--Observing the Disturbing: Mormonism is a Form of Mental Illness, As Is Its Sibling, Christianity--

Both are in the business of selling sin, submission and self-hate.

Yet, there are some defenders of the faith who appear to be in denial, in denying that religious belief can clearly represent a classic form of debilitating and destructive mental illness. For example, in a recent, now-closed thread, RfM poster "summer" asserted that Mormonism is hobbled with mental dysfunctionalities, while arguing simultaneously that Christianity deserves to be cut a break:

" . . . Christianity has evolved, and is still evolving to keep up with the times. Mormonism is pretty far behind the curve. Mormonism has also institutionalized dysfunctional, controlling, and psychologically unhealthy behavior."

("Re: MaInstream Christianity believes in free agency?," by "summer," posted on "Recovery from Mormonism" discussion board, 28 November 2011)


You'll get no argument here that when it comes to cultivating good mental health, Mormonism is definitely "behind the curve."

But you will if you insist that its sibling, Christianity, isn't.

Before proceeding further, let it be noted that there is a definite Mormon-Christian connection--although not the one Mormonism's propagandizing proponents would have the gullible believe. Perceptive observers of the “religious belief-as-mental illness” proposition are encouraged to compare reported findings on dysfunctional Christianity with their own mentally-disturbing experiences in Mormonism. The similarities are striking, sobering and, to use an especially appropriate term here, “sickening.” To appreciate that fact as one reads further, simply replace the words “Christian,” “the Christian Church,” and “religion” with the words “Mormon,” “the Mormon Church,” and “Mormonism,” and those parallels will become manifestly evident.
_____


--The Religion Belief/Mental Illness Connection--

Rather than attempt on my own to persuade “summer” and other like-minded posters that religious belief (including the weed-infested Mormon garden variety) is a form of mental illness, I'll instead refer interested readers to the observations and findings of others--both in and out of the Christian realm of belief--on the subject of both Christianity's manifest dysfunctionalities and harmful effects.

One highly-regarded critic in this arena is Wendell W. Watters, M.D., professor Emeritus in Psychiatry at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Watters is the author of the book, “Deadly Doctrine: Health, Illness, and Christian God-Talk” (Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1992, 198 pp.).

By way of professional credentials, Watters is a trained psychoanalyst who spent seven years in that area and 25 years as a practicing psychiatrist. He credits working with his patients has having led him “to the conclusions I have reached about the hitherto unrecognized role of Christianity in people's lives,” adding that it “became evident that in the social woodwork of the Western world, the cross of Jesus has been carved deeply over the past two thousand years and that even people who [have] never darkened a church door [have been] strongly affected by many teachings of Christianity, often without knowing it.”

As to his own personal background, Watters does not come to religion ignorantly, noting that his “early upbringing was in the Anglican (Episcopalian) faith,” with “many of the messages emanating from that institution still reverberat[ing] at some level of my being.”

(“Introduction,” pp. 11-12)


But Watters is a seasoned--and reasoned--foe of religious belief, having concluded that it is a pernicious, mind-hampering form of mental disease.. Indeed, his book banners the warning across the top of its front cover: “Christianity May Be Hazardous to Your Health!”

The other experienced author and critic is Leo Booth who, as vicar of St. George Episcopal Church in Hawthorne, California, authored the book, "When God Becomes a Drug: Breaking the Chains of Religious Addiction and Abuse" (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1991, 273 pp.)


Booth describes himself this way: "My name is Leo. I'm an alcoholic. A co-dependent. A religious addict and religious abuser. I'm a recoverying priest."
_____


--The Challenge in Escaping the Prison of Mentally Destabilizing Religious Belief--

In making his case for religion as a perceivable and preventable mental illness, Watters minces no words. He dedicates his book “to all those who choose to think for themselves on existential issues, no matter how lonely and painful that may be,” and quotes freethinker Robert G. Ingersoll on the facing page:

“If people were a little more ignorant, astrology would flourish--if a little more enlightened, religion would perish.”

(pre-Introduction, pp. 4-5)


Watters' book starkly warns the reader of what they are about to encounter as they run up against his bold arguments on the devastating effects of religion on the human psyche:

“Churchgoers who are committed believers may be offended by this book, if, indeed, they read it all,” he acknowledges. And no wonder. Watters forthrightly announces that his thesis, “based on many years of clinical experiences, is that, despite the so-called comfort of the Christian message, Christian doctrine and teachings, deeply engrained as they are in Western society, are incompatible with the development and maintenance of sound health, and not only 'mental' health, in human beings.”

He has work cut out for him in cutting through religion belief's mental morass, observing that “[t]raditional believers tend to cling to their religious systems with a tenacity not demonstrated in the area of scientific research. Addictive belief systems become so much a part of the identity of some people, that it is often impossible to determine where the individual being stops and the religious, group-think starts.”

However, to the searching and open-minded, Watters offers hope and encouragement:

“People who are atheists, freethinkers, or humanists (who comprise approximately one-fifth to one-quarter of the world's population) may find much to help them in their never-ending quest for genuine meaning in their lives.”

Watters informs the reader that, ultimately, he has “written for those who, while nominally religious, are increasingly dissatisfied with the theist orientation to life and, in spite of the guilt they are encouraged to feel for doubting, are prepared to explore the humanistic alternative.”

That sounds like a lot of visitors to this “Recovery from Mormonism' site.

(“Introduction,” pp. 9, 12)
_____


--Religious Belief as a Dangerous Addictive Drug--

Watters likens religion to a habit-forming narcotic, describing it as “an existential soother to which individuals, having been born atheists, are encouraged to become addicted as they grow up in our theistic society.” In this regard, he declares that “Christianity is the pacifier PAR EXCELLENCE, claiming to alleviate cosmological fear--fears largely of its own creation--and to relieve guilt that has been stimulated in the believer by Christian god-talk.”

Like pushers trying to entice their customers to inhale the “wonder drugs of deity” they peddle, Watters says that “[i]n order to sell their product, god-talking salesmen do everything possible to prevent the believer from growing up emotionally and psychologically, manipulating the greedy egocentric infant in us all with preposterous promises of eternal bliss in the hereafter.”

Watters might as well be talking to true-believing, saddled-by-their-faith Mormons who are convinced against all reason and evidence that their brand of mind-twisting religion is absolutely imperative for long-term happiness and survival:

“In our addiction, we tend to lose sight of the price tag carried by most drugs, some higher than others. . . . Christians [substitute 'Mormons'] will find it difficult to entertain the notion that the tenets of their faith (one many claim to be as essential as food and air) have side effects that are deleterious to their health and that of their children. Simply put, Christian indoctrination is a form of mental and emotional abuse that can adversely affect bodily health in the same way a drug can.”

Watters' book explains the negative side effects of hallucinatory religion to those searching for healthy meaning and economic practicality in their existence:

“ . . . [E]vidence that religion is not only irrelevant but actual harmful to human beings should be of interest, not only to other behavioral scientists, but to anyone who finds it difficult to live an unexamined life. . . . [T]he argument advanced [against habit-forming religion] should stir political decision makers, who complain about the high cost of health care even while continuing to subsided that very institution that may be actually making the public 'sick.'”

(ibid., pp. 9-10, 12)
_____


Watters isn't the only critic who finds religiousity both harmful and addictive. Author Leo Booth defines "religious addiction" as "using God, a religion or a belief system as a means both to escape or avoid painful feelings and to seek self-esteem. It involves adopting a rigid belief system that specifies only one right way, which you feel you must force onto others by means of guilt, shame, fear, brainwashing and elitism. Thus religious addiction nearly always results in the abuse of someone else in the name of your beliefs."

