towards rationalizing the member's "offishness" as being simply arrogant or unfriendly.

If you are any indicator, I think you've nailed it as to why some people don't like Mormons. "They" and "us" just don't mesh very well with each other when it comes right down to it. Going both directions.

But we can still be civil to each other.

Regards,
MG