The 3/12 promote LDS marriage in a particular way.
- Youth: prepare to marry, prepare to be sealed, prepare to have family, ad nauseum
- No sex, even with self, before marriage
- Do not delay getting sealed
- No sex with anyone besides your spouse, even yourself, in marriage
- Do not delay having a family--school, job, money are not reasons to delay
- Constantly do church things as a family, FHE, prayers, yada yada


LDS marriage is taught to young women in a silly fantasy, with a temple that is a castle, and an RM priesthood prince to sweep them away from the ills & temptations of this world. Once sealed, life is happily ever after.

LDS marriage is a trap for men. I know this is gonna be controversial, so endure with me.
Why?
Any man who is forbidden from sex with anyone, including self, except a wife, will be eager to marry if he has any red-blooded testosterone flowing in his arteries. For him, getting an emotional bond is secondary to getting legitimized sex (and perhaps having a family is next). He can confide and open his heart all he wants before marriage. He can hang out, goof around and be friends all he wants before marriage. Young men aren't worried about having kids too soon. They want sex. Once in the marriage, as long as his wife gives him sex and isn't emotionally abusive/controlling, the average LDS man will be happy. If, god permits, she shuts him down sexually for any petty or even moderate reason, he will be shut out of what he married for in the first place. Marriage has become a prison. If he dares go outside of the marriage, even engaging in masturbation, he is a big-time sinner and horrible person. Masturbation (porn use) is cause for break-up. Never mind that he was shut down and imprisoned.

Now what about the woman? (This is simplified, I know, but space is short.) Most women know that they can get sex anytime they want. Just knowing that is often fairly satisfying to their physical ego. What they seem to want more is adoration and emotional attachment with a strong man. If their husband shuts them down emotionally, it is tragic. But if a woman goes elsewhere to find her emotional needs met--talking with friends, family, LDS leaders, anyone--it isn't seen as being unfaithful. She can have her most important needs met outside of the marriage (albeit, less satisfyingly). It's acceptable.

BUT, LDS leaders know that if a woman has children, she is trapped. If the husband is abusive, bishops are still counseled to encourage them to stay the course. Top leaders encourage woman to have as many children and as early as possible, regardless of finances or other factors.

Once the man and woman are trapped by what motivates each, they are beholden in a vicious cycle that keeps them praying, paying and obeying indefinitely.

Bottom line: The LDS leaders know how to trap their victims, and they preach financial irresponsibility, poor judgment and impulsiveness in this case, when at all other times, they want members to be responsible, careful, and frugal.

The evidence is not strong, but it shows a pattern of purposeful manipulation to entrap.

(for stronger evidence, look at the post below... http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,383980,384197#msg-384197 )



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2012 04:16PM by Jesus Smith.

Textbook example of a cult.

Wow, J.S. - interesting angle I had never even begun to consider. Fascinating. I'm going to mull this over for a while - thanks for posting it...

in the claims by faith and that all powerful spiritual witness that rarely can be shattered. They stake their whole life, their whole family, and their reputation on their belief by faith and dedicate their lives, in most cases to service to their belief in the claims, God, the Savior, etc. This is serious business for them, in my view. This is the same kind of dedication I witnessed from some of my relatives that were ministers.

This is an American Religious God Myth and part of the history of the US. It has over 200 years of established heritage and cultural norms/patterns/rituals etc., to sustain it's believers in what I call a close-knit tribe with the Eternal Family as it's core, as that best describes, in my view, how it functions and operates. I think it's wise to remember that.

This quote takes on some very strong meanings on many levels when we go through the process of changing our mind about our belief system and leaving the LDS Church/Mormonism and creating a whole new World View.

"The individual has always had to struggle to resist the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

--Nietzsche

The LDS Church would not be as successful as it is if the leaders all thought it was some kind of fraud or scam. It would have fallen apart decades ago, in my view. Rarely does anyone break rank, as they say. This is the kind of leadership that is not broken. I find that rather rare! Other religious groups accomplish it also, but some do not.

