I got into some trouble for playing poker (we weren't even gambling, we were just playing a card game and having some fun). In the last year, I've gotten some "counsel" for playing Halo, drinking herbal tea, exercising on Sunday, and a bunch of other trivial nonsense.

I'm not trying to be contrarian/rebellious. I'm legitimately curious where these rules come from. Is there a general conference talk that specifically says you can't play poker?

Who cares? Not in the cult anymore...

You’re asking us here?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2019 10:00PM by mel.

I'm still in, but trying to cause the least amount of friction in my family as possible until I can leave forever. I just noticed recently how many weird rules there were that don't seem to have a basis in the Bible or Book of Mormon.

Games of chance are viewed as opening the door to demonic influence. That's not in the scriptures but it is deeply established doctrine in many of the foundational secondary sources, things like Doctrines of Salvation and Mormon Doctrine.

...skip the card games. Go for broke. Invite the Missionaries over for a "get together", then bust out old-faithful.............the OUIJA board! First, make the Sign of the Cross. Then they get to go first. Ask it, "Is Joseph Smith a TRUE Prophet"? If the Board says yes, run like hell, or, just spill your vodka and tonic all over, and say "You better go now, or I'll rat you out to the Bishop tomorrow for trying to subvert me"!

There are people here who are still attending due to family pressure.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2019 02:33PM by bona dea.

Brigham Young was vocally against playing card.

The herbal tea is iffy. Some bishops are ok with it, others are not.

There's a semi renewal in keeping the sabath day holy. Some bishops take anything other than studying church materials as breaking the sabath.

Maybe the bishop thinks you should be preparing for a mission rather than playing Halo.

Bottom line, each bishop is a wild card.

Heartless Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brigham Young was vocally against playing cards.
> The herbal tea is iffy.

He really should have been more vocal against tea.

His doctor and nurses plied him with such stuff laced with arsenic during his waning moments.

A classic method of dealing with autocrats.

Brigham Young was vocally against playing cards.

when i was drinking the koolaid i read discourses of brigham young and from what i can remember he didn't like card playing wheile they were on the trail west. he thought it was a waste of time when they could be doing better things. right. after a long hard day, why should they relax?

some of it comes from a nasty combination of fanaticism and ignorance that possesses the minds of many of the ordinary members of the church.

With regard to the stuff that comes from General Authorities, it can often be all over the place and incoherent. This is because individual General Authorities are frequently meeting with people in venues other than General Conference and talking about their views on things and the way that one General Authority views a particular issue may completely be opposite the way another General Authority views the same issue.

So, for example, a GA doing a "fireside" on the subject of keeping the Sabbath holy, may have a very strict interpretation that rules out exercising on Sunday. At the same time, another GA may be meeting with leaders of a Stake in Oregon and having a conversation about various things and in the course of casually talking he mentions that he does not believe that the Lord has any objection to people getting outside and moving around on the Sabbath by walking, cycling or even just doing some calisthenics to get the circulation going and invigorate their minds and bodies.

So, to extend the above example, for someone in your position, it will often just depend on whether you are dealing with a Mormon who has been directly or indirectly influenced by what the GA in NY said or if you're dealing with a Mormon who has been influenced by what the GA in Oregon said. Either way, it's not as "official" as if it had been preached in General Conference, but most Mormons rely on whatever a GA tells them about just about everything.

As for the herbal tea thing, that's just pure ignorance. The solution for you is to start calling it an herbal infusion (which is more accurate). As long as the fanatical/ignorant person doesn't hear the "tea" word, they won't know what to think about it. "Hey, I'm having an herbal infusion. Anyone else want a cup?"

I think if you haven’t figured out yet that LDS is all about what you call “trivial nonsense” then you have a long way to go before you leave the cult.

Maybe we could be a little more sympathetic

How much fun is that?

Well okay, I used to be TBM. It sucks to be them. If you consider that everything we know is made up, whether backed by science or not, the fact that it’s made up doesn’t matter so much. What does matter, then, is the character of JS and BY. Stealing other men’s wives or genociding enemies isn’t something I look for in a prophet. Deciding that bat sh*t crazy isn’t for you shouldn’t be such a source of alienation.

But they are victims of a parasitic ideology. They are trapped by a psychological process that con men use to control their marks. Which is ironic since they think we are the lost ones.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What does matter, then, is the character of JS and BY. Stealing other men’s wives or genociding enemies

Agreed!

> They are trapped by a psychological process that con men use to control their marks. Which is ironic since they think we are the lost ones.

Excellent points, Babs. I speak as a former mark who was conned.

Babs, thank you for an excellent post making some great points!

