Do you care about how Utah and Mormons are perceived?

fishonjazz said:

Good timing of this thread btw. Just started a movie called Heretic today.

Click to expand...

How was it?

Miggs said:

How was it?

Click to expand...

It was quite good. Especially the first third of the movie. That portion was fantastic. The rest of it was still good but less so.

Overall I recommend it.

fishonjazz said:

It was quite good. Especially the first third of the movie. That portion was fantastic. The rest of it was still good but less so.

Overall I recommend it.

Click to expand...

Did you watch The Undoing with him on Max?

Miggs said:

Did you watch The Undoing with him on Max?

Click to expand...

No sir. Never heard of it. Good?

fishonjazz said:

No sir. Never heard of it. Good?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Miggs said:

Yes.

Click to expand...

I will put it on my list

Stars Fan said:

As a believing member of the LDS Church let me add a couple of thoughts to the thread.

As human beings we all care, or at least should care, what others think of us. We are social beings who try to make sense of the world we live in. So the narrative we build for ourselves matters. Shows that stretch the truth to entertain make members of the church fit a narrative that is often easy to dismiss, ridicule, laugh at, or disdain. The Church and its teachings and culture have been a powerful source for good in my life. So negative portrayals of the restored church of Jesus Christ concern me. They just make it easier for other people to put me (& us as members) in narrative that doesn't fit at all.

Several posters have intimated that American Primeval shaped their opinions of Brigham Young, and the Mormons "extremely violent past". The movie is entertainment, not history. Any objective reading of history shows the Mormons were victims of violence far more often than perpetrators. But the narrative of violence will stick in the minds of those who watch the entertaining movie and don't care to read the history. That makes it easier to dismiss the Church and its members as "others", not worthy, or less than. That does worry me.

Another thought is Church members are not all rabid Republicans. I am not a leftist, woke wacko, or liberal nutcase, but I voted for Harris as the only ethical choice. I flew a Harris Walz flag along with my American flag and posted Harris signs in my yard. The comments from members of my ward were all supportive. We even saw several other members/neighbors follow our lead and post their own Harris yard signs. There are many members of the Church who are bitterly opposed to Trump. Check out LDS Women for Ethical Government. ( Sadly, there are also members who support Trump. When I question them on why, they invariably say they don't like his morals but support his policies. When I question which policies, the common thread is abortion. ) My point is don't use a broad brush to paint us members as just similar shades of rightists. My support for Harris was based on my belief system.

The Church encouraged its members to study the issues and vote for candidates that support good causes. In fact Church leadership stressed the danger of party loyalty, and that good can be found in both parties. So don't think that most people in Utah voted for Trump because the Church told them to. The did so because they bought the narrative he was selling.

Sent from my CPH1907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

One cannot ignore the historical record of just the last 40 years of statements made by top leaders (Ezra Taft benson) and causes (prop 8). The church puts out statements of neutrality but those statements don’t apply to top leaders, their rhetoric at conference, and political causes led by church leaders. And it’s become so ingrained with church doctrine that it’s hardly noticeable anymore the political charge.

Some examples off the top of my head:

1. Tad Callister’s 2021 sermon against government assistance. One reads this by a prominent leader of the church and can make some pretty clear assumptions about where the church stands politically. I’ve often wondered what a member from Canada, Scandinavia, or Western Europe must think when they read these types of diatribes. To them, is Hollywood or a social safety net really the threats that they’re made out to be here in America?
2. The constant rhetoric often spewed by first counselor Oaks about “religious freedom.” Much like law and order is code for attacking African American communities, This is code for religious bigotry towards the LGBT community. It never actually pertains to schools being free from religious indoctrination or protecting non-Christian religions from Christian persecution.
3. Elder Holland’s “musket fire” talk at BYU (he has apologized for it but the damage has already been done). Btw, have you kept up with what’s happening at byu right now? Yikes.
4. When prevalent LDS politicians and board members clearly abused their positions of authority to bully adults (Google cliven bundy, his son, or Phil Lyman) and dox children (Google Natalie cline) the church remained silent. Yet, when those from the left have made public scenes, they’ve been very publicly rebuked or excommunicated. There’s a clear double standard.

The double standard is, you can use inflammatory rhetoric, lead scores of fellow members into committing unethical and illegal acts, and as long as you’re from the American political right, you’re good. So yeah, the church sends out annual letters read over the pulpit declaring neutrality. But the church clearly isn’t neutral. It is very much melded to American (Republican) politics.

LogGrad98 said:

My wife and I took a hard look at the Church, starting with learning to accept an LGBTQ child and attempting to "debunk" the CES letter in discussions with another of our kids, and ending in a support group for sexual abuse survivors in the church who saw the church unequivocally protect and in a few cases actually "promote" their abusers (Bishops who became stake presidents, etc.), leaving them in positions to abuse others. We had the same misgivings you did as well, almost to the letter. We have since left the cult entirely. Some of our family understands, but of course the heavily indoctrinated ones won't even discuss it since discussion about such things gets you excommunicated, since they know that shining a light on the darkness will lead others to leave as well. Abuse children in your official capacity in the church? It's ok we have lawyers for that. Make a few posts on social media questioning anything about the Church? Get called into a court to discuss your apostasy with the stake president. All they care about is PR and keeping the money flowing.

