In my eyes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. OW is a silly club, one that is upset that they wrote santa and santa did not write back. They want something they cant have, and I think KK knows this and just wanted to expose the church on their misogeny (based on her background).


HOWEVER, we are fighting a PR war against a monstrously wealthy corporation. They disseminate lies, we correct them. They have many many avenues of indirect PR. From foudations, to political organizations to lobbists.

We need to think in the same terms, we must support ANYTHING that hurts the lies of the LDS church. If OW opens the eyes of a few people, great. If they appear on tv and expose mormons for the hypocrites they re, even better. its a win win.

They treat women as less than equals, we can agree on that and support them in that effort.

because I always thought OW wasn't important. I agree with you.

It doesn't matter that they have tons of money. They could slice both ears from everybody's head and spoon everybody's eyes out. It wouldn't shut out the sounds of the truth. It wouldn't stop people from being able to see through them.

I support OW. Not necessarily since I want to hurt the church, but since I generally support gender equality. I don't believe in the church, so the mormon priesthood is basically fictional to me, but I still approve of the intentions behind it (also I have family and friends still in the church, if they're not going to leave, I at least hope they can spend their life in a less sexist church than the one I was in).

Civil rights.

I guess I currently support it. However, if through time OW gets women into the penishood and it helps sustain cultco. through time and increases the number of dupes that feel they have special power and authority from a sky daddy, then I will retroactively hate this thing.

I support OW's right to stand for what they believe. Doing so in the environment of the LD$ cult takes a tremendous amount of courage.

I'd be a whole lot more supportive if I believed that the church had the whole truth, as they say they do.

But they don't. They are a fraudulent cult.

So, I would advise OW to simply leave the cult. (I know, easier said than done - it took me about 10 years.)

Limiting one's thinking to "the church is evil so any attempt to change it is wrong-headed" seems so naive to me.

How does any organization, group, country in the history of civilization ever change if that is your requirement? Seems like such black and white and shall I say it..."mormon thinking".

Was it okay for Lech Walesa to petition for workers rights even though his country was under "super evil communist control?" Or should he have just shut the hell up and moved if he didn't like it?

Maybe some people are just really jealous of other people's success when they are able to make a difference in the world? Honestly, the takeaway message from exmos who want Kate to shut up, sound really similar to what the Mormon PR machine is saying.

Wow. The second viciously sexist post I have read on this. Are you guys out to prove something? Suddenly the guys on the RfM board are all "Just because we left Mormonism don't you silly girls get any ideas and think we don't have dominion over you! We might be post Mormon, but we are NOT post entitled, post arrogant, nor post better than you silly girls!" Yeah. We are getting the message. You left not because you hated them -- but because you knew you could do better at being them!

Ordain Women is "a silly club." Never heard that one before to put a feminist organization in its place. Oh wait...

Kate is silly and deluded -- but SB can use her. Does he feel a little creepy using her? What part of "she's a woman, they are here to be used by us guys" am I not getting? is no doubt his gallant reply.

Go ahead -- try to use her. She is so far above you -- it not as though you can touch her.

There is nothing quite like the panic of Mormon men when they feel out of control of women -- and as it obviously extends to post Mormon men, it deserves long books written about it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2014 05:18PM by janeeliot.

Not agreeing with KK or seeing her movement as silly has nothing to do with her gender. Stop being su uber sensitive. I say its silly becuase she istrying to (on the surface and to the average person) change a religion that is founded on the principle that a resoration was needed becuase god does not change.

In case you missed my OP, I agree that she helps puch equal rights, and in that we should all unite. duh.

Yuo are insinuating that she is better than me becuase I dont agree with her and somehow you find a way to use the word "touch". creepy.

Trust me KK makes me feel no panic. I am an advocate of human and civil rights in Utah. Yuo dont konw what you are talking about.

Inmy opinion, and from a neutral PR point of view, she could have gathered a lot more support with a more subtle message.

She could have focused on equality and not the phood, she could have focused less on begging for a conversation and exposed mormon history more (about women being ordained)

I give her kuddos for her efforts, bot that does not mean that they were perfect. She had one card to play and she overplayed it and now she is mostly out ofthe game for her target audience of prospective supporters. LDS can now label her an excommunicated apostate.

Really. What are you talking about?