I don't think the OP is necessarily TBM and he/she asked a simple question. Lots of non believers attend for family or other reasons.

Trivial virtue signaling nonsense...

A custom exists. Some up & comer takes a look at the custom and it occurs to him that there is a more righteous way to behave and that if he suggests it and his suggestion is acted on, he, the up & comer, will be able to glory in having done ghawd a favor!

It is via this pathway, I believe, that the change from the missionary D-day to P-day occurred in the mid-70s. Talk to most missionaries from the 1960s and they will describe a pace and practices much less spiritually strenuous than what a missionary from the 80s and moving forward to the recent change to calling home on weekly basis.

It wasn't a ghawd who revealed the need for changing to a more hardcore missionary existence. It was some pennyante brown-nosing piece of crap mission president looking to make a spiritual name for himself who started the process and the other pieces of crap MPs jumped on board.

And now the pendulum is swinging back. The Stains (rearrangement of 'Saints') have shown themselves to be a bit rebellious lately! It seems ghawd is being persuaded to dial back on some of the hardcore stuff, like only calling home twice a year and ladies having to veil their faces and promising to obey their husbands.

The mormon ghawd doesn't need a Vatican Council sort of thing to make life harder or easier. The mormon ghawd just needs to see the results of holy surveys. The mormon ghawd is a business school Ph.D. He's got index and middle fingers on the pulse of modern mormonosity.

Elderolddog,

Excellent post and discussion. Spot on!

"The mormon ghawd just needs to see the results of holy surveys."--Elder Olddog.

That's the reality of it!

I love your new word, "Stains." When Mormons and their media refer to themselves as "Saints", it makes me cringe!

The OP apparently doesn't recognize the totality of ChurchCo CULTure & how it impacts the current focus's of things in Morland:


'be anxiously engaged in a good cause'

'devote your time & energy to building the kingdom'

etc. etc. etc.


with those who travel up the rungs of leadership, it's always turning attention inward to what's worked for those ahead of you in the line, never deviating therefrom.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2019 11:05PM by GNPE.

GNPE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The OP apparently doesn't recognize the totality of ChurchCo CULTure...

Exactly, GNPE! It’s all about control...

> it's always turning attention inward...

Yes.

And that saying “endure to the end” isn’t about enjoyment or fun or doing what you like to do... nope! Endure... only!

Good insights, GNPE!

A good analogy I've often heard is that trying to pin down Mormon doctrine is like trying to nail jello to a tree.

So many things(the word of "wisdom" for example) are vague and ever changing, but they are often strictly enforced.

CrispingPin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A good analogy I've often heard is that trying to
> pin down Mormon doctrine is like trying to nail
> jello to a tree.

Hahah!!! I’m picturing green jello to match the leaves...as it slowly slides down the tree trunk... :)
>
> So many things(the word of "wisdom" for example)
> are vague and ever changing, but they are often
> strictly enforced.

So many male and female members in my former ward had tattoos and multiple piercings had they kicked them all out, would have reduced membership by half or more. So then, presumably, instead they would “counsel” which means, we’re not able to do anything to you but try to make you feel guilty!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2019 11:18PM by mel.

Or chocolate pudding. The kind Bill Cosby gives you late at night in a cozy setting.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Or chocolate pudding. The kind Bill Cosby gives you late at night in a cozy setting.

Gaaaaaah! Horrors!!!!
I will never look at chocolate pudding the same way now!!!

Go to lds.org and type "poker" in the search function. You'll find a bunch of stuff on why poker is bad bad bad.

Herbal tea has "tea" in it so some nosy mormons think it's bad bad bad.

Sunday is for church activities only. Anything else is bad bad bad.

Long story short, TSCC thinks that anything that doesn't drag you deeper into TSCC is bad bad bad.

logged out today Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Long story short, TSCC thinks that anything that doesn't drag you deeper into TSCC is bad bad bad.

Hilarious! And Truth!

OP better not say he has been on RfM looking for explanation or it would require even more counseling and Double bad bad bad bad bad bad scolding!!!

Yes, poker is very bad for church members. They might not win and lose their money. Also, there are many members living in Utah that need other member's money for multi-level marketing schemes. Above all, the church really needs its tithing. Nelson is on a world wide tour so you need to round up all the loose change you can find and mail it into SLC, pronto!

messygoop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Also, there are many members living in Utah that need other
> member's money for multi-level marketing schemes.

I can’t believe Amway still exists...

> Above all, the church really needs its tithing.
> Nelson is on a world wide tour so you need to
> round up all the loose change you can find and
> mail it into SLC, pronto!