Booth also describes religious addiction as "a hidden epidemic," in which "the concept of God . . . is used to create guilt, shame and, ultimately, self-hate."

Religious addicts, Booth explains, are driven by their "need to control, judge and proselytize," which he says "make abuse [of themselves and others] a virtual imperative."

The driving force behind that imperative is "[t]he all-or-nothing mindset [and] the belief that sex is dirty, [along with] other symptoms [which] unite to build a wall of shame and fear around the spouses and children of religious addicts. When a religious addict's rage is couched in scripture, when it literally appears to be the wrath of God, the guilt and shame imbedded in the family go straight to the core. In this way, religious addiction destroys families as much as do other addictions."

In the end, Booth says, it amounts to "using God or religion as a fix. It is the ultimate form of co-dependency--feeling worthless in and of ourselves and looking outside ourselves for something or someone to tell us we are worthwhile. . . . It is using God, religion or a belief system as a weapon against ourselves or others. . . . [In reality, however, it is an] addiction [that] has very little to do with God or spirituality, just as food addiction and alcoholism have less to do with the substance involved than with the way in which they are abused. Religious addicts use the accessory items of religion--rituals, dogma and scriptural texts--to reinforce the dysfunctional message that all humans are evil, stupid or incapable of merit. Thus, far from enhancing spiritual development, religious addiction stunts or paralyzes spiritual growth . . . ."

Booth speaks of religious addiction as an obvious "mental disorder" in the same breath as he does "compulsive behavior and psychiatric disorders;" "drug addiction, eating disorders, co-dependency, sex and love addictions, gambling;" and "such psychiatric illnesses as depression, anxiety, paranoia and post-traumatic stress due to sexual and other physical and mental abuse."

As with drug addiction, there are definite symptoms of religious addiction, which Booth lists as follows:

--"Inability to think, doubt or question information or authority.

--"Black-and-white, simplistic thinking.

--"Shame-based belief that you aren't good enough or aren't 'doing it right.'

--"Magical thinking that God will fix you.

--"Scrupulosity: rigid, obsessive adherence to rules, codes of ethics or guidelines.

--"Uncompromising, judgmental attitudes.

--"Compulsive praying, gong to church or crusades, quoting scripture.

--"Unrealistic financial contributions.

--"Believing that sex is dirty, that our bodies and physical pleasures are evil.

--"Compulsive over-eating or excessive fasting.

--"Conflict with science, medicine and education.

--"Progressive detachment from the real world, isolation, breakdown of relationships.

--"Psychosomatic illness: sleeplessness, back pains, headaches, hypertension.

--"Manipulating scriptures or texts, feeling chosen, claiming to receive special messages from God.

--"Trance-like state or religious high, wearing a glazed happy face.

--"Cries for help; mental, emotional, physical breakdown, hospitalization."

While a professed believer in God, Booth nonetheless is convinced that the most effective way to treat and recover from religious addiction is not through religion itself, but through personal spirituality.

He defines "religion" as "being essentially a set of man-made principles about God, focusing on a teacher or prophet," which often contains "negative messages" that produce feelings of "alienation and and shame." Borrowing from Eric Fromm's "The Dogma of Christ," Booth explains the three-fold function of religion:

--"for all mankind, consolation for the privations exacted by life;

--"for the great majority [of humankind], encouragement to accept their class situation; and

--"for the dominant majority, relief from guilt feelings caused by the suffering of those they oppress."

Booth writes that these functions have historically been carried out by "[t]he controlling authority of the [Christian] clergy," who are tasked with "teaching and interpreting religion" in order to maintain abusive "social control" by "keep[ing] people in submission [and] fearful of error."

He notes that "[t]his divinely appointed power group claims not only to speak for God but insists that it is also the only way to God. From cradle to grave, we are trained to look to someone else to tell us what to do, when to do it and what will happen if we don't." Booth explains that this power group "make[s] the rules and say[s] the rules are God's, so that questioning the teachers or teachings equals questioning God. Those rules, those messages have been, still are, often dysfunctional and abusive." And thus, he laments, "[s]o it is that people allow themselves to be abused in the name of God."

By contrast, Booth defines "spirituality" as an individually-determined "process of becoming a positive and creative person" through "a search [for] a healthy spirituality that . . . enhance[s] our self esteem" and which leads to "the spiritual freedom of truth."

(Preface, "Leo's Story," pp. 1-2, 13; Chapter 1, "Sin, Shame, Fear and Control: The Roots of Religious Addiction," pp. 20-21, 23, 27, 30-31, 36, 38; Chapter 3, "Where Does It Hurt? The Symptoms of Religious Addiction," p. 59; Chapter 4, "Religious Addiction: A Family Disease," p. 92)
_____


--The Broad Case for Classifying Religious Belief as a Mental Disorder--

From the cover of Watters' book, "Deadly Doctrine," on through its final pages, he lobs salvo after well-aimed salvo at the negative, ignorant and unhealthy impact of religion's “deadly doctrines“ on humankind. Starting at the beginning, he draws a bead on the mental backwardness that religion creates—and the social ills that it also produces:

“Christianity's influence actually militates AGAINST human development in such vital areas as self-esteem, sexuality and social interactions. The tragic result of Christian conditioning is too often anti-social behavior, sexual dysfunction, poor psychological development, anxiety and even major psychiatric illness.

“Christian indoctrination is not simply a problem affecting individuals or single families; the noxious effects of its teachings over nearly two millennia pervade society at large, even those who are not Christians, and in ways that seriously undermine human welfare and the quality of life. Christianity's aggressive pronatalist policies have encouraged large families despite parents' ability to cope either emotionally or financially. With this the Christian church has formulated rigid sexual roles, forbidding all practices not leading directly to conception. By actually promoting sexual ignorance and irresponsibility, Christianity has allowed the proliferation of such social ills as rape, child molestation and pornography.”

Watters' book further argues that “[r]ecent research data in the field of psychology and religion . . . show that patients with rigid belief systems manifest greater racism and less open-mindedness and flexibility than those with a more questing scientific attitude toward life. Biological predispositions toward severe depression and schizophrenia may also be aggravated by Christianity's promotion of an extreme body-soul dualism, self-denial and narrowly defined social roles.”

Watters' work notes how reluctantly “the Christian church” has come to grips (or “rectification”) with the mental illness-producing nature of some of its most notorious traditional and officially-peddled doctrines on such matters as “slavery, democracy, psychoanalysis, sexuality and reproduction, and religious toleration.”

(from flyleaf)
_____


Booth agrees that all is not well in the world of religious belief. He points out, for instance, that "the messages and teachings concerning the concept of original sin [which] offer the explanation that we were born bad and only by following God's rules can we overcome this inherent blight" is a manifestation of "the disease of religious addiction and abuse" which serves only to create "negative effects on self-esteem and spirituality" and which results in harming people "as individuals and as a society."

He warns that "[t]eaching the concept of original sin--that people are born bad--and keeping the focus on avoiding error, which religious addicts equate with sin, makes people slaves to following rules . . . . Promising heavenly rewards as compensation for suffering and deprivation in this life conditions people to escape into magical thinking and denial of reality. Teaching that acceptance of Christ (or any other prophet/teacher) is the way to absolve sins lead to rationalization and the inability to take responsibility for one's actions."

"This," Booth says, "is the foundation of religious addiction and abuse: We are bad and God will magically fix us if we do what someone tells us is God's wish." It is, he writes, "the conflicts and sources of guilt and shame within Christianity [that] have left us vulnerable to victimization by those who would abuse the power we give them."

