http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1176346

Refusing to give permission for a missionary, even a late stage missionary to return home for the funeral of a loved one. Threats to reassign them or not allow them to return if they do go.

I would list this as one of the ways Mormon leadership prove cult control and set examples to others of the length of sacrifice and control they require from cult members to others observing the situation.

What do you think? If you see this behavior in other areas please add.

What Mormonism has become is a well-developed control organization. This is not a surprise to us, but have their techniques been scrutinized, discussed, and compiled. I think they should be if they haven't.

Former Mormons can make this list better than anyone.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2014 03:42PM by gentlestrength.

Another example would be giving someone an assignment or calling for which they aren't prepared, perhaps "working with the youth." And this is intended to break them, humble them, get them down on their knees before God.

Or a mission president sends an elder to the mission "pit," the worst, poorest, least developed town in the mission.

Or, as was done to me, the EQP in my BYU ward constantly paired me with the mentally disabled, delusional, isolated, autistic types to go home teaching. I'm sure now that it was intended as a demonstration of power; they did it to me just because they could, just because I let them.

I wanted to go to the least desirable, no one gets baptised, areas of the mission, they were in the middle of nowhere, far from prying eyes

"Or, as was done to me, the EQP in my BYU ward constantly paired me with the mentally disabled, delusional, isolated, autistic types to go home teaching..."

No you were just at BYU, they are all like that.

I resent the deference to men with callings. They make yor decisions for you, they tell you whether you are right or wrong, they MIGHT get your wife and kids if you dont obey them, you are to get emotional and thank them, you are to annouce in oublic that they are called of god. The mormon male butt sniffing was one of my niggest turn offs.

Once you find out how unispired, uneducated, unenlightened they are you realize how sick your obedience has been and you aleft the rest of your life to try to untangle the life decision and thinking that was based on other men's opinions.

As an aunt of a mentally disabled boy and mom to an autistic one, thanks for doing that- even if the EQP was doing it to be a prick.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/2014 01:37AM by brandywine.

Mormonism isn't about loyalty, it's about obedience. In the real world, disobedience can even be a sign of loyalty. Only authoritarians require absolute obedience and confuse that for loyalty.

Amid all the drivel you get on this board, occasionally there is wisdom and valuable insight. Thanks for this post. It was valuable to me just now.

Glad to have been of some help :-)

Separate loyalty and obedience for me. I know they are not the exact same words, but apparently you see them separate enough as to correct my point without clear expanding or explanation.

I see tests of loyalty and tests of obedience as highly similar.

gentlestrength Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Separate loyalty and obedience for me.

Maybe it's not the same in English as it is in my language. To me, obedience means just doing what you're told. Loyalty is more.

You can practice civil disobedience, for instance, and still be a loyal citizen. You can voice disagreement with a company manager and still be a loyal employee.

Loyalty is not found in the Mormon church, only obedience.

By saying or implying that you can't turn down a calling. Some people do, but they are always looked at as a bit unfaithful - unless they have a good medical reason. And sometimes even if they do have a good medical reason.

Also by controlling your underwear. If you will allow someone else to tell you what undies you have to wear and when you have to wear them, they've got a pretty controlling hold on your brain as well.

Oh and the beard thing. My LDS friend says she can always tell when her brother has an important calling because he's clean-shaven. When he's just doing Scouts or something, he has a beard. He'd always wear a beard if he had a choice but when he was called to be a bishop or to a stake position, they made him shave that beard. He grew it back the minute he was released each time.

I think the underwear may be the best example of all, because:

(1) It's so trivial. There's no obvious reason why it would be more spiritual to wear certain underwear; and

(2) It's usually considered no one's business what you're wearing underneath your clothes. When you're a Mormon kid, it's not considered acceptable to ask questions about other people's underwear. But once you go to the temple, everyone else's childish impulses finally burst out and they have to know what you're wearing. And only a really loyal (or defeated) person puts up with it.

Telling members that they HAVE to do what they are told, (no matter how crazy) or they will be deprived of their family for eternity.

Some things that members are told they must endure:
Longjohns 24/7
confessing personal private business.
Sacrificing family members to the church through callings
Go every single meeting that's held, causing you to abandon spouse and children, not to mention hobbies or down time.
Giving money to them
Reading false books that are emotionally damaging
Humiliating yourself in front of friends
Demanding you change how you look and dress. Only wearing 1 earring, no tats,no beards, no bare shoulders, length of clothing, sheerness, shoulders covered.

Those are off the top of my head. Can you think of any more?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2014 10:21AM by madalice.

I've got another one. Compulsory "testimonies" in priesthood quorums, stake conference, or sacrament meeting. The reigning authority "asks" someone to come up and give their testimony, because that presumably doesn't require preparation. The authority usually looks smug as the victim looks embarrassed.