Messy you are so funny! I will start looking down the couch cushions right away... but oops, not mailing the cult one cent, going to put it to much better use with a quick trip to my corner Baskin-Robbins. :). :). :)

Part of the answer here is what ChurchCo leaders call
'the unwritten order of things'

Never did know why. I think they told us why, but I can't remember. I liked to play solitaire and I always felt guilty about it. Was told to feel guilty about drinking diet coke. There was always something new to feel bad about.

When I'd go to stay at my aunt's, we were to wear our Sunday clothes all day and TV was forbidden. In fact, they didn't even have a TV for a long time until my grandmother died and they "got" hers. We'd go stay with them in the summer for a week. My sisters went and stayed a few months in the summer and I refused.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2019 12:57AM by cl2.

Some people will attempt to bully you if you will tolerate it. I would just reply, "Tend to your own business." Or, "Go fuss at your spouse. I'm sure your spouse is used to it." Or, "Don't you have a church toilet to clean?" etc.

Anything that keeps you from handing over your money to Mormonism or allowing yourself to be used up by the cult is BAD

“I'm legitimately curious where these rules come from.“

Unless you’re a proctologist, you probably don’t want to know.

:)

I think staying away from gambling is not bad advice. There are people out there it becomes a serious and dangerous addiction for and it can start with smallscale forays like this. I had a few experiences as a young man where I spent a little too much on gambling, and I was lucky enough to be able to pull myself away from it before it became a serious problem. Others are not so fortunate and bet the farm or lose their families.

I know some people can spend small amounts on it, but the people I do know who play poker often do put down the equivalent of a week's wages. Unfortunately, the only way to know if you have a gambling problem is to get into it. I never got addicted, but my experience was enough to causs me concern when I reflected on it.

A lot of gamblers use self-delusion. My old room mate used to use one armed bandits. He would claim he won more on them than he lost. I told him that was not true, since me and other friends had often seen him playing them

Large scale gambling is the sign of the collapse of a civilization. If you look around us, you can see it being promoted everywhere especially on television and the 'net. It can create large amounts of debt across a nation if it is not properly controlled.

It's not bad advice, Jordan, but if someone interrupted a card game that I was playing in order to lecture me (especially for low or no stakes,) I would tell them to go mind their own business. If a family member or close friend ever felt I had a problem with some habit, they would tell me. I don't need to listen to anyone else.

I don't gamble either (or to be more exact, less than $10 per year on a horse race or lottery tickets.) I don't like to throw my money away. If I went to Las Vegas again, I would have to amuse myself with other things. My mom liked to play the slots, but she would limit herself to $30 per trip, which I considered a fair amount for a day's entertainment. I would joke with her that she needed to stop while she was winning, but she would never do that.

Not all poker players are in it for the money. It’s a mind game. I know a guy who liked to teach greedy people a lesson, take their money and give it to the dealer, etc. He’s too busy for poker nowadays.

The best rule to live by is “everything in moderation”. Besides, you can now look up the pros and cons of everything instead of relying on dogma.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not all poker players are in it for the money.
> It’s a mind game. I know a guy who liked to
> teach greedy people a lesson, take their money and
> give it to the dealer, etc. He’s too busy for
> poker nowadays.
>
> The best rule to live by is “everything in
> moderation”. Besides, you can now look up the
> pros and cons of everything instead of relying on
> dogma.

I know there are people who play for matchsticks and the like, but some do put money down. I think poker is more geared towards gambling than certain other card games. It's also promoted a lot in James Bond, Maverick and a number of other films I can't think of just now.

I think the internet is far too pro-gambling. There are websites devoted to it everywhere and really heavy advertizing, including online poker. I tried watching it on Ttelevision once, it makes for poor viewing as they are all stony faced and wear sunglasses. I think gambling addiction also gets more of a free pass due to the fact it isn't a "physical habit" like drugs.

Moderation is a difficult thing. For some people, just a brief entry into it is enough to trigger an addiction. For some, like me, longer term exposure would hook me (as I think was beginning yo happen). I know there are moderate gamblers. My father liked horse racing, but put very little money down, thankfully.

Rat park. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park

Maybe people just need the right HOA.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rat park.

Wow! Amazing that this research was so suppressed apparently because it does not fit the prevailing paradigm of everything being the fault of the drug companies. I had never heard of this, so thanks very much for the link, Babs! I intend to share this with many folks.

mel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> babyloncansuckit Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Rat park.
>
> Wow! Amazing that this research was so suppressed
> apparently because it does not fit the prevailing
> paradigm of everything being the fault of the drug
> companies. I had never heard of this, so thanks
> very much for the link, Babs! I intend to share
> this with many folks.