Booth observes that religious addicts "all share a common experience: in the name of God, they have been made to feel fear, guilt, shame and anger. In the name of God, they have emotionally, physically or sexually abused themselves or others. In the name of God, they have brought themselves or others to the edge of financial ruin. In the name of God, they have judged and condemned themselves or others as worthless or inherently bad."

Booth notes that "[much] shame comes from dysfunctional religious beliefs" and that "[d]ysfunctional religious messages about sin, about sexuality, about God as an angry judge or Cosmic Fixer have created these toxic beliefs--from which people have tried to escape by means of addictive practices."

(Preface, "Leo's Story," p. 16; and Chapter 1, "Fear, Shame, Fear and Control," pp. 25, 31, 36)
_____


--Treating the Mental Illness of Religious Belief--

Watters, in "Deadly Doctrine," argues for rapid, intense and focused remedial action to counter the perverse, pervasive and poisonous role of Christian dogma in perpetuating a range of debilitating mental illness:

“In the face of so much human suffering resulting from Christian doctrine, it is imperative that health care professionals, recognizing the Christian belief system as an addictive disease, develop a religious status examination to help evaluate how notions about life derived from Christian god-talk compromise individuals' healthy functioning. In failing to to determine the role of oppressive religious beliefs in mental illness, physicians and other health care workers actually promote Christianity's continued stranglehold on human happiness and self-fulfillment.”

Watters' work lays out the aggressive course that must be taken to effectively counter the mental disease of religious dependence--a course that Mormons in their various stages of recovery could also arguably benefit from:

“If we are to free ourselves from the destructive end toward which god-talk is leading us, we need to cure ourselves of our addiction to religious doctrines that teach us to deny self-responsibility in all areas of our lives. . . . Only with proper education comes the promise of RECOVERY that will restore the primacy of reason and critical thinking.”

(from the fly leafs, emphasis added)

“Recovery.” As in “Recovery from Mormonism”--and in that rehabilitation process, as in recovery from Mormonism's contributing cousins in cranium-crushing crime.
_____


--The Role of Religious Belief in the Development of Significant Psychiatric Disorders--

Watters, in his chapter entitled “Christianity and Major Psychiatric Illness,” cites the work of behavioral scientist Albert Ellis in making the case that “there exists an irrefutable causal relationship between religion and emotional and mental illness.” Noting that Ellis “identifies 11 characteristics of religiosity that run counter to the development of sound mental health,” Watters offers the following summary of findings:

“Adherence to a religious view of life, in contrast to the scientific humanist view, discourages self-acceptance, self-interest and self-directedness, which are all necessary for sound mental and emotional functioning.”

Watters presents Ellis's contention that “religion tends to make healthy human-to-human relationships difficult, and encourages intolerance of others and inflexibility." Ellis asserts that “[s]eriously religious people have difficulty accepting the real world and trying to change what can be changed for the better; especially problematical is the acceptance of ambiguity and uncertainty. Religious people make use of scientific thinking, but only until it comes too close to areas that threaten their religious beliefs. They are also prone to fanatical commitments, in contrast to the less fanatical but nonetheless passionate commitments of emotionally healthy non-believers. Generally speaking, emotionally stable people are more inclined to be risk-takers in the sense, first of all, of recognizing what they want and then taking appropriate risks to pursue their personal goals. Deeply religious people, by contrast, are more inclined to feel too guilty to pursue their goals, since self-sacrifice is such an important component of their world view.”

(Chapter 8, “Christianity and Major Psychiatric Illness,” pp. 135-36)
_____


Below are explicit examples of religious belief manifestations of mental illness.

Watters notes that “Christian doctrine and teachings are incompatible with many of the components of sound mental health . . . . ” Sound mental heath, he says, includes the following indicators:

--”self-esteem

--”self-actualization and mastery

--”good communication skills

--”related individuation and the establishment of supportive human networks,” and

--”development of healthy sexuality and reproductive responsibility”

Watters then observes that in family situations “[w]hen the couple are not only partners to each other but parents to children in a family, the destructive effects of Christian doctrine combine to compromise the healthy development of yet another generation.”

Watters writes that women, in particular, have been trapped in a mentally-battered world of their own where religious dogma denies their personal identity and right of choice:

“Until recently, women in our society were not encouraged to look upon themselves as autonomous individuals capable of developing their human potential in whatever direction it took them. Even their identities were submerged in that of their husbands. . . . Nonetheless, women were somehow expected to be effective catalysts in the self-actualization of their own children. But how can a woman be expected to develop the adaptive potential of her own biological offspring if her own adaptive potential has been compromised, not only by the gender role she has been obliged to play but by many other teachings inherent in our Christian doctrine?"

Those destructive teachings include the following:

“Consider the tendency of Christian indoctrination to produce self-loathing, guilt over pleasure, the inability to be in charge of ones won sexuality and reproductivity and a built-in orientation away from human support systems and toward the divine. Could anyone design a more inefficient training program for parents?

"The fact that most mothers in our society do not raise schizophrenic children has more to do with the innate humanity and good judgment of most women and their ability to defend themselves against the more destructive effects of Christian doctrine, even when they may repeat that doctrine like parrots Sunday after Sunday.”

(Chapter 8, "Christianity and Major Psychiatric Illness," pp. 140-41)


In the authoritarian scheme of sex roles still largely imposed in the Christian church, Watters writes that the saving grace, so to speak, of protecting church-raised children from church-created psychiatric illness is the “female characteristic that comes to the rescue;”--namely, “the mother is expected to be 'emotional' and allowed to be demonstrably affectionate,” while in the history of Western religious culture, “that has long been denied to men. . . . Coupled with this is the traditional pressure on the male to control his feelings as much as possible, . . . [and] never to attempt to express them verbally and directly. . . . The longing for contact with a male God may be a reflection of this longing for contact with an earthly father denied to most people in the Western world because of the roles males have been and still are encouraged to play.”

Such factors, Watters argues, play their own role in the toxic relationship between “Christian doctrine and mental health,” where children are mentally imprisoned and developmentally stunted in a religiously dysfunctional and destructive environment. He notes, for instance, how “Christian teachings [demonstrably] interfere with the process of 'related individuation,' [in] that a child who is under-individuated shows poor ego boundaries and runs the risk of remaining fused with or absorbed into the stronger organism, the parent. In order for this to be the case, the parent, whose individuation has also been severely compromised, would have to remain over-involved in the life of the child.”

Watters notes that “[e]xcess criticism and hostility toward the growing child also interfere with healthy adaptive growth, making it difficult for the child to feel good about himself. Negative attitudes toward the self . . . are actually favored by Christian doctrine [and] lead naturally to negative attitudes toward others."

(ibid., pp. 140-41, 145-46)
_____


Booth likewise illustrates the plight of women in double-minded, schizophrenic-like religious belief systems, where they "are particularly vulnerable to . . . behaviors [of religious addiction] because of the secondary roles into which they are cast. For women with a Christian background, religion has given a definite message concerning their conduct:

"'. . . [W]omen should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly attire but by good deeds, as befits women who profess religion. Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet women will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.' (1 Tim. 2:9-15)

"'Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Saviour. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives be subject in everything to their husbands.' (Eph. 5:22-25)

"These verses," writes Booth, "have been the basis for the religious abuse of the female population. They help make women susceptible to becoming both addicted and abused. When religion is used as an external means of identity, of finding self-respect, these verses can become the standard against which women measure themselves. The woman who has been abused, who is seeking to purify herself or attain perfection, has only to adhere to this code to assure herself of salvation. This is how women use religion as a fantasy means to compensate for their secondary status--by becoming exemplary models of that role."

"At the same time, these texts set up a rebelliousness, an internal conflict that causes some female religious addicts to become abusive and sexually conflicted. . . .