It's wise, in my view to remember that this is not about factual information sustaining a church's belief system. That is not how it works. It's always going to be about faith in the claims and that ever powerful spiritual witness (which I have lived with and understand).

Members can find fault with their belief system and change their mind about what they want to support and leave it if they choose to also. It's not easy, if born and raised in Mormonism as it's a strong heritage and culture that is intertwined with it's beliefs and rituals/ordinances, etc. It's what I often refer to as a Whole Life Religion with some very strong controls.

SusieQ#1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The LDS Church would not be as successful as it is
> if the leaders all thought it was some kind of
> fraud or scam. It would have fallen apart decades
> ago, in my view.

I disagree and believe the opposite. The reason it is so monetarily successful is because it is run as a business with top leadership caring not for the actual spiritual well being, but the bottom line.


One thing is certain, Hinkster's actions are fitting of his nickname and show he probably knew it is a con.

Think about how the conman operates. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_trick ) Think about Bernie Madoff. ( http://www.postmormon.org/exp_e/index.php/discussions/viewthread/24214/ ) They make promises that are fantastic and play to the dreams and wishes of the victim. They gain trust by deceiving. Now at this point you could say the person leading astray is not conning, but deluded and fooled themself. The difference lies in how they treat negative information on their claims. An honest person would attempt to objectively look at the flaws in their claims.

For a conman, if any bad info comes to light, they start by never acknowledging it so as not to draw any attention in the hopes it will wither on its own. When forced to confront unsupportive info, they deny it and refuse to discuss it further, pretending offense and playing the victim. If pressed further or in a way that they cannot deny it, they lie about it--downplay its importance, etc.

Hinckley did both. Denied it live on press. Then downplayed its importance to the church body.

The Q12/15 use some of these very clever tactics to coverup and slyly change history in order to keep the "all is well in zion" story flowing. An honest servant of god would be up front about issues and try to work with people openly and without guile.

Some examples that come to mind:

0) Secrecy about church finances. They refuse to open the books. This smacks of con through and through. Why wouldn't a steward of the Lard give honest accounting to all members of their donations? There is no law or doctrine requiring secrecy on "sacred funds".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finances_of_The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints


1) the revelation on "blacks and the priesthood" was followed by subtle changes in the words in the BoM where "white and delightsome" were changed. It became obvious the 15 were receiving revelation on race in order to appeal to the world changes. The quiet, almost secretive way they changed the scriptures reveals the MO of potential coverup, rather than full honest disclosure.
http://www.mormonthink.com/blackweb.htm


2) temple ceremony changes due to a significant amount of attention paid by Godmakers and others to the death oaths. The coverup is held in place due to the secrecy of the ceremony claimed by the 15.
http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no104.htm#Summary


3) change in the BoM introduction due to the DNA lamanite crisis. This was not acknowledged until the media forced it. And even then, the 15 go on as if nothing has changed in the Lamanite landscape. They never directly discuss the issue at GC. But it has become about the most serious flaw in the BoM.
http://www.heraldextra.com/lifestyles/article_a645beb5-d963-5606-b91f-ac401d5f859d.html



4) Holland lied about the very copy of the BoM kept with Joe Smith, in attempt to elicit strong feelings against anti-mormons. (October 2009, GC)
http://www.postmormon.org/exp_e/index.php/discussions/viewthread/18043/



5) Mark Hofmman conned Hinckley/Kimball on a variety of falsified documents that posed LDSinc in bad light, and they covered it up. There is a big difference with this and how LDSinc extols a prophet (Alma) discerning a conman's (Korihor) trickery.
http://www.mormoninformation.com/hofmann.htm
http://lds.org/ensign/1981/05/the-joseph-smith-iii-document-and-the-keys-of-the-kingdom?lang=eng
http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no115.htm#anthon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salamander_letter#Suspicion_.26_Resolution
http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/alma/30.42?lang=eng#41


6) Propistion 8 cover-ups. Just as they did with the gay marriage in hawaii issue, the LDS church covered-up how they financed a political operation that strains the separatoin of church-n-state. They deny all of it, but it has been documented.
http://www.mormonproposition.com/


Now, an honest prophet would talk openly about these issues and why these changes are made. A dishonest conman hides unfavorable issues, makes the changes secretly and refuses to acknowledge them at all. It's better not to pay any attention to your weakness when you run a scam, but to change things secretly and pretend it was always that way. The Moaps perform the latter, by claiming that the new revisions are really what ole Joe intended himself, and we were diverted by misunderstanding in the congregations.

