Breaking Away

[_Themis]

I didn't start the insanity. Indeed, SP, said as his premise, "I think there is more LDS apostates that go directly to non-belief, do not pass another religion 'and do not collect $200', than those that leave many other religions." I truly think it an absurdity. You can call it insanity if you like. But there's not need to attribute it to me. If he meant percentages then he has a very terrible way of expressing himself.

So why is it that you are the only one who didn't understand what he was saying? It seems patently obvious considering the number of Catholics that become atheist/agnostic might just number more then the whole population of the LDS church.

[_harmony]

I wasn't necessarily talking about "the spirit".

I find the concept of love as a chemical reaction to be just... offputting, to say the least.

harmony, could it be that is because mankind has been able to figure out and explain the chemical reaction aspect, and that has demystified it, and perhaps made it not 'magical' or 'special'? I mean, sometimes we humans like the extra value that a mystery can add to our experiences, just like a Victoria's Secret add can be more arousing than say full frontal nudity.

by the way, I hope I am not spoiling anything for you by perhaps providing an explanation into a human emotional need for the mystical.

When I take my oldest daughter to the hospital, as I will do tomorrow, I don't look at her and think "I hope the chemical reaction will help you endure the pain". I think "I love you so much, and this hurts me too".

It wasn't a chemical reaction I felt when I first held her (my first daughter...). I loved her before she was born. To tell me "it's just a chemical reaction" just tells me you've never walked in my shoes. I'd venture to guess no mother worth her salt would agree with you.

[_honorentheos]

Hello Ceeboo,

It's nice to see you chose to continue with our discussion.

As if we were discussing anything but here or anywhere else on this board. Interesting.

In addition to opinions, I would suggest that this board is littered with personal beliefs

opinion

world-views

also opinions

perspectives

opinions yet again

experiences

Fair point. Granted.

bias

opinions I would say

and a shopping cart full of good and healthy banter

a mixed bag this shopping cart fills indeed.

Putting the above aside, and to be fair, opinion may not be the most descriptive term for what I meant in every case related to the examples you provided. But proclaiming a statement to be merely an opinion does not change the significance of the sentiment expressed. Of course it was an opinion. You said it, on a board ostensibly dedicated to the discussion of Mormonism, and it related to Mormonism.

The point is - suggesting your view expressed in the quote is only your opinion and therefore harmless or less significant than....(what?) makes little sense if the (what?) can not be adequately answered. Saying a statement is an opinon neither softens nor hardens it's content or your personal perception of it's true-value. There is something about it's usage in this way that reminds me of someone falsely apologetic of some matter they really feel should not justify any response on the part of the person affected by it. Like it was a naughty pet that somehow slipped out of your home and was found digging holes in the neighbor's yard. "You'll please forgive my opinion. It's normally so much better behaved at home. I simply don't know what came over it!" The ill- or goodwill born in the statement is independant of it's being labeled an opinion.

Anyway, getting back to the main discussion:

I am not sure why you yourself seem to lump Joseph Smith in with God. Your answering "no" to the second question is what puzzled me, and this deepened rather than resolved itself as I questioned further into your meaning. As noted previously, you had stated that the reason you answer no to the question, "2) A person who stops believing in the Prophet Joseph Smith but retains a belief in God could be seen as having been raised or climbed out of a figurative pit." was because ""Simply put, it is my opinion that a belief in a God/Creator (or no belief in a God/Creator) has no "pit" to climb in or out of (On either side)".

If they were in a pit, figuratively, when they believed in Joseph Smith (per your answer to #1)and the only thing that changed in Question 2 was their loss of belief in Joseph Smith, then you may see why I am confused by what you really mean. Perhaps it would be best to ask simply - what is the figurative pit you see in question 1? I was thinking you meant Joseph Smith, but since your answer to #2 suggests otherwise, I have to beg your indulgence in answering me yet again.

Thanks.

[_Ceeboo]

Good evening, honor

I want you to know that it is very important to me that if and when I choose to engage on these boards, I do so without causing contention, producing offense, and/or involving myself in exchanges that don't seem to be providing much value to any/all who may be involved. (As much as that is possible or that we might have some control over)

In our ongoing dialouge, I believe I have already failed on at least one of the above and for that, I will again offer my apology to any/all who may have been at the other end of my opinions/comments/statements.

Honor, I have tried (several times) to answer your initial yes/no question/experiment. I have also tried (several more times) to answer all of your following sets of questions about the initial yes/no question/experiment.
For several reasons, at this point, I must opt out of any further questions you might have for me. (Sorry)

I look forward to crossing your path again on this board and hope that when this next opportunity arises, we might both be fortunate enough to gain mutual value.

Peace friend :)
Ceeboo

[_sock puppet]

I wasn't necessarily talking about "the spirit".

I find the concept of love as a chemical reaction to be just... offputting, to say the least.

harmony, could it be that is because mankind has been able to figure out and explain the chemical reaction aspect, and that has demystified it, and perhaps made it not 'magical' or 'special'? I mean, sometimes we humans like the extra value that a mystery can add to our experiences, just like a Victoria's Secret add can be more arousing than say full frontal nudity.

by the way, I hope I am not spoiling anything for you by perhaps providing an explanation into a human emotional need for the mystical.

When I take my oldest daughter to the hospital, as I will do tomorrow, I don't look at her and think "I hope the chemical reaction will help you endure the pain". I think "I love you so much, and this hurts me too".

It wasn't a chemical reaction I felt when I first held her (my first daughter...). I loved her before she was born. To tell me "it's just a chemical reaction" just tells me you've never walked in my shoes. I'd venture to guess no mother worth her salt would agree with you.

Best wishes on the outcome at the hospital.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex-Mormon

Research shows that 43% of Mormon disaffiliates left due to unmet spiritual needs. Of former Mormons surveyed, 58% switched to other faiths or practices (mostly Christian). Of those with no current religious preference, 36% continued to pray often or daily. However, "single reason disaffiliates are rare among former Mormons" Reasons for leaving may include: logical/intellectual appraisal, belief changes/differences, spiritual conversions to other faiths, life crises & poor or hurtful responsiveness by Mormon leaders or congregations. Although many leave to be true to themselves or to a new belief structure, they leave at a tremendous cost of feeling ostracized, pressured and missing out on major family events such as temple weddings.