Do you think that men having opinions about women or women's movements is sexist per se? You obviously have opinions about men having opinions, does that make you sexist, per se? How about some specific logical analysis. Your argument seems more emotional and ideologically driven than rational. I get that man'splaining's exasperating, but "you can't disagree with KK and her objectives unless you're a sexist," can't be true. KK, even with her desire for women's equality, wants equality so she can be a higher-status member of a club based distinctly on inequality and discrimination: Mormon priesthood. Priesthood and Mormonism itself exemplifies unwarranted discrimination.

I thought about that, but I don't support Ordain Women because I think the church is a complete fraud. Liking them on facebook would make me feel like I was giving the impression that I believed in what they want.

That was my point. When we want to hurt venezuela, we support the colombia goverment. We might oppose what the colombia govt does and all its evils, but the greater evil is adressed. OW, in my view is geting played a lot in the media (lots of negative press for churchCo) that makes us all win, who cares about the phood, equality is a legitimate fight even if it might be poorly presented by KK.

I would be most alarmed if I realized that I was helping some fat Corporation put braces on my children's brains.

And that goes for nearly all religions.

...they are using the priesthood business as a Trojan horse to hurt the church in a much bigger way.

randyj is on board. welcome.

Obviously, I support any person or group whose activities help Mormons learn the truth about the church and leave it.

Totally agree. I couldn't care less whether women can be ordained or not; it's all just silly mumbo-jumbo anyhow. But anything that puts the church in a negative light should be celebrated and supported, because it just takes us one step closer to exposing the church for what it really is: a piece of shit.

While I agree with the valid opinion set forth in the OP, I must object, on general principle, to being told what I SHOULD do. If we're going to jump all over Tal for the way he presented his position, we have to jump all over SB for the same thing.

Everyone here has a right to their opinions. All opinions are valid by definition. We do not have to prove our opinions true. The line is crossed, I think, when you go from expressing your opinion (and maybe asking if people agree) to telling people what they should think or do. This is the same issue as Tal's posts, only a different opinion from Tal's.

+1

Yup.

Uber-sensitive Dogzilla has spoken! Listen what I wrote in MY opinion and that is why I started with ""in my eyes..."

I read your post very carefully. The "should" is in your subject line. I get that you're expressing your opinion. But I also saw "We must support" and "we need to" in the third paragraph. "Should," "must," and "need to" are all action words; you are commanding the reader to take some action.

I feel compelled to be as fair as possible in my posts. I don't see how it's über-sensitive to say to Tal, "Hey, I agree with you and you make great points, but let's not order people around, huh?" And then say the exact same goddamn thing to you. I agreed with you and think you make good points, but let's not order people around, huh?"

Because I am apparently thick, please explain to me how this is über-sensitive. I don't know what the hell you want from me, to shut up and never express MY opinion because you don't like it?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/27/2014 02:50PM by dogzilla.

... the cult will never be what it claims to be.

If, for example, OW manages to change the cult from within, it still won't be the only church on the face of the earth in which god is satisfied, so what's the point?

If OW, wants women to experience the joy of making kids feel extremely uncomfortable by questioning them about their sexual indulgences behind closed doors, I can't support 'em.

The cult will fail when the women revolt. Wanna make a difference? Stop paying the bastards to make your life miserable.

This is the Gospel according to Timothy ... Just say "Stop It!" to the profit!

Timothy

I disavow the enemy of my enemy doctrine using the example of Iraq/Iran, and the United States.

Having said that, I think you make a good point and have tried to say so, but sometimes I fail to overstate and repeat.

I do support OW because of the challenge to Mormon priesthood. It troubles me when testimonies are shared by members of the group in this movement and children are raised in Mormonism by members of the group.

It is their business, but Mormonism intrudes into my life through politics and consenting abuse of TBMs I love or should love.

I also am an activist for protecting the BIC children and providing them tools for a healthy life outside of a mainstreamed cult.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/27/2014 11:26AM by gentlestrength.

I think these people feel that they can better change the church by staying within, but I doubt that is possible. KK can be just as effective calling out Mormon sexism by leaving as she can by staying and dancing to their tune. They did her a favor by exing her, because now she is a martyr and now she is free to live her life by her own rules.

Exmos like the Tanners and Steve Benson have more influence on the church than people who have to censor themselves to stay in. Mormons may publicly dismiss them, but we have seen that many people leave as a result of their voices. Quinn was very influential on my leaving, but not because he was a member, but because his research was so thorough and convincing. I just scratch my head wondering why he professes to believe something he himself demonstrated was a joke.