They're not knowingly complicit in the 15's scheme, but are acting as suck-ups do.

Also, it's very very clear to me that Joe Smith knew it was a con, BY in his very authoritative leadership did too. And so one has to wonder how the secret continued to the next prophet. As the profit of the con increased with the growth of new victims, one man could never have contained it himself. So what was the process of revealing the con to trusted insiders?

This interview with William Law is revealing in how this might actually work:

http://waynesimister.mysite.com/lawint.htm

>>> "...This was simply the result of a very smart system adopted by the prophet and his intimate friends like Brigham Young, Kimball and others. They first tried a man to see whether they could make a criminal tool out of him. When they felt that he would not be the stuff to make a criminal of, they kept him outside the inner circle and used him to show him up as an example of their religion, as a good, virtuous, universally respected brother." <<<

One wonders if the 15 don't do something similar today. Look for those LDS strongmen in bizness that are corruptible, elevate them to the Q70, watch if they embellish and cover up in their own little kingdom and then elevate them to the 15. How else do they keep those in the know so quiet? Because birds of a feather flock in quorums together.

A prophet of god who truly believed he represented the all knowing, all powerful supreme intelligence would defend that being without excuse or concern for what the world thinks. To the prophet, god is above the world so far, it wouldn't matter what the scorn was--he'd defend whatever bizarre, wacky command god gave.


Hinkster didn't do that.

1) He dissembled on important doctrines of eternal progression ("I don't know that we teach that" on becoming like god)
2) He downplayed polygamy and its history (Let the past remain in the past)
3) He was fooled by Hofmann and tried to cover up documents that posed poorly on Joseph Smith. (If smith were truly god's prophet, hinkster would accept whatever visions/revelations he received even if publicly unpalatable).
4) He was instrumental in changing the racist parts of the BoM and dissembling the reason for them.

And so on. Hinkster had a history of dissembling, hiding and covering up less savory parts of church history. His goals were to mainstream the church and make it tasty for public consumption. He did this because not only did he NOT believe it is the one-and-only truth, but because getting more tithe payers was more important than defending his god and his truth.

Is/Was Hinckley the only one?


I think not....

Some here have argued that the 15 are just self-deluded and believe the crap they shovel. I think that there's no doubting they are deluded big-time. But they could know they lie and even know the church is a lie, and yet be deluded about their actions being justifiable for other reasons. They'd have to be. No one believes he himself is evil--the dishonest believe they are justified in doing horribly dishonest things because they deserve the rewards that are withheld from others.

We will at least all agree that they lie. Whether they are deluded to buying their own lies or they are devious in their lies is the question.

Here's the interesting twist about that: The LDS church teaches honesty and integrity, requires it for temple entrance. Yet the leadership, historically and in modern times, continues exhibiting traits and actions that belie honesty to obvious levels. How did these leaders get to that point? How does an organization requiring honesty to be worthy of "blessings" and position raise up the most dishonest? How is it that these lying sacks of @#$%& are the ones at the top?

I think the William Law comment about how they see if they can make a criminal tool out of a man, and if so, raise him to the inner circle makes sense. The real honest guys are lower down.


So, there's no doubt they lie. Do they recognize they lie? I think yes, they knowingly lie, but feel justified. Do they believe they see god? Or do they rationalize away all the lacking spirituality that accompanies their office with a mere shrug of the shoulders as they enjoy the perks of the office. Perhaps the perks alone give them testimony enough to justify the lies.



