My Wife's Take on the New Mormon Media Blitz

[_stemelbow]

This is the crux of the problem. This message that the church is now sending with its new PR campaign is very different from what Mrs. Consig and a lot of the rest of us were given in our many decades as members in the LDS church.

When you live your life and make your most important life decisions based on the teachings of the church it is a huge deal to have the church do an about-face with its message.

It's a huge deal to some. To me...it ain't no thing. I don't see it as a problem. its good in a way too. The Church is acknowledging that you can be and do things differently and still be a Mormon. By differently I mean normally of course, but you get my point.

[_why me]

I've read a great deal more than wikipedia entries, whyme.

Also, I don't see any mention of how mocking LDS religious beliefs played any role in the formation of anti-mormon sentiment in what you're quoted.

Morley is right. Your specious and trolling comments do nothing other than trivialize the suffering of Mormons in Missouri. You apparently don't even care enough to read the material you cite.

I don't know what you're defending in your posts, whome, but its not Mormonism or Mormon history.

How about this:

From the beginning, Joseph Smith and his followers provoked ridicule for Mormonism's seemingly magical if not superstitious origins, and opposition as a heresy that dared to claim itself "the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth." Feeling themselves persecuted by their upstate New York neighbors, they organized separate Mormon settlements in Kirtland, Ohio, and in Independence, Missouri. Kirtland was the seat of the prophet where in l836 the Mormons built and consecrated an elaborate temple. In both places, they isolated themselves from their neighbors, and, much as other nineteenth-century religious communitarian groups like the Shakers or the Amish, set up cohesive, economically self-sufficient and largely self-governing communities, setting themselves up not simply as a group of worshipers but as a people apart.

Neither Ohio nor Missouri provided adequate refuge against the hostility of neighbors suspicious of Mormon belief and fearful of Mormonism's growing numbers and economic prosperity and power. In 1833 their Missouri neighbors attacked the settlement, forcing the Mormons to abandon Independence. Opposition also intensified back in Ohio and by early l838 most of the Kirtland Mormons, led by the prophet, had departed for Missouri, where they joined forces with their Independence coreligionists who had resettled in a county organized especially for them. Still, the tension between the Mormons and their Gentile neighbors escalated into armed conflict, and the saints were forced to flee once again.

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tse ... Mormon.htm

Is that better? Has anything changed since the beginnings of Mormonism when looking at this board? Maybe you need to read some Mormon history.

[_Rambo]

This is the crux of the problem. This message that the church is now sending with its new PR campaign is very different from what Mrs. Consig and a lot of the rest of us were given in our many decades as members in the LDS church.

When you live your life and make your most important life decisions based on the teachings of the church it is a huge deal to have the church do an about-face with its message.

It's a huge deal to some. To me...it ain't no thing. I don't see it as a problem. its good in a way too. The Church is acknowledging that you can be and do things differently and still be a Mormon. By differently I mean normally of course, but you get my point.

Sometimes I wonder if you guys even go to church. Why me I know doesn't and that's why he doesn't know what he is talking about.

You know full well that if a guy wears an earing to church that people will talk about him behind his back. Leaders will also encourage him to remove the earing and so will other members.

Just like when women worked out of the home. If they didn't have to work out of the home the other Relief Society ladies will gossip about that lady and talk about how she is not followig the counsel of the brethern.

It's pretty stupid to say that the Mormon church is ok with women working outside the house when they don't need to. When there are clear statements counseling women not to work outside the home.

Sometimes I really wish my TBM Mom was on here to set you guys straight. Oh how I wish.

[_why me]

How is this (below) mocking temple marriage?

"I think the church should feature him in an "I'm a Mormon" commercial. He can show off the pictures of a Protestant minister performing his wedding, gush about how great it was to hold a wedding that all of our friends and families could be a part of, and talk about how he decided to surprise me for my birthday one year by coming home with an earring."

Her tone with the word, gush. It was mocking.

[_cafe crema]

I had ancestors on the Mormon side at Haun's Mill. I had Mormon ancestors in Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois. I resent you trivializing what happened there by comparing the acceptance of a pierced ear to armed mob violence that culminated in murder and rape. You're f*ing kidding me.

Ms Jack mentioned her protestant faith in her post that was critical and mocking of LDS practices. Not me. Read her post and tell me that she didn't mock LDS practices on temple marriage and ear piercings by mentioning her protestant wedding and her husband's birthday gift by saying that a I am Mormon series could have her husband as a main character.

I read it as critical of the ad campaign and the gushing that you see in them. Would Ms Jack's husband ever be featured in an advertisement, would he even be able to say he enjoyed his non temple wedding on an LDS.org I'm a Mormon page?

[_why me]

You know full well that if a guy wears an earing to church that people will talk about him behind his back. Leaders will also encourage him to remove the earing and so will other members.

Sometimes I really wish my TBM Mom was on here to set you guys straight. Oh how I wish.

Are you from Utah County. Head to parts east and west and explore the world. Mormons are doing all sorts of things, including men wearing an ear ring. Nobody could care less if a guy has an ear ring. Also, a guy can wear an ear ring and still get a temple recommend. No problem. Counsel is counsel but it isn't a commandment.

[_Rambo]

You know next time my Mom goes on a rant about how women shouldn't work outside the home I think I am going to show her these ads. I'll tell her you know Mom the church is obviously ok with a women working outside the home. Then she will get all pissed off and say no way. Then my question would be why would the church show case these ladies as examples then...

Oh I am an evil son. mahaha

[_Buffalo]

It's a huge deal to some. To me...it ain't no thing. I don't see it as a problem. its good in a way too. The Church is acknowledging that you can be and do things differently and still be a Mormon. By differently I mean normally of course, but you get my point.

Well, that's the message the marketing department is sending to the outside world. The message to church members still seems to be "conformity and uniformity."

[_Buffalo]

How is this (below) mocking temple marriage?

"I think the church should feature him in an "I'm a Mormon" commercial. He can show off the pictures of a Protestant minister performing his wedding, gush about how great it was to hold a wedding that all of our friends and families could be a part of, and talk about how he decided to surprise me for my birthday one year by coming home with an earring."

Her tone with the word, gush. It was mocking.

I'm sure if this were the 19th century you'd feel justified in slaughtering and raping and looting another caravan of Methodists to get your revenge.

[Guest]

No it wasn't. I guess you're as big an ignoramus as you are an asshole.

Read my link above in a separate post. You will see that it all started with mocking...and eventually escalated into more than mocking.

Put yourself back in missouri back in the 1830's. Would you be leaving the Mormons alone? Would MsJack? And that goes for many of the critics here. I have a feeling that many would be with the mobs. No problem. It is hard to separate ourselves from our social environment. And many of the instigators were exmormons. Nothing much as really changed, except the killing and the burning of Mormon homes.