Click to expand...

Excellent post.

Why is there fear of excommunication you think?

And if you see something to big you disagree with in the church, who can you talk to without fear of repercussion? To me, this is a huge problem. There’s no “suggestion box.” Your first stop will probably be your bishop or stake president. But then, you’re playing bishop/president roulette. They control your temple recommend and callings. Depending on their tolerance of your questions/concerns, they literally hold your salvation in their hands. Let’s say they do nothing, then what? Email some 70 and get some automated response? Or worse, they email your president or bishop for disciplinary council?

The tribune recently came out with some amazing reporting on byu professors who have questions and how that goes when they bring up questions and concerns with their bishops. It can bring about a loss of employment. Article and podcast here:


View: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mormon-land/id1289043118?i=1000683221568

I gotta go but I’ll post more later.

I also have severe concerns about bishop’s interviewing children. And covering up child abuse. I really don’t like how bishops have been given the option to report abuse to the police or not. To me, this should be automatic.

The Thriller said:

Excellent post.

Why is there fear of excommunication you think?

And if you see something to big you disagree with in the church, who can you talk to without fear of repercussion? To me, this is a huge problem. There’s no “suggestion box.” Your first stop will probably be your bishop or stake president. But then, you’re playing bishop/president roulette. They control your temple recommend and callings. Depending on their tolerance of your questions/concerns, they literally hold your salvation in their hands. Let’s say they do nothing, then what? Email some 70 and get some automated response? Or worse, they email your president or bishop for disciplinary council?

The tribune recently came out with some amazing reporting on byu professors who have questions and how that goes when they bring up questions and concerns with their bishops. It can bring about a loss of employment. Article and podcast here:

Dark days: New rules have BYU professors running scared

Under the LDS Church's new education boss, many BYU faculty members feel demeaned, disrespected, powerless — and afraid.

www.sltrib.com

View: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mormon-land/id1289043118?i=1000683221568

I gotta go but I’ll post more later.

I also have severe concerns about bishop’s interviewing children. And covering up child abuse. I really don’t like how bishops have been given the option to report abuse to the police or not. To me, this should be automatic.

Click to expand...

Great post. The Church is definitely running scared right now. Never has so much information been available and simply out of their control. We have a friend who was excommunicated for "apostasy" and in the excom documents they specifically said "posting questions online is an attack on the brethren". Interestingly they didn't let him take any documents home with him. He was allowed to read them in the court then they kept the documents. Mainly because so many people are posting theirs online for all to see and they are not flattering for the church at all. Our friend was devastated, he was not looking to leave, he wanted reasons to stay, they told him once to stop posting questions, he BEGGED for some answers just for himself promised to never post another thing, if they just answered, and they just said "stop posting that", so when he posted one more question, it was over.

And like I said before, they don't just give the bishops the option to report abuse, they actively cover up for abusers to keep the name of the church out of the news. Personal accounts from friends, lots of accounts online, but many verifiable where the church just turned a blind eye and worse often moved the person into a different role within the ward or stake. One such abuser, of a relative of my wife, was moved from Sunday school teacher to the high council, then into a bishopric, all while there was an active court case brewing brought by several girls in the same ward and in other wards. Once the news actual broke for real his first attorney was a friend of the stake president, and paid for by the church. This was the deal until his guilt was basically proven, then they released him from all callings and withdraw his legal support. But he was never excommunicated. The worst part was the stake president called this young girl into an interview and accused her of enticing her abuser and told her she needed to confess that is what she had done and repent and go public that it was consensual and basically her fault so she didn't "ruin a good man's life". That was one of the final straws for my wife and me. And this has happened a lot. Doesn't take a lot of digging to find experiences like this all over the church.

By their fruits...

LogGrad98 said:

Great post. The Church is definitely running scared right now. Never has so much information been available and simply out of their control. We have a friend who was excommunicated for "apostasy" and in the excom documents they specifically said "posting questions online is an attack on the brethren". Interestingly they didn't let him take any documents home with him. He was allowed to read them in the court then they kept the documents. Mainly because so many people are posting theirs online for all to see and they are not flattering for the church at all. Our friend was devastated, he was not looking to leave, he wanted reasons to stay, they told him once to stop posting questions, he BEGGED for some answers just for himself promised to never post another thing, if they just answered, and they just said "stop posting that", so when he posted one more question, it was over.