"Just as often, the same verses . . . are used to justify sexual abusiveness [by men]. The idea of women as examples of submissive purity and sanctity sets up powerful conflicts in men, which have contributed to sexual double standards and abuse. Even today, the myth persists that there are sexual acts that men should not perform with wives, but rather mistresses. Another myth holds that women should remain sexually inexperienced, but that men should know what they're doing. . . . The conflicts produced by such mixed messages no doubt add to the range and sense of guilt felt by many religious addicts."

(Chapter 4, "Religious Addiction: A Family Disease," pp. 108-09)
_____


*Religious Belief and the Inability to Forge Meaningful Human Inter-Connectedness

A “major affective disorder” that Watters causally associates with Christian doctrine and liturgy is the actual “discoura [ment] [of] the kind of human-to-human communication and negotiation skills that make for genuinely supportive human networks, the phenomenon of 'Christian fellowship' notwithstanding.” As an example, he points to “[the] beesch[ing] of [lonely] listeners to 'come unto Jesus Christ,' thereby reinforcing the barriers that separate lonely people from their fellow human beings, [which are the] very barriers that Christianity has helped to erect.”

(Chapter 8, "Christianity and Major Psychiatric Illness," p. 147)
_____


*Religious Belief and Depression

Another major mental illness that Watters blames on Christian contribution is depression:

“If an individual has grown up with poor human relationship skills, his or her human support systems may not be very effective, in which case full-blown clinical depression may emerge. This illness may show varying degrees of intensity and require a variety of psychiatric treatments; when it reaches the degree of intensity requiring mood-altering medication, we consider that we are then dealing with a major affective illness. The main classification system used today is BIPOLAR DISORDER (in which the mood disturbance is alternately one of mania and depeession) and UNIPOLAR DISORDER (in which the mood is only one of depression).”

Watters blames Christianity for contributing to the affective illness of depression through a combination of “personality factors, early maternal deprivation, loss of human supports associated with incomplete mourning, stressful life events that exceed the coping capacity of the individual and learned helplessness,” together with “low self-esteem, strong super-ego, clinging and dependent interpersonal relations, and limited capacity for mature and enduring object relations.”

Watters notes that all of these “are inevitable products of the Christian belief system, one that preaches self-abasement as a means of ingratiating oneself with the deity, that discourages ego growth and inner-directedness and promotes super-ego growth and outer-directedness with its reliance on external authority. The dependent, clinging relationship Christians are encouraged to develop with their God quite naturally becomes the paradigm for their relationships with each other in the absence of any training in how to make adult human relationships work.”

(ibid, pp. 147-48)
_____


*Religious Belief and Maternal Deprivation

“Maternal deprivation,” as a contributing factor to mental illness generated by unhealthy religious influence, is, as Watters writes, “largely a direct result of the authoritarian pronatalist sex code operating in our society, which promotes the idea that motherhood is the only legitimate role for real women and which has encouraged women, even those who genuinely wanted children, to have more of them then they can care for emotionally or economically. Paul stated the childbirth was the only way in which women could be forgiven for the sins of Eve. By continuing to make it difficult for women and men to become knowledgeable about their sexuality, by continuing to resist the establishment of contraceptive and abortion services, many Christian denominations continue to contribute to unwanted pregnancies and maternal deprivation.”

Watters emphasizes that “[b]eing a competent mother is an adult activity and women can give OF themselves TO their babies only if they have been able to give TO themselves without feeling guilt. A Christian society that promotes suffering as good for the soul, while it discourages adult self-esteem and human inter-dependency, is hardly an environment for encouraging women to develop their full potential as human beings; and if a woman has been socialized to ignore her own needs, how can she be expected to be sensitive to the needs of her infant?”

(ibid., pp. 148-49)
_____


*Religious Belief and Unhealthy Mourning

In addition, Watters writes that the Christian practice of mourning losses is likewise conducive to the development of a depressive mental state:

“. . . [I]t is not the loss itself that appears to play an etiological role in depression but rather the way the loss is mourned. Christian attitudes toward death discourage healthy mourning in many ways, starting with the destructive impact of the resurrection myth. Since Jesus promised Christians a life after death, much of the message of 'comfort' delivered at Christian funerals is geared to a denial of the very existence and permanence of death. . . . The essential Christian denial of death is illustrated in the famous hymn, 'Abide with Me;' here we find the words 'Where is death's sting? Where, grave, the victory? I triumph still, if thou abide with me.'"

By contrast, Watters notes that “[h]ealthy mourning occurs when the bereaved is able to experience and express the full range of painful feelings mobilized by the loss of a loved one.” Unfortunately, as he reports, “Christian doctrine and practice encourage people to deal with such emergency emotions by beseeching 'God' to take the painful feelings away, thereby making it difficult for human supports to sustain the mourner through these difficult times. It is often said at Christian funerals that 'the widow was a real brick,' or 'he held up so well during it all.' Denial of emergency emotions of all kinds is really encouraged in Christianity.”

(ibid., p. 149)
_____


*Religious Belief and the Inability to Cope with Anxiety

Watters points to religious belief as contributing to debilitating mental illness in failing to offer healthy, self-aware mechanisms for dealing with stressed-caused anxiety:

“Christian doctrine and liturgy . . . discourage the development of adult coping behaviors and the human-to-human relationship skills that enable people to cope in an adaptive way with anxiety generated by stress.”

As Watters notes, Christian teaching and practice require that “adaptational challenges associated with anxiety are not to be resolved by using ones human support system to help develop a higher level of coping skills. Such feelings should be suppressed or denied. One Christian psychologist, John A. Hammes, put it bluntly: 'Not only should needless anxiety be avoided. Other unhealthy emotional responses should be resisted This means avoiding anger, hate, jealousy, envy, bitterness, and depression . . . . For the Christian, however, indulgence in such moods indicates a lack of trust in divine providence.'

"If such denial is impossible, the anxious Christian is encouraged to regress to a dependent symbiotic state with the great anthropomorphized unknown and unknowable. A prayer in the Anglican prayer book titled, 'For Those in Anxiety,' teaches this message specifically. . . . [T]he prayer does not ask God to help the anxious and distressed to maximize their human support systems in order that they might bear their own burdens and learn and grow thereby. It says nothing about asking God to enlighten the anxious and distressed as to the sources of their suffering, and to enhance their problem-solving skills by tackling those problems that can be solved. It says nothing about asking God to help the anxious and distressed develop confidence in themselves; rather, it urges the supplicant not to make the effort, but rather to 'put our whole trust and confidence' in God.”

(Chapter 4, “Dependency, Interdependence, and Self-Actualization,” pp. 61-62; and Chapter 9, "Christianity and Major Psychiatric Illness,” p. 149)


Which leads to the next religion-exacerbated mental affliction.
_____


*Religious Belief and Learned Helplessness

Watters compares and contrasts a healthy human-centered attitude toward individual self-confidence and ability, against the Christian lack of one:

“It is . . . generally accepted that children who, from an early age, live in a human environment that encourages them to develop mastery of their intra- and inter-personal environments, as well as the physical environment, are likely to develop a sense of competence and ultimately sound mental health. They are the adults who are more likely to cope with loss by allowing the mourning process to go forward naturally and to adapt well to challenges and cope with stress by use of their human support systems. These individuals are less likely to become depressed, having grown up with a life-long sense of their own personal worth and competence, and an ability to trust in the human beings they cherish.

“By contrast, children who grow up influenced by Christian teachings develop a sense of powerlessness in the world, rather than a feeling of competence and mastery, together with an inability to trust in the human support systems around them. It is logical that such individuals are more likely to grow up with a tendency to develop 'clinical' depression when faced with loss or stress.

