There have been a number of discussions in my ward about the opposing votes at the last several general conferences and stake conferences. One of the members of our Elder's Quorum Presidency was speaking in sacrament meeting and made a comment that those who do not sustain the leaders should be roughed up and physically thrown from the meeting. The bishop looked disturbed by this comment (thankfully) but the two counselors seemed to find the thought amusing. There has been a gradual shift toward a more primitive view of "living the gospel." Even with the loss of liberal and moderate TBMs, I had not expected such a shift was underway. Knowing this "gentleman", I would fully expect him to act on his threats of physical violence.

As if we did not need any more evidence that Mormonism is a cult and devoid of any teachings that might be mistaken as Christian, we have church leaders bearing testimony that they are ready to physically abuse anyone who openly questions. TSCC is in a worse position than the Titanic. At least the Titanic had a rudder and a destination in mind. TSCC has become rudderless, goalless, and is sailing aimlessly. Other than an aim to maximize the number of members and dollars for no other purpose than more members and dollars, TSCC no longer seems to have a mission statement. "Men are that they might pay tithing."

"At least the Titanic had a rudder and a destination in mind."

Too big a ship with too small a rudder, it couldn't corner worth a shit.

And if we're not allowed to choose our own votes, then why do they even bother putting it up to a vote at all?

PeacePrincess Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> And if we're not allowed to choose our own votes,
> then why do they even bother putting it up to a
> vote at all?

Just like any well run totalitarian regime. There is one name on the ballot and voting is almost always unanimous. Those who cast dissenting votes are given new careers working in a gulag or contribute to the party by being turned into worm food.

Ezra Taft Benson and Cleon Skousen were so opposed to communism because they felt it was using the teachings of Joe and Brigham without proper acknowledgment and payment to the supreme Communist HQ in SLC.

Brother Yada Yada for a position in the bishopric. Because I didn't especially care for the guy, I didn't sustain him either.

After Sacrament, the bishop hustled up to DH and demanded to know why he failed to sustain Brother Yada Yada. DH said, "Because I have worked with him before. He is not reliable, and I do not think he is a good candidate for that position."

The bishop clearly had a case of badly ruffled feathers. He told DH, "Brother catnip, do you realize that Brother Yada Yada was GOD'S choice?"

DH said calmly, "Bishop, God and I don't have to agree on everything." And walked to his next class. I was astonished. DH is a BIC TBM, but clearly, he also believes in the strength of his own convictions. I was very proud of him for that.

This raises an interesting question: as more and more members leave the fold, those who remain will be the most stalwart, clinging despite all reason. What changes in character will we see as it becomes less mainstream and more enclave?

Pista I believe you've seen what it will become. Imagine the most zealot member of your ward... Now imagine everyone is like that who attends. Now, understanding the undercurrents of Mormonism, imagine all of those who stay competing to be the "best of the best."

You won't want to be anywhere near Mormons... Especially if you have left.

I left over a decade ago and don't live in the Morridor, so fortunately this won't have as much affect on me as some others. I had always imagined them becoming sort of like the Amish, but Mormons do have more of a violent streak, historically.

Whatever happens, it's going to be interesting to watch.

Pista Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What changes in character will we see as it
> becomes less mainstream and more enclave?

I think the day will come when the cojcolds will look like the various sects of fundamentalist mormonism. A few thousand whacked out members, and that will be it. The fundys stayed true to Smith's teachings, while the cojcolds changed in order to grow and make billions of dollars.
At the end of the day its just lipstick on a pig.

This is a frightening idea to think about but I 100% agree with the gist of it - I think it's going to get crazier. I too have seen a shift in some towards more violent thought. Not all but enough to see a bit of a trend - I've also seen the other half go the other way and become far more liberal. But they get marginalized by the extremists and more of those liberals choose to fade away.

"What changes in character will we see as it becomes less mainstream and more enclave?"

When I was debating TBMs on the 'net from about 1999 to 2004, I would tease them by predicting that as time goes by, most of the rational-thinking people will leave the church, and the only ones left will be the irrational "iron-rodder" apologist types. In a coupla more decades, I believe that the average Mormon will be like Daniel Peterson, Michael Ash, and Rodney Meldrum. They'll double-down on the church's fundamental beliefs, and will be like today's true believing Scientologists.

Why don't bishops or members of the congregation rise and stop people who say irresponsible and damaging things over the pulpit? Is everyone gutless? It was a perfect time for the bishop to have a teaching moment.

Myron Donnerbalken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why don't bishops or members of the congregation
> rise and stop people who say irresponsible and
> damaging things over the pulpit? Is everyone
> gutless? It was a perfect time for the bishop to
> have a teaching moment.


That is one heck of a great question. I would imagine there is some roll played by the decades of training of not arguing about things that do not sound right. Because of that, Mormons tend to develop into generally passive people. Those with a tendency to what to correct what they do not agree with seem to be passive-aggressive. Assertiveness and being able to rationally talk through disagreements is sorely lacking within Mormon culture.

Not talking through disagreements is the direct consequence of being rudderless and directionless.

Part of the joy of living in S Utah County is that most casual conversation happening around one is Mormony. I'm at the dentist, the dentist's Mormon as are all his staff. The topic of discussion is who's touring the Provo Temple and when. The topic turns family--the dentist and his assistant are BIL and SIL. Then to handling multiples of kids, and why people would have so many when their relationships are on the rocks (and these people've got a lot a kids).

I pointed out that a friend of mine, whose marriage was breaking up, was counseled by her bishop to have another child, because what the marriage needed was "more blessings" (a child was the blessing the marriage needed). It didn't work. The marriage broke up with another baby involved.

The dentist said he hated that kind of advice. He knew that bishops wanted to advise based on "the spirit" but their lack of qualifications in serious situations made things worse. He said when he was on a bishopric he felt sorry for the bishop because the bishop was a well-intentioned nice guy but over his head. When he was done speaking, everyone just looked at him blankly. He'd just said the obvious, it's BS. It's nothing more than a family trip to tour a new temple. If you've got bigger fish to fry than that, don't look to Mormonism for answers. They're out of their depth.

Rudderless and directionless.

"One of the members of our Elder's Quorum Presidency was speaking in sacrament meeting and made a comment that those who do not sustain the leaders should be roughed up and physically thrown from the meeting."

Duh, if they don't like the possibility of people voting against the sustaining the leaders, then they shouldn't bother to ask for a vote---especially since 99.99% of the time, protest votes are ignored.

Less than a year ago, a TBM relative, who's about 70 years old, opined to me in a private conversation that all homosexuals should be killed. I doubt that he'd share that opinion in a church meeting, however.

"...those who do not sustain the leaders should be roughed up and physically thrown from the meeting."

Because thats what Jesus would do, right?

Who needs Jesus when you've got Nephi cutting of Laban's head.

I'm predicting an increase in trolling by frustrated members with poor writing skills. Danites of the internet. Deriders of the purple sage. ( Or purple prose, if you will.)

donbagley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm predicting an increase in trolling by
> frustrated members with poor writing skills.
> Danites of the internet. Deriders of the purple
> sage. ( Or purple prose, if you will.)


Jane Withersteen couldn't have said it better herself ;-)

But-how-very-Joe-like-ly yrs,

S

I quit raising my hand to "sustain/support" someone called to a new position, when I realized I wouldn't. Then I removed my self from attendance altogether. Problem solved. (Still, I hope no one takes it upon his/her self to come over and beat me up for staying home.)