And like I said before, they don't just give the bishops the option to report abuse, they actively cover up for abusers to keep the name of the church out of the news. Personal accounts from friends, lots of accounts online, but many verifiable where the church just turned a blind eye and worse often moved the person into a different role within the ward or stake. One such abuser, of a relative of my wife, was moved from Sunday school teacher to the high council, then into a bishopric, all while there was an active court case brewing brought by several girls in the same ward and in other wards. Once the news actual broke for real his first attorney was a friend of the stake president, and paid for by the church. This was the deal until his guilt was basically proven, then they released him from all callings and withdraw his legal support. But he was never excommunicated. The worst part was the stake president called this young girl into an interview and accused her of enticing her abuser and told her she needed to confess that is what she had done and repent and go public that it was consensual and basically her fault so she didn't "ruin a good man's life". That was one of the final straws for my wife and me. And this has happened a lot. Doesn't take a lot of digging to find experiences like this all over the church.

By their fruits...

Click to expand...

Wow. Really interesting post.

Do you think church leaders understand that by hammering your friend who had questions that they’re only eroding their own base? Putting aside the responsibility of leaders to be transparent, foster an environment of inclusivity, and helping individuals get answers, isn’t what they did to your friend counterproductive by just a raw power point of view? You To me, you should want critical thinking members. These are people who actually have testimonies and can build a stronger church. Or do they just want trained seals? If they just want trained seals, how strong of a base do they think that’ll build? Are there enough (LDS) trained seals to keep the church growing in North America? Even in Africa and Asia, at some point they’re going to run out of low info converts and face peoples’ questions regarding the church’s history and some of its policies toward blacks, gays, and women.

Are they aware of what they’re doing?
Do they care?

I just don’t see where shutting people down for their doubts is going to end well for the church, the institution. Which is ironic since the actual teachings emphasize individual and personal revelation and the value of intelligence and education. The church’s own founder searched for a church to join before having his first vision. Why doesn’t the institution practice what it preaches?

Which leads me to the second issue, sexual abuse. This makes me sick. But because the church is very patriarchal, the power 100 percent resides with men. And because most sexual abuse is committed by men and because of how society is structured, sexual abuse even (especially?) in 2025 isn’t seen to be serious. Men’s illegal and deplorable behavior is dismissed. Safeguards aren’t put into place. And the entire process of repentance is thwarted. Can one repent of sexual abuse if they aren’t turned into law enforcement? Why isn’t the church practicing what it preaches?

In your lifetime have you seen a greater circling of the wagons from the institution? From what I’ve seen in my limited experience, the church is really locking down on members and how they’re speaking out. They feel the pressure from MAGA and are cracking the whip. Even issues that the church used to support (immigration and vaccines) they’re tip toeing around because of the political situation here in America.

To me, I find value in spirituality. In community. I’m not a fan of the institution, it’s current (old and out of touch AF) leadership, and of the lack of transparency and jacked up policies for a myriad of issues. And I worry what direction we’re heading towards because humans need community, something that gives them hope, and need meaning (something that gets them out of their bubbles and serving others). Unfortunately, as I grow older and see how politics very much influence church leadership and policy, I become more and more disenchanted with the institution and become curious if there’s something better out there.

This is the sentiment amongst young Utahns who happen to not be LDS. Not doing good PR at home.

Just first 2 min

LogGrad98 said:

I guess bottom line for me is no I don't care. I'm fact I'm worried about my friends and family still stuck in the cult and the degree of outright lying the church will engage in to keep them in check. Just go look at how often the intro to the book of Mormon is changed. Every time they find more archeological evidence that disproves the book's claims about the Americas for example they change it. It went from the book being entirely the record of the history of the native Americans to the people in the book being the primary ancestors of the native Americans, to being "among" the ancestors, to no mention of it at all since the dna evidence has all but proven beyond a doubt there were no middle eastern ancestors at all, they were all actually of Asian descent. They even removed the part that used to read that the book of Mormon was the most correct of all books ever written. The emperor's clothes are being exposed in the information era and won't long stand reasonable and logical scrutiny. And the fact that they still exploit people for monetary gain, including people I know who can little afford it, means to me that it is destructive at best. I've come to personally believe that all religions are nothing but a detriment to society. It absolves people of the need to develop a sense of morality that comes from within and what is best for society and instead allows them to hang their hat on external beliefs and promises of a hereafter. It makes it a hell of a lot easier for a piece of **** like Trump to make inroads since the brainwashing is already in place. He just has to piggy-back off it, and he has a ready-made group of people who believe they were "chosen", so they have no compunction at all putting themselves and their made-up beliefs before the needs of others. The net results of religion are negative in the extreme, even if pockets of religious folks are still trying to do the best they can to be good people. As a mass movement, it has brought us closer to fascism than any other movement in the West since WWII. By their fruits ye shall know them indeed.

Click to expand...

Great post.

Yet another story of how religion divides people instead of uniting. Sad that adherence to a cult has to drive such ****** behavior. What would Jesus do indeed. Imagine if they were marrying a person of color! Oh the shame!