There are slightly different kinds of dependency involved with different drugs. Some seem to be more a psychological hook, others more physical. I think if someone is in great pain, they will be inclined to take drugs to get rid of that pain, whether it is socially acceptable or not.

Some addictions may also be connected to social status. A gambling addiction offers the prospect of raising your financial status overnight without the usual work. A drinking problem allows you to beat shyness and become more confident in a group of people, and also in some cases it is a gateway to sexual experience (consensual or not). Heroin allows you to forget that you are not succeeding in life. LSD helps those who are struggling with imagination or spirituality to fake a short cut. Pornography makes up for your own sexual failures and inadequacies. etc.

How is buying a lottery ticket different than buying a share on the stock market?

Aren't all those paying tithing gambling on the odds that there is a celestial kingdom?

Scientific fact. All science is a theory. It can't be proven. The same applies to crazy cult ways. They have no clue if there is a CK, or even heaven. Pathetic.

Yes, but they can count. Count the wives, the lies, etc. Science is an extension of that. In a weird way, so is Mormonism with experimenting on the spirit. If you don’t honor institutional lies then you must go it alone. Which is harder than it looks but not too bad if it’s character you’re after.

So why the tea ban? Any interaction with plant consciousness is very dangerous to the hold Mormonism has on you. Joseph knew his plants.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2019 03:27PM by babyloncansuckit.

The few times that we have driven to California, we stop overnight in Vegas. Our maximum amount to gamble with was $40. Win, lose, or draw, we would stop when the $40 was done. When we did win, it was usually just enough to pay for dinner. Our next door neighbor sold his business and cashed in his retirement money. He lost $700,000 in one fell swoop. After he lost more money, trying to recoup, he left his wife and moved out of state. IMO, many people aren't disciplined enough to live in moderation. On a different thought: When I was TBM, I couldn't convolute enough to excuse why LDS owners or managers of casinos could sit across from a stake prez or a bishop and get a temple recommend after they were asked if they were honest in their dealings with their fellowmen. Now being aware of TSCC for what it really is, it makes sense.

I think *some* people can't live in moderation, but most people can. Most people would not blow their life savings in a casino, or be drunk or high every day, etc. Your $40 limit for a day of gambling strikes me as being quite sensible. Many people would spend the same or more for dinner, or a show, or a movie, or other entertainments.

My college friends and I had a saying, "Everything in moderation including moderation" -- meaning, be sensible most of the time, but feel free to blow off steam every now and then. We liked to have a good time, but we all graduated with decent to good grades. Many of us went to grad school, and we all eventually got good jobs and lived normal lives.

Summer nails it.

The key is moderation, but Mormonism is not a normal religion by any means.

OP, I can't tell you the actual origin of where some Mormons got the idea cards and herbal tea are wrong, but I remember various comments from old-timers before me.

My mom said that face cards had origins "in dirty dens in France" where immoral things were being done. I was young and assumed there was sex and alcohol involved in "dirty dens." I figured she must know what she was talking about (big mistake). The cards were associated with wasting time (as if church wasn't a bigger waste), and gambling (not a Protestant favorite vice). Plus, Kings and Queens seemed to be a remnant of "dark Medieval" times to my mother and things like that only invite Satan and drive away "the spirit" (hahaha), blah, blah. My mom was OK with the Rook card game so for her, the problem was with face cards. None of it makes sense now. I think it is mostly a gambling risk concern now.

As for herbal tea, there were three reasons my mom didn't want it around. First of all, she wasn't sure what "tea" actually was and herbal tea might be related. Second, they had an issue with hot drinks (except hot chocolate or soup) and herbal tea was hot. Lastly, drinking herbal tea gave the "appearance of evil" since it looked like you might be drinking the bad kind of tea. It was a slippery slope to drinking actual tea. Again, none of this makes sense, but such is the way people internalize things they picked up from church.

I was taught that the pictures.on face cards were.symbols of the Gadianton Robbers. Apparently they had a taste.for Medieval clothes and titles.

LOL!

Anon Vega,

The posts here should help answer your questions about poker. But since you mentioned you have also been counseled about playing Halo, I think you could legitimately challenge anyone to find that prohibition in D&C or BoM as I’m sure they weren’t thought up by JS back when he was making that stuff up.

Why? Because there are lunatics and fruit loops in almost every organisation.

Road safety groups, healthy eating groups, churches, humanist groups, charities, all have idiots who take things to ridiculous extremes.

When, if, they get into positions of power they make it their ambition to have the group made into what they want it to be like.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2019 11:48AM by matt.

True.

In groups that form, including religions and others, all it takes is for someone to express an idea and then some repeat it, and start policing it. They don't need it in writing or even evidence for it. Then somehow after they get the position out there, the goal is to impose it on everyone.

