So glad that I did that in 2005.

In the wake of resignations this week in the news, I reflect on how it’s never wrong to prioritize your conscience.

In fact that’s how it should always be.

I've always thought it was a lot of work for little return. You define whether you're in or out, not them. They still get to readmit you when you're dead.

But if this is what you want, that is up to you.

My resignation took all of 15 minutes of my time, which included printing it out and the walk to the mailbox. Yes, in 2002 we still used this quaint thing called "paper" now and then.

When I did not get a reply in 6 weeks as I expected, I called them, and got an apology. They said they were short-staffed because it was vacation season (July and August), but my resignation acknowledgement was "in the mail". It did in fact arrive the next day, so it was in the mail. I was in the Midwest at the time.

Hard to describe that as "a lot of work." And I have the satisfaction of knowing I officially fired them.

Kudos to you!

After all, like some, you could have gone public with your criticisms, writing critical books and essays, while waiting patiently for the Church to excommunicate you. Then, you could have protested the injustice of it all, while spending the rest of your life playing the martyr and bending the knee while begging for the Church's forgiveness. No doubt, you would have accumulated many friends, both in and out of the Church, who thought you were just wonderful, and would defend your inconsistent behavior at all costs!

So sorry if this offends you.

If your goal was to offend, you missed your mark. I'm not even sure what point it is you are trying to make.

> I'm not even sure what point it is you are trying
> to make.

LOL. That does happen.

>I'm not even sure what point it is you are trying to make.

Neither does Bemis

Perhaps this thread will jog your memory.

https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2526595,2526608#msg-2526608

I responded critically and caustically to the attitude and actions of your friend, as you described them. And because you were offended, you requested the post be deleted, which it was, even though no rules were broken.

Who are our exMormon 'heroes?' Those who resign as a matter of principle, and accept their fate willingly and unapologetically, or those who get excommunicated against their will and spend the rest of their life bending the knee to the 'priesthood' while begging for readmission?

That is the point!

Actually, no, doesn't jog my memory, nor do I recall what your post was about, nor any request I made that it be deleted.

I have responded to posts where I was positive the post I was responding to was going to get deleted, which would of course delete your response as well. That was particularly common with anti-vax posts back in the day. Nightingale and I always took the time to debunk those. Thankfully, it got to the point where admin deleted anti-vax posts pretty much immediately, saving me and Nightingale much time and many pixels. Gracias. ;)

I vaguely remember saying a post ought to be deleted, but I have no memory of the content or the author. I doubt my musings on its value had much to do with it being deleted. Sometimes I am surprised as to what disappears. Sometimes I am surprised as to what doesn't get deleted. Most of the time, it is pretty obvious why stuff gets deleted.

Hey Henry - That was one of the most witless posts here ever.

I can't quite picture Eric or BoJ either bending the knee or begging.

Yet another prophecy that will go unfulfilled.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/18/2025 02:00PM by Nightingale.

I can't quite picture Eric or BoJ either bending the knee or begging.

Yet another prophecy that will go unfulfilled.

COMMENT: If you read my response above, and the link I provided, you would know that the reference I made was to Lavina Anderson, not to BoJ or Eric, who upon being excommunicated did just the bending and begging I described -- for several years, continuously until her death!

Now, I am sure she was a good person, and a good friend to many, with a lot of wonderful qualities. But she was certainly NOT a model of exMormon courage or heroism, of which we have many genuine, les famous, examples.

For example, she knew, or should have known, as revealed by her own research and writing, that aside from its comfortable social, and familial, attractiveness, Mormonism was doctrinally false, anti-women, anti-gay, and generally harmful to individuals who do not fit their bend-the-knee, conformist, "priesthood-hierarchical" views. Her constant appeasement suggests that she was either the victim of her own self-deception or a martyr-loving 'victim.'

I feel roughly the same way about Michael Quinn. Both he and Anderson made great contributions to exposing the falsity of Mormon history, which all should appreciate. But neither could bring themselves to call out Mormonism for what it is while openly disengaging from it. Anderson not only failed to disengage from Mormonism, but she also defended it repeatedly as God's true Church and longed to remain part of it!

You said the following in direct response to BoJ:

Henry Bemis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Then, you could have protested
> the injustice of it all, while spending the rest
> of your life playing the martyr and bending the
> knee while begging for the Church's forgiveness.

> So sorry if this offends you.

That's the part of your post I was referring to when I said I couldn't imagine either BoJ or Eric bending the knee.

Sorry if I misunderstood your post but even on third and fourth readings it still seems that you are responding directly to BoJ.

It doesn't really matter. They can certainly defend themselves if necessary, if they care to. I was just giving my opinion, given what I've seen of both men via their posts through the years. They are not for bending, I'm betting.

Mine was done via email after I learned here that I could. I got a call from a bishop asking if I was certain about my decision.

That'll show 'em!

But do you still count toward the 17 million?

That is not the purpose of resigning. The purpose is to terminate your membership, and it does indeed do that. How they calculate their fictional membership number is beside the point.

Yes, it’s all about principle.

Period.

Forty years ago I knew nothing of resigning or asking for my name to be removed so to get out I went to their court. It was a freeing experience that gave me opportunities for control at times. Their biggest mistake was asking me if I had anything to say.

LOL. I would have loved to have been a fly on that wall.

Now that you bring it up, this year is in fact the 40th anniversary of the Norman Hancock case (Mesa, AZ, 1985) that finally solidified the right to resign, even if the church has started excommunication proceedings against a person.

I just googled it to verify the date, and noticed that Hancock served as his own attorney, and got an out of court settlement. I suppose that means that there is no actual court precedent. I don't think any church has challenged a member's right to resign since then.

And going up against LDS Inc without a lawyer and winning is pretty gutsy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/18/2025 01:57PM by Brother Of Jerry.