Then the authority listens very carefully, because its harder to fake an impromptu expression of belief. If you don't sound good, you may not last long in that "calling" you find so comfortable, or prestigious, or fulfilling. And if you refuse to come up, you'll probably be busted to primary or Boy Scouts.

My advice if you're asked would be to say that you can't, you have a headache, and then accept the consequences (getting released) without accepting any punishment (i.e. humiliating new assignment.)

This will be an example that will hurt them.

Sending 18 year old kids on missions was an act of desperation. Many of them are coming home early. The more that come home early, the easier it becomes for others to come home early and eases the stigma.

They ate the seed corn and it is going to cost them dearly.

+1

deco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> They ate the seed corn and it is going to cost
> them dearly.

What a sad and beautiful thought, and so utterly true.

You ask about the difference between loyalty and obedience? How about defending church ideals and commandments that you don't practice yourself, like polygamy or consecration? Or defending church authorities that you don't find credible or reliable, like Hinckley or McConkie?

That, my friends, is loyalty.

deco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


>
> They ate the seed corn and it is going to cost
> them dearly.


well said

That's something I thought about when my mom died last November. I have a nephew serving in the Phoenix Arizona mission. Instead of dropping his mission to say goodbye to his grandmother, he stuck it out. The closet thing he was to saying goodbye was sending a talk about her that my older TBM brother(his father) read at the funeral.

If the morg were really family orientated they'd let missionaries go home for funeral or if a loved one is dying. Then given them the option of returning or staying home and finishing it honorably. After all with the morg it's "Family First" still isn't ??!!

I think in my TBM family eye's all they saw with my nephew on his mission was loyalty to the morg. I for sure didn't. I highly doubt that my TBM mom wouldn't want him to say goodbye to her earthy body. Or to help with the funeral, viewing etc..

southern idaho inactive Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If the morg were really family orientated they'd
> let missionaries go home for funeral or if a loved
> one is dying. Then given them the option of
> returning or staying home and finishing it
> honorably. After all with the morg it's "Family
> First" still isn't ??!!

The way the church treats its missionaries is mind boggling to say the least. I've never understood the purpose in making sure they can only call their family twice a year.

It severs the missionaries trust and dependence on parents as the final authority and replaces it with church leadership. Very easy to understand, just not very palatable.

The unspoken requirement that a member accept unquestioning every assignment that they are given not matter what is going on in their lives or families. If you are loyal, you will bow yes and serve in the calling without any if, ands or buts.

Also, going to the temple for ordinances, temple marriage and dead-debunking. IF you are loyal and a true believer, you will go and go often, when the cult builds it.

This has actually been on my mind, and I have wanted to blog about it. Here are the results. I'll update if you guys find anything else I should add. :)

http://lmontr33.blogspot.com/2014/04/how-lds-church-controls-your-thoughts.html

ETA: I've added a couple more points to the blog page -- Every Member a Missionary & Gender Inequality. Thanks!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2014 10:39PM by lmontr33.

Good work. The list is solid. I am glad you included sexual activity and clothing. If you can control a person's sexual behavior you can control anything with respect to that individual.

Excellent thread.

I think the inequities between men and women should be mentioned somewhere. Mormon women must accept their second-class status in the organization, and not question why they can't have the priesthood or any of the high leadership callings. Husbands meet separately from wives. Boys are separated from girls in YM/YW, Scouts, priesthood.

It is acceptable behavior, for Mormons to pry into the sex lives of young couples. They are told to "multiply and replenish the earth," and if they are not doing this, the Mormons want to know WHY. Childless couples are marginalized.

There are all kinds of little, personal ways Mormons demand obedience. Our neighborhood had an interesting little book club, that was about 2/3 non-Mormon. The new stake president told us that we would have to read only LDS-written books, from Deseret Books. The Mormon women obeyed, and all the non-Mormons quit the club. I quit, too, as I find LDS books boring. It was a private club and none of anyone's business. We were reading all "tame" books. They just didn't like the women meeting outside the direct control of the cult.

forestpal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
"The new stake president told us that we would have to read only LDS-written books, from Deseret Books."


He said this just for the book club or for reading in general?! Either is crazy. If it wasn't a church book club then that's absurd. And if in general, that's very controlling.

After being baptised I went inactive after 6 months girls period of 2 years. I then went back yo the cult (face palm) and was immediately assigned as second councillor to a branch presidency. The SP said at the time that he ended me to learn about how the church is administered and that this could be best done in the presidency with his son as BP. After 3 years I certainly was indoctrinated. It took another 10 years to leave the church again.