“Christian doctrine,” Watters summarizes,. “promotes human helplessness by making it a virtue, indeed the 'sine qua non' of a good Christian life. Paul said, 'For when I am weak, then I am strong.' (2 Cor. 12:10) A perusal of a common Anglican hymn book today will convince one that this is not simply an outmoded notion pushed by Paul, but is one constantly reinforced: 'Stand up! Stand up for Jesus! Stand in his strength alone; the arm of flesh will fail you; you dare not trust your own;' and 'Jesus Savior, pilot me over life's tempestuous seas.' It is important to note that these lines explicitly discourage the development of personal mastery, warning that 'the arm of flesh will fail you.' They do not implore Jesus to help one find strength in oneself and human support systems to sail over 'life's tempestuous sea.' In order for a growing child not to be damaged by repeated exposure to such message, he would have to be blessed with a considerably high level of innate adaptive capacity and with a familial and social environment that was able to neutralize the destructive impact of these messages.”

(Chapter 8, “Christianity and Major Psychiatric Illness,” pp. 149-50)
_____


*Religious Belief and Co-dependency

Booth defines "co-dependency" using terminology from Robert Subby's book, "Co-dependency: An Emerging Issue," as "an emotional, psychological and behavioral condition that develops as a result of an individual's prolonged exposure to, and practice of, a set of oppressive rules--rules which prevent the open expression of feeling as well as the direct discussion of personal and interpersonal problems."

Booth explains that "[i]n religious co-dependency, the family members either take on the belief system that the addicts bring into the home or resign themselves to putting up with it, living in martyred victimhood. They may also rebel.

"When the family members take on the addict's belief system, they rarely do so out of their own inner convictions. Children who are raised in this kind of religious environment seldom have an opportunity to question those beliefs, especially if they are raised in a home in which doubting and questioning are punishable sins. Because of religious teachings about women being submissive to men, wives usually follow their husband's lead. Either they are not aware of their own needs and beliefs or they set them aside to follow those of the addict. They become as judgmental, dogmatic, rigid, intolerant and perfectionistic as their addicted spouse or parents.

"As a result, they have their own struggles with issues of control, guilt, shame, inadequacy and fear. Religious co-dependents are extremely out of touch with their emotions; they have been conditioned not to think for themselves. They live very narrow, restrictive lives, avoiding people who do not meet their strict standards.

"The families who resign themselves to living with religious addicts are walking pressure-cookers ready to explode. Resentment, fear, rage and anxiety seethe beneath the surface because putting up with the status quo set by the addict entails not rocking the boat. They may attend the same church, swallowing feelings of hypocrisy and anger. Some try to adopt an approach that says do what you want but leave me out of it--co-existing in stoic martyrdom. . . .

"In resigning themselves to the addict's behavior, they become victims, feeling helpless, powerless, confused and frustrated. They may alter between arguing with the religious addict or tuning out by avoiding or ignoring the addict's behavior. The passive-aggressiveness that comes with being a victim may manifest itself in the form of extra-marital affairs, hiding or hoarding money so the addict can't tithe it away or belittling the religious addict to family and friends.

"The families who rebel often have the hardest time. Spouses frequently find themselves pitted against a powerfully united church front. The dissenting spouse is portrayed as sinful and ungodly. Worse, when children are involved, they are often caught in a good parent/evil parent situation, creating great guilt and confusion."

The downwardd spiral of mental illness continues with, as Booth notes, "[d]ysfunction beget[ting] dysfunction.. The religious co-dependent spouse often ends up adopting unhealthy rules of caretaking which include:

--"Peace at any price.

--"Maintain the conspiracy of silence.

--"Never quit.

--"Never discuss feelings.

--"Try to appear normal."

The personal cost to all involved is horrific:

". . . [F]or the religiously addicted family, any failure, imperfection or scandal is seen as a disgrace to God, the church, the ministry or the preacher. The taboos against expression of feelings and the urgent need to look normal make the religiously enmeshed family a breeding ground for the secret addictions of anorexia, bulimia, sexual addictions, compulsive spending, gambling, workaholism. With these come the need for silence, never giving up, never discussing feelings and above all, peace at any price."

(Chapter 4, "Religion Addiction: A Family Disease," pp. 111-14, 120)
_____


--Research Findings on How Religious Belief Contributes to Mental Illness--

In his chapter on “Christianity and Mental Health: The Research Findings,” Watters cites an expansive project conducted by Daniel C. Batson and W. Larry Ventis, “The Religious Experience” (New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 1982).

Its researchers made a detailed examination of 57 studies correlating “being religious” with characteristics of mental health, racial prejudice and concern for other people. Their conclusion, notes Watters, was that “the means [to an end] orientation to religion had “a rather pervasive negative relationship” to mental health REGARDLESS OF HOW MENTAL HEALTH IS CONCEIVED. “In other words," Watters writes, “people who are religious for short-term social rewards are not very mentally healthy when measured by [the following] characteristics: freedom from worry and guilt, personal competence and control, self-acceptance or self-actualization and open-mindedness and flexibility.”

By contrast, when reviewing “the end orientation to religion,” Watters reports that the two researchers found “it was not a personal competence but a blind reliance on the omniscience and omnipotence of the deity” that gave long-term religious people an increased sense of “personal competence and control” when compared to non-religious people. In other words, notes Watters, “[a]s the authors point[ed] out, the greater [finding of] 'personal competence and control' were based on reliance on God, not on oneself”--meaning, essentially, that it wasn't really personal at all.

The definition for this attitude, Watters states, is religion-manufactured “smugness”:

“[The] combination of apparent freedom from worry or guilt [as detected in the end orientation portion of the examination], combined with an apparent sense of personal competence that is really a reliance on God, coupled with a [lingering] lack of open-mindedness and flexibility is actually a definition of smugness, a quality especially characteristic of the 'born again' Christian.”

Watters quotes Baston and Ventis' conclusion that “[t]he intrinsic end orientation [towards religion] leads to freedom from existential concerns and a sense of competence based on ones connectedness to the Almighty, but at the same time an inflexible bondage to beliefs. In contrast, the quest orientation [toward science and open-mindedness] leads to neither.”

Watters explains the reason for the difference between the two approaches:

“The social desirability factor most certainly operates here . . . Christians are not supposed to feel guilty if the guilt has been washed away by the blood of Jesus, so there is a marked tendency for Christians to deny guilt even when it is clearly operating in their lives and helping to shape their behavior. Many Christians lead restrictive, austere, pleasure-free lives, as a way of minimizing the opportunities for guilt to arise. The more religious the individual, the more guilt is denied, a finding that any sensitive psychotherapist will confirm. Hence Christians, when answering a questionnaire, are likely to show the same degree of denial that they demonstrate in the clinical situation. By contrast, people with a quest orientation to life have no such need to deny any guilt they may feel; it is more acceptable for them to be open and honest.”

The research confirmation, Watters announces, of Christians being guilt-laden underscores the fact that “[t]he price religious people have to pay for the existential nostrums offered by Christianity is to have a straitjacket placed on their human potential.”

“Many Christians,” he continues, "especially those engaged in scientific pursuits, try to deny that this is the case; they even talk about science as being a gift from God to enable humans to conquer the earth and subdue it as the Bible instructs. Some Christians claim to be scientific about some areas of life, but even for them a truly scientific approach to the totality of human existence is impossible; it would be too painful emotionally for them to turn the telescopes and microscopes on the human need for a sustaining deity, and the strategies used by religious institutions to keep that need alive in human beings.”