-----------------
Thus, if Mormon Enigma reveals information that is detrimental to the reputation of Joseph Smith, then it is necessary to try to limit its influence and that of its authors."
- Apostle Dallin Oaks, footnote 28, Inside the Mind of Joseph Smith: Psychobiography and the Book of Mormon, Introduction p. xliii
------------------

“Some things that are true are not very useful.”

“That historian or scholar who delights in pointing out the weaknesses and frailties of present or past leaders destroys faith. A destroyer of faith — particularly one within the Church, and more particularly one who is employed specifically to build faith — places himself in great spiritual jeopardy. He is serving the wrong master, and unless he repents, he will not be among the faithful in the eternities. ... Do not spread disease germs!"
- Boyd K. Packer, "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect", 1981, BYU Studies, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 259-271
--------------------
"Indeed, in some instances, the merciful companion to truth is silence. Some truths are best left unsaid."

"Any who are tempted to rake through the annals of history, to use truth unrighteously, or to dig up “facts” with the intent to defame or destroy, should hearken to this warning of scripture:

“The righteousness of God [is] revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.” (Rom. 1:17-18.)

"I repeat: 'The wrath of God is … against all … who hold the truth in unrighteousness.'"

To anyone who, because of truth, may be tempted to become a dissenter against the Lord and his anointed, weigh carefully your action in light of this sacred scripture:

“These dissenters, having the same instruction and the same information … yea, having been instructed in the same knowledge of the Lord, nevertheless, it is strange to relate, not long after their dissensions they became more hardened and impenitent, and … wicked, … entirely forgetting the Lord their God.” (Alma 47:36.)

"We must realize that we are at war. The war began before the world was and will continue. The forces of the adversary are extant upon the earth. All of our virtuous motives, if transmitted only by inertia and timidity, are no match for the resolute wickedness of those who oppose us."

- Russell M. Nelson, “Truth—and More,” Ensign, Jan. 1986, page 69
--------------

" As Elder George F. Richards, President of the Council of the Twelve, said in a conference address in April 1947, 'when we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.' ... The Holy Ghost will not guide or confirm criticism of the Lord's anointed, or of Church leaders, local or general. This reality should be part of the spiritual evaluation that LDS readers and viewers apply to those things written about our history and those who made it."

- Dallin H. Oaks, "Reading Church History," CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium, Brigham Young University, 16 Aug. 1985, page 25. also see Dallin H. Oaks, "Elder Decries Criticism of LDS Leaders," quoted in The Salt Lake Tribune, Sunday August 18, 1985, p. 2B

---------------
Dallin H. Oaks:
"Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed is in a class by itself. It is one thing to depreciate a person who exercises corporate power or even government power. It is quite another thing to criticize or depreciate a person for the performance of an office to which he or she has been called of God. It does not matter that the criticism is true."

I emphasize: "IT DOES NOT MATTER THAT THE CRITICISM IS TRUE"

Source:
http://lds.org/ensign/1987/02/criticism?lang=eng&noLang=true&path=/ensign/1987/02/criticism


This is not for us, it's for the children!!
Oaks:
"The counsel against speaking evil of Church leaders is not so much for the benefit of the leaders as it is for the spiritual well-being of members who are prone to murmur and find fault. The Church leaders I know are durable people. They made their way successfully in a world of unrestrained criticism before they received their current callings. They have no personal need for protection; they seek no personal immunities from criticism—constructive or destructive. They only seek to declare what they understand to be the word of the Lord to his people."

<"I disagree and believe the opposite. The reason it is so monetarily successful is because it is run as a business with top leadership caring not for the actual spiritual well being, but the bottom line.>>"

Actually, I agree with this accessment also. The bottom line in the whole scheme of the business model is money. It will always be money. Like I have often said: no money = no church.

SusieQ#1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, I agree with this accessment also. The
> bottom line in the whole scheme of the business
> model is money. It will always be money. Like I
> have often said: no money = no church.


If they are placing money above faith and doctrine, which appears to be the case when you assess their actions, they aren't the believing, faith-filled, deluded leaders that are running a church with pure motives. They are about the benjamins and doing whatever it takes, saying whatever they need to for more $$.