However, all of the extreme positions that arise are not equal. The trick is to examine the facts and where the position leads us, e.g. environmental practices or making women wear tents. The hard thing is that if people are wedded to certain views, they are not interested in facts and have different goals for humanity and our planet.

matt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When, if, they get into positions of power they
> make it their ambition to have the group made into
> what they want it to be like.

Exactly! Good insights!

Is "don't get obscene tattoos on the Sabbath" a rule?

Like any HOA, it depends on if you're friends with the members of the architectural committee.

The question was, "Where do these rules come from?"

My answer, "Most are not 'rules' - but a member asserting authority where none exists." In other words, most of these examples are somebody pulling a Church example to suit their purpose at the moment. They're bluffing - like poker, except using gospel chips.

When I was looking for new employment, I would sometimes apply for positions outside of "Zion." My wife's interpretation of "Zion" would be the USA or Canada (as "Zion-lite"). I thought Bermuda or Europe might be a good experience for our family.

My wife would pull quotes from Heber J. Grant: "Europe is no longer safe for the saints." I would have agreed with President Grant during WWII.

My wife did not want to live in Europe. She did not want our children to live in Europe. Rather than presenting facts on the merits of European lifestyles, she wants the Church to provide her reasoning for her.

"My answer, "Most are not 'rules' - but a member asserting authority where none exists." In other words, most of these examples are somebody pulling a Church example to suit their purpose at the moment. They're bluffing - like poker, except using gospel chips."

Interesting observation - we must also consider the moral panic and existential terror that afflict the mormon community, making them hunger for the 'sweet solace' of a life infested with authority figures and their arbitrary dictates and rules.

If you *must* remain within the Church for now (or for how long you can tolerate it or whenever you can exit) because of family, academic, financial reasons or if you are still sorting out what role faith or the Church has in your life, it is *VITAL* for your physical, spiritual and mental health that each member knows their *rights* within the Church.

The Church is manipulative. Members learn from the Church how to manipulate. Unless members can recognize when they are being manipulated, they may do things that are contrary to their own interests. The consequences are always borne by the member - never the Church. Beware!

When our son was 14 he was in counseling. His mother wanted an LDS counselor because she wanted his counseling to support what she wanted within our home. A non-member counselor might be "too questioning" and "too open to our son's choices." Our counselor was also in our ward bishopric. Excellent, says my wife.

During a meeting my wife wants this counselor to tell our son that he *must* attend Church with the family. She expected total compliance from the counselor (not to mention our son).

The counselor says, "He is 14. Under Church policies, your son can decide if he wants to attend. He can decide if he wants to become a member of the Church or leave the Church."

My wife was LIVID and then beyond LIVID. "This counselor doesn't know anything about Mormons!"

When dealing with Church officers or TBM family, it is VITAL that you understand what your rights are. It is the same as when you are stopped by law enforcement. In Canada we do not have to identify ourselves unless driving a vehicle on a public road or at an international customs point. When an officer asks for identification, we can decline to identify ourselves in other circumstances. An officer can ask; we have the choice to answer. Similarly, we don't have to give information to a bishop or our child's Primary teacher. We may not keep our temple recommend or ecclesiastic endorsement at BYU, but that is part of our choice to make.

So they’re more pathological than cultural or doctrinal.

Mormonism is the church of the latest thing the guy in charge said. Nothing more.

Once one realizes that the only doctrine is the Führerprinzip (the leader is never wrong), everything else makes sense.

The trite little statement that the prophet can never lead the church astray is a tautology. Just imagine how that would read in my dad's old missionary discussions:

Missionary: "The prophet can never lead the church astray."

Brother Brown: "How will we know that we are being led astray?"

Missionary: "The prophet will tell us."

Brother Brown: "What the hell?"

snowball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mormonism is the church of the latest thing the
> guy in charge said. Nothing more.
>
> Once one realizes that the only doctrine is the
> Führerprinzip (the leader is never wrong),
> everything else makes sense.
>
> The trite little statement that the prophet can
> never lead the church astray is a tautology. Just
> imagine how that would read in my dad's old
> missionary discussions:
>
> Missionary: "The prophet can never lead the church
> astray."
>
> Brother Brown: "How will we know that we are being
> led astray?"
>
> Missionary: "The prophet will tell us."
>
> Brother Brown: "What the hell?"


As with most individual persons / personality characteristics/ attributes, each GUY in charge is a bit different in temperament & priorities than the other previous ones; this leads 'the faithful' to think/believe that each has a special / divine mission from god.


yeah Right.