Watters concludes that the nature of these findings do not bode well for the overall mental health of religious believers:

“The gist of all this is that being religious is quite definitely not associated with greater mental heath when compared to a scientific, questing approach to life. The latter approach's association with more 'worry and guilt' is probably traceable, in large part, to early Christian socialization and a lesser need to deny emergency emotions. But even if this is the case, surely this is a small price to pay for the great 'open-mindedness and flexibility' that characterizes the quest orientation.“

Watters highlights some of the project's other, particularly disturbing findings:

*The More Religious, the More Prejudiced

The Batson-Ventis examination found that, overall, devout Christians demonstrated a noticeable degree of racial prejudice. “Why,” asks Watters, “when Christianity is supposed to be a religion of love, are Christians more intolerant of those who do not have the same skin color? . . . The question may be asked another way: Why are those who have grown beyond the need for the comfort of the Christian religion, or who were minimally exposed to it, more racially tolerant than those who are still believers? Is there something about the doctrine of the Christian church that tends to make people seek and find scapegoats?

“The answer to this question," Watters asserts, “is undoubtedly a resounding yes. An individual burdened with as much guilt as a Christian is encouraged to bear would, if he or she does not become completely psychotic, have to externalize some of the self-hatred which characterizes the true Christian. Scapegoats for that hatred have never been hard to find..”

(Chapter 9, "Christianity and Mental Health: The Research Findings," pp. 156-59, original emphasis)
_____


*No Noticeable Difference in Concern for Others Among Religious Believers and Non-Believers

Watters notes that when studies have been conducted that are designed to filter for “socially desirable” answers (such as one finds in self-reporting questionnaires), “religious people were no more or less helpful than non-religious ones.”

Moreover, from the several studies reviewed by Batson and Ventis, Watters reports that “it appears . . . that Christians can associate themselves with projects that give them a sense of being good Christians, when the helping is not on an interpersonal level and when they are not required to tailor their help to the real needs of a human situation. Otherwise," he observes, “Christians are no more helpful than non-religious people; indeed, if [one of the conducted studies] is measuring a real dimension, Christians are more insensitive since they tailor all their efforts to their need to ingratiate themselves with the deity. . . .

“[As an indicator of this,] [i]n their book, 'The Long Dying of Baby Andrew,' Robert and Peggy Stinson described their experiences with the medical staff with whom they had contact during the tragic circumstances surrounding the birth and eventual death of their premature infant. It was their experience that non-Catholic doctors, especially non-Christian doctors, were more responsive to patients' concerns and feelings than were the strongly Catholic physicians, who insisted on following their own rigid religious program.”

Watters further reports on the telling results of a study patterned after the New Testament parable of the Good Samaritan:

“Theology students were tested to see what determined whether or not they would stop on their way to class to help someone in obvious stress. It turned out that a religious orientation did not seem to determine their behavior. Rather, it was more a question of how rushed students were to get to their class. However, among those who did stop, there was a distinct difference in one aspect of helping behavior between those with [religion as] an end orientation and those with the [scientific] quest orientation. The person taking the role of a sick derelict lying in the doorway of a building was instructed to insist that he could manage on his own and did not need the student to do anything . Those with a quest orientation respected his wishes more than those with an end orientation. The latter appeared to have an internal need to help that overrode their ability to be sensitive to what the other person really needed.”

(ibid., pp. 159-60)
_____


--Final Assessment: Religious Belief Constitutes a Negative Force in Personal Mental Health--

As Watters knits it together:

“It is safe to conclude that committed Christians, when compared to those with a more scientific approach to life, do not fare very well when it comes to mental health, racial prejudice and concern for others.

"On self-report, Christians appear less best with worry and guilty than non-religious people; however, the psychological mechanism of denial and the need to give socially desirable answers may account for the difference.

"They appear to manifest as much personal competence and control as those with a scientific questing orientation; but this, too, is spurious, for it is not a real sense of personal competence but rather a reliance on an omnipotent deity.

"Committed Christians shows more racial prejudice than those with a humanist orientation, while in interpersonal situations they are no more helpful than non-believers. Indeed, Christians may be less so, since that are insensitive to the real needs of the person in distress as they persist in acting according to their Christian belief system.

"Summing up their research, Batson and Ventis conclude: 'This evidence suggests that religion is a negative force in human life, one we would be better off without.'”

(ibid., p. 160)


Watters then adds his own blistering assessment of mental illness-producing religion, followed by his prescription for cure:

“Religions--Christianity most of all--are the enemy of human morality. . . . [M]any of Christianity's doctrinal beliefs work against the development of the full moral potential of human beings. It is ludicrous to believe that men and women can develop into moral beings by manipulating their guilt, treating them like small children, and urging them to be afraid of their natural impulses.

“Those who set themselves up as the deity's interpreters form institutions that develop their own strategies, which are designed to expand and consolidate power over the believer. In the case of Christianity, these god-talking shepherds have been able to convince the sheep that that are innately evil and that 'all good things come from God.' The first step for the pilgrim on the road toward humanism is to understand this, 'the great projection.' The next step is to repudiate the destructive myth of innate evil.

“'It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man,' says Psalm 108, verse 8. . . . [T]his belief, ingrained as it is in the religious consciousness of Western society, has had a devastating impact on inter-personal relationships and human health. The medical profession, the pharmaceutical industry, and high-tech medicine are collectively blamed for the high cost of health care, some of which is well-deserved. However, no accusing fingers are ever pointed at the institution that promotes suffering as a valuable strategy, and whose doctrines have been shown to compromise human health in a variety of ways. . . .

“There is an evolutionary process at work here, At one time, a 'man's home was his castle,' and the state had no right to intervene if a man chose to beat his children in obedience to the biblical injunction about sparing the rod and spoiling the child; or if he abused or raped his wife, since she was his property. Now the state takes a radically different view of all such forms of abuse, to the extent that health care professionals can be charged if they fail to report suspected instances of spouse or child abuse. Admittedly, in comparison with physical and sexual abuse, the matter of mental and emotional abuse is proving more difficult for the justice system to deal with; however, there are signs that these forms of maltreatment are gradually acquiring judicial legitimacy. . . .

“Whatever we do, we must ensure that education, not legislation, is the strategy used to effect change. There must be no attempt to use the state to outlaw religion, even if Christianity has no compunction about using the state to extinguish other faith systems. . . .

“Only if Homo religiosus evolves into Homo sapiens can our species hope to survive. Surely it is time we . . . completed what others started at the time of the Renaissance.”

(Chapter 12, “The Future: Homo Religiousus or Homo Sapiens?,” pp. 191-92)
_____


Booth offers his own recommendations to mental health care professionals for dealing with the debilitations to their patients brought on by abusive religious belief systems.

He urges that those being assisted be encouraged to address "spirituality as being different from religion," with focus placed on the "mental, emotional and physical wellness that promotes healthy spirituality."

He suggests access to "treatment centers [that] combine lectures, medical education, family therapy and recreational therapy as well and individual and group therapy sessions."

He recommends that lecture topics "address all obsessive-compulsive behaviors, INCLUDING RELIGION."

(Appendix 11, "Treatment: A Guide for Professionals," p. 252, emphasis added)
_____


"Including religion."

Indeed.

Which leads to the last, inclusive point: Mormonism is like Christianity.

They both create and foster mental illness.


(related RfM links: "Kraziness from Kooky Koenig: The Touted Benefits of Religious Belief," at: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,912828: and "How do you distinguish between religious fervor and mental illness?," by "Amyjo," RfM, at: https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2087338)



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/06/2018 03:06PM by steve benson.

--”self-esteem

--”self-actualization and mastery

--”good communication skills

--”related individuation and the establishment of supportive human networks,” and

--”development of healthy sexuality and reproductive responsibility”
========================================================

whoa ! Now I REALLY feel inadequate .
I don't think I have ANY of that.


And I think that mormonism is the sibling of christianity, not the other way around.

that makes sibling sense, although, being a sib, that means they're still both mentally related.

WOW. Any questions? Any “ya-buts”?

someone needs to jump up and shout, "Now don't you go mental on me!"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/06/2018 11:44AM by steve benson.

Amazing. I need to read only SB’s posts.

Wish certain religious zealots here would weigh in. Probably won’t hapoen.

Hoping that you find peace in your lifetime too.

Hoping that you find peace....

Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 12:32AM by steve benson.

Stick to drawing cartoons Steve.

Now, back to sleep you go.

I imagine that Sikhs, Baha'i, Unitarian Universalists, Theravada Buddhists share my frustration at how our various religions get put under the same umbrella of condemnation because of what is largely a problem endemic to certain other religious traditions. (Or not. Maybe they have more a sense of humor about it and slyly notice who's *really* being talked about.) The problems identified are not religion per se, nor do I think the problems are exclusive to religion. Of course, when the same problems are noted elsewhere, the shorthand description has become "They're like a religion!"

But they are regularly manifested in religion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2018 06:02AM by steve benson.

" . . .my frustration at how our various religions get put under the same umbrella of condemnation because of what is largely a problem endemic to certain other religious traditions."

Why does everyone see their own religion as the exception to the rule?

'The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.'

"Here are some problems which often manifest in religions (and elsewhere)" doesn't quite has the same punch for a subject headline as "religion per se is the problem," does it?

Not only that, it's a duck-'n-dodge. Try to stay focused instead of reverting to the "yeah, but" work-around.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/07/2018 02:37PM by steve benson.

I suppose any obsession could be termed a mental condition including obsessive atheism and unbounded ego.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/07/2018 02:47PM by steve benson.

On the basis of posts by each of us and their content, I would suggest that you are clearly the leader in the field. I bow to your leadership.

to its secret temple-ceremony god. No bowing at RfM required.


However, the good thing about your leadership-related mistake is that it suggests that you've been out of Mormonism long enough to be experiencing some doctrinal memory lapses. It's part of the natural purification process. Nice job!



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/07/2018 11:13PM by steve benson.

Wow, psychic, too.

Very thorough, Steve. It appears I was raised by a madman. It makes sense, because I have crazy memories of church and childhood.

Stop embarrassing yourself with this silliness. You clearly have no understanding of how the human mind works, or how abnormal psychological states are recognized and defined. No, religion is not a mental illness. Seriously, anyone with even a high school education should understand the basics of psychology well enough to know better. It's surprising you managed to graduate from college with so little actual education.

Not only do you not understand their ideas, you do not tolerate their expression, and your notion of a healthy mental state is one which seeks to suppress and silence the opinions of others with which you disagree. Your cover for that intolerance is to demand that those with whom you are at odds should simply quit talking. So let it be written, so let it be done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O8gTIr4lys


Now, that's psycho. You clearly do not accept or respect how free speech works in democratic societies and would have failed a high school Civics 101 course in that subject. Allow me to cut to the chase: You remind me of a stake president I once had who happened to be a professor at a local university in the Phoenix area and who punished me (with support from certain radical outposts in the local Mormon religious community) by removing me from the stake high council for voicing views that he declared to be in violation of God's will. He later commended me for expressing subsequent views that he deemed to be an improvement on my part. I told him to back off and said that, if given the opportunity again, I would still express ideas that he had deemed to be unfit for articulation in public places--ideas that he had unilaterally judged to be a mockery on my part of sacred things through misuse of my "God-given talents." You sound like that same stake president, in embryo.

If you can't handle diversity of open and free expression in a pluralistic society, then please seriously consider moving to Communist China and there apply for appointment to its Politburo where, as Minister of Mind Management, you can then dictate the content and limits of thought and discussion, along with the nature and length of punishment for those who dare challenge your position, point of view and state-assigned power. That would be God-like for you. How appropriate.

And since you made mention of how the mind works, I am currently reading "Into the Silent Land: Travels in Neuropsychology," a fascinating book by Paul Broks. As a matter of self-help, you might want to pick up a copy.

Finally, since you are the one who brought up credentials, I graduated from college, cum laude, with a degree in political science, and have been awarded a Pulitzer in my professional career. Thank you for your interest.



Edited 23 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 12:29AM by steve benson.

That tickled me no end!

Benson graduated cum laude in political science from BYU in 1979.

And yet your professors that you learned from had mental illness?

Yah - I suppose that is possible....

Having a mental illness doesn't mean you're rolling on the floor drooling, or can't succeed in a job...

https://www.biography.com/people/groups/mental-illness

Wrap your head around that. :)

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Having a mental illness doesn't mean you're
> rolling on the floor drooling, or can't succeed in
> a job...
>
> https://www.biography.com/people/groups/mental-ill
> ness
>
> Wrap your head around that. :)

Maybe Steve will take a moment to clarify where on the bell curve of sanity he understands religious belief falls. Is it trending toward the end that is an imminent serious threat to themselves and others, or more toward the kind displayed by a person who will author a 9000 word essay in response to an online post?

Does the mental illness associated with religious belief rise to the level that the state has an interest to seek help for those that suffer from it? If so, we've got some great examples from history to draw from.

but, wait, there's more!: Who do other wild and weird stuff like:

--infecting the bodies of pigs with evil spirits before sending them to their demise by running them off cliffs;

--rubbing human-saliva drenched mud on non-working eyes to cure blindness;

--part the waters of the sea when they decide they don't want to walk across the surface of said waters;

--getting virgins pregnant through insemination by holy ghosts;

--commanding their faithful fairy followers to stone women and children to death;

--ordering said believers to commit genocide in the name of these god fairies;

--casting sinners into a lake of eternal fire and brimstone for not believing in or obeying your god fairies;

--wrestling with angels;

--conversing with demons

--causing mistreated donkeys to speak in Aramaic; and last but not least,

--resurrecting themselves from rotting corpses to a living, eating, walk-around state before flying away.

SNORT!

This stuff is straight out of La-La Land and ranks as a definite sign of some form of mental detachment from reality. Call it whatever you will--including mental instability, mental mind fog, mental derangement or mental illness.

The curative "pill," if you will, for this mind-boggling mental morass is critical, empirical, rational thinking. May you locate a good, healthy dose of it as quickly as possible.

(And please don't go bearing your altar-call personal testimony here again. It just doesn't fly, so to speak).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2018 09:37PM by steve benson.

I do sincerely hope you find peace Steve....

. . . repeating the same phrase to me like some sort of mentally-marginalized wind-up doll.

Why the condescension?

The above list is all what the Bible thumping religious believe and it doesn't look so good in this format rather than being spoken in holy, reverent tones in a church setting. You really need the amiance of the ecclesiastical to swallow it cause when it is stark naked in black and white in front of you it looks pretty embarrassing to buy into. I guess I can see why all you have to say is an arrogant,judgmental, self-righteous, "I hope you find peace."

"Condescension [is] the act of descending to a lower and less dignified state; of waiving the privileges of one’s rank and status; of bestowing honors and favors upon one of lesser stature or status. The Condescension of God is the descent of Christ below all things. He came to earth to dwell as a man, and suffered more than any man who has ever lived in order to redeem the children of God, that they might inherit His kingdom."

(Did I tell you that the above definition comes from "MormonWiki"? Surprise, surprise. Read and repent: https://www.mormonwiki.com/Condescension_of_God)

It's regrettable that Compassion/Understanding is not an attribute of many here. Perhaps the fight should be against self, not against others.


As an atheist of many years now, I count many in the various religious communities as my friends, my mentors, my teachers and my students. I believe they feel the same about I.

These people are certainly not mentally ill.


Eric K? What type of board are you running?

What a concept.

Speaking of concepts, here's another one:

No way am I going to be Christ-like when I'm an atheist--you know, the kind of person that Christians want to feed to their lions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 02:18AM by steve benson.

Eric?

I didn't ask you to explain the level of contempt and vitriol you have for religious people, nor provide a laundry list of things you imagine they all believe, but thank you for filling us all in on that.

My question was relevant to your actual post. Since you're convinced that religious people are mentally ill, how would you measure that? Do they compare with someone who, say, like you, assembles a 9000 word essay on the topic, but is so rattled by basic questions about this chosen topic, he's unable to offer a cogent response? Or are they more dangerous than that?

And do you believe the level of mental illness displayed by religious people is sufficient to warrant the state taking action to remedy their malady?

I see this topic may be upsetting to you, but I'm not looking for a fight. If you're willing to suggest that religious belief is a mental illness, it's fair to ask how you would gauge that.

You did not address any of those elements with any meaningful specificity or logic, which reminded me of my former stake president who suffered, to some extent, from the same misguided and uninformed impulses. You simply wanted me to shut up in the name of you being a self-assigned naysayer who had tasked yourself with protecting me from my own "embarrassment." Hmmmm. I don't feel embarrassed at all, but nice try.

At any rate, I wasn't "fighting"; I was facting. I thought your reply was pretty damn funny, but nonetheless concluded that you might benefit from a short history lesson in regards to where I was coming from. Apparently it failed to sink in.

Oh well, back to God you go. Hit it, brothers and sisters!:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQlv_xUYATg



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2018 11:12PM by steve benson.

Ha ha ha...bring in the choir.

Tall Man, Short Hair Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Is it trending toward the end that
> is an imminent serious threat to themselves and
> others, or more toward the kind displayed by a
> person who will author a 9000 word essay in
> response to an online post?

What is wrong with intellectual discourse? Even at length?

. . . attacking atheists while praising Jesus and Bible believers.

But, hey, who's counting? Certainly not him.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2018 11:00PM by steve benson.

He's made that easy enough to figure out, given that he has testified to that very thing on this very board. Below is a short but choice collection of his RfM come-to-Jesus altar calls:

-- “Jesus always stands ready with a welcome embrace, but you won't see it or benefit from it until you turn in his direction."


--"If you come to believe in God, you can grapple with the source of his power. . . . I'm just asking for a bit more honestly and less propaganda in our science."


He has also provided examples of how, in the name of Jesus, he deals with those who do not similarly believe in the Lord. For example, he asserts that he follows Jesus’s charge to turn the other cheek against Heaven's anti-God foes but, in the very next sentence, proceeds to contradict himself by invoking Jesus in comparing enemies of God to venomous non-human creatures:

--“. . . I do embrace turning the other cheek, but when you promote a discredited anti-intellectual farce to support your atheist ideology, you're more in the 'brood of vipers' camp. Jesus had no patience or mercy for that crowd.”

Can anyone say "hypocrisy"? Yes. One, in particular, comes to mind.

--“Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.”

(Jesus, James 1:26 )


--"[Ye] hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
'This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me.]”

(Jesus, Matthew 15:7-8)


--"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam [is] in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

(Jesus, Matthew 7:1-5)


--"If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion [is] vain.”

(Jesus, James 1:26)


Dammit, Jesus, shut up and sit down. You're being so inconvenient. :)

(http://exmormon.org/phoru /read.php?2,1923001,1925230#msg-1925230; and http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1956550,1956706#msg-1956706)



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 12:11AM by steve benson.

And I thought these playground farses were limited to a couple of Jesus-luvin’, book-writin’, mushy-brain mean girls active on this site.

Love this thread. Thank you, Steve.

. . . would regularly greet me as follows:

"And they stoned Stephen."

Rock on.

Like a good old fashioned ad-hominem attack.

Were you absent that day when they taught that logical fallacies demonstrate the weakness of your argument, or are you just enjoying a moment of pleasuring yourself in public because it feels really good?

But please continue to show us how your brand of atheism represents a pinnacle of human thought, reasoned exchange, and sanity. And don't forget to mention that I'm also a bit overweight, so that too will prove your assertions to be true. And for old time's sake, perhaps you can pull out of your archives some of those witty schoolyard taunts that you're so adept at tossing toward those who disagree. We all recognized those too as incontrovertible proof that your claims are valid.

Your BYU professors are surely proud.

"his" and "story"



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2018 11:57PM by steve benson.

. . . outside the box and who, in fact, did.

Needless to say, they were not part of BYWoo-Woo's religion department (where my uncle Reed spun out the good word for the bad Book of Mormon).

One of these creative, crafty and courageous rebels was Ray Hillam (a professor of mine in poli sci, where he taught international relations [IR] and for whom I was a teaching assistant). Ray was the target of an infamous student-spearheaded-ratting-out-the-liberal- apostates spy ring orchestrated under the command of my grandfather and eventual Church president Ezra Taft Benson; BYU president Ernest L. Wilkinson; and Apostle Mark E. Petersen. My grandfather warned me about taking any classes from unrighteous Ray.

Recently, I spoke with Omar Kader who, until the early 1980s, was a member of the BYU faculty, where he ran classes in political science and IR. He was quite the outspoken renegade (at least by Lord University's standards), and informed me in our recent phone chat that, back in the day when I was a BYU poll sic undergrad, there were those on the faculty who "had hope" for me.

That was a nice thing to hear (and may I add that I don't care that I disappointed Grandpa Ezra. Facts are facts and I'm not going to cover them up to keep my Mormon family happy. God damn me to hell). :)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 02:21AM by steve benson.

I have enjoyed immensely all the well laid out, fact filled, and well researched and documented arguments made here to discredit all of the quotes by mental health professionals that Steve has listed for us as food for thought. Oh, wait . . .

I mean, the word "silliness" pretty much ends the argument doesn't it?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 12:12AM by steve benson.

Yea, but...one of SB's favorite sayings....How do you explain away 'real' visions?

I was knelling down on the carpet, supported by my couch, and praying to God, in the name of Jesus, for courage and help in a political/government matter, when I received an answer thorough an improbable circle in my mind's eye (similar to the circles seen over cartoons which contain words inside for the character 'speaking').

My circle contained a picture of a 'real' entity who appeared to me, sitting down, inside the circle. While I blubbered about how unfair and awful I was being treated by this political enemy, this (apparently) 'divine' entity responded with, "I know, I know---which is why I have given you Marty (the name of my best friend), to help you fight your enemies"---at which time, the phone rang, and the circle vision immediately disappeared, and it was my friend Marty on line, calling me to ask what she could do to help me.

Happenstance? I don't think so. Never since have I had such an experience.
---

And, I do hesitate telling this story here, as it was 'too sacred' for others to make fun of.

(Well, here goes, I am going to press "Post message").

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/10/2018 06:57PM by steve benson.

Firmly in the TL;DR category!

There is more than enough mental illness amongst militant atheists in my experience of attending many of their meetings Classic example was the perp of the 2015 Chapel Hill Shootings. All over his Facebook page he'd been posting all these extreme atheist links and memes and had evidentally been radicalised by loony atheism before going out and murdering several religious people.

Militant atheists actually oppose diversity and tolerance in our society through their actions.

These types remind of homophobes. Their obsession is revealing. Just as many homophobes are repressed homosexuals so many militant atheists are frantically trying to compensate for the religious tendencies in them they fear subconsciously.

. . . marching as to war, with the cross of Jesus . . . "

Do you know the drill.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P83DMziX1gA



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/10/2018 07:01PM by steve benson.