That makes it a scam, and one that they likely know about at the top.


I think you originally wrote that they completely believe "in the claims by faith and that all powerful spiritual witness that rarely can be shattered. They stake their whole life, their whole family, and their reputation on their belief by faith and dedicate their lives, in most cases to service to their belief in the claims, God, the Savior, etc. This is serious business for them, in my view. This is the same kind of dedication I witnessed from some of my relatives that were ministers."

It isn't like other churches tho. These guys are not really believers in a faith or truth. They are after dollars and entrapping people who'll pay.

In response:

The churches are run by money. They all need money. They get it one way or another. Tithing is a Biblical concept that some live and some do not.

I know that the ministers I knew personally (now deceased) were total believers - and I have the same sense from the top leadership of the LDS Church.

I'm convinced they are total believers in the claims by faith and spiritual witness.

And I've been convinced since I first started researching this religion that Joseph Smith was never convinced of anything about it. (Heck, his money with a man shearing a sheep is OBVIOUSLY a big laugh at the expense of the faithful.)

He really seemed like someone who was curious as to how far he could go and people would still believe him. I'm starting to wonder if Warren Jeffs isn't just about the same.

They know how to tie that knot to their own advantage.
They don't care what that does to people.
Cold cold cold
they only care about something if it might make them look bad, or cause a law suit. Other than that they expect you to keep giving them money no matter what!

This is a really interesting read JS. I think there are some really good points, but I have to agree with SuzieQ about the leadership position.

You only have to grow up in a TBM family to know that people will stake their lives on the belief that the church is 100% true. The 1st presidency and the 12 so-called apostles have most likely lived their entire lives within the church and do not doubt it's truthfulness for a moment. Just look at the position they are in. They MUST believe it's true! As SuzieQ wrote, they are indeed "total believers," and if that were not the case, it would have fallen apart due to in-fighting and excessive greed many years back.

Of course, I'm not saying that their faith is true, but it's understandable under the circumstances.

JS puts up a very convincing case.
One item JS did not post is Hinckley's line when asked if he was a prophet of god by Mike Wallace-
"The members of the church sustain me as such."

In other words, that's what everyone thinks, and that's all that matters. Perception is everything, regardless of the truth.

Misfit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JS puts up a very convincing case.
> One item JS did not post is Hinckley's line when
> asked if he was a prophet of god by Mike Wallace-
> "The members of the church sustain me as such."
>
> In other words, that's what everyone thinks, and
> that's all that matters. Perception is everything,
> regardless of the truth.

That's awesome!! I'm going to add this.

"And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:

But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God."
(Acts 5:38-39)
---
now, is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints standing?
yes..
even though a lot of groups persecuting..
now you say money..
if its just the money, then maybe you are not aware of
a lot of big companies go down even they have a lot of money..
---
are you fighting against God?

"And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:

But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God."
(Acts 5:38-39)
---
now, is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints standing?
yes..
even though a lot of groups persecuting..
now you say money..
if its just the money, then maybe you are not aware of
a lot of big companies go down even they have a lot of money...
---
are you fighting against God?

there's such a wide disconnect between what their claims are and what they do.... Hinkster ABSOLUTELY KNEW it was a Scam, he was the Scammer-in-Chief.

Oh to be a fly on the wall in those meetings of the 15!

how could they look each other in the eye ?!

No promises of love or loyalty to your spouse... just promises to let the LDS church suck you dry in every way.

As much as I was told I wanted to be married and as much as I thought I wanted to be, believe it or not, it was me and not my ex who was not happy married. AND when I was pregnant with twins, I lived in absolute fear that he would leave me to raise them alone. I told him MANY TIMES--you can never leave me now as I can't do this alone. (I have to add--his big boohoo story while I was "dating" him was that he would never be able to have children if he didn't get married to a woman--so, me, feeling sorry for him, married him, gave him kids, and he left them.)

Oh well--he left anyway.

I am not divorced, but I don't consider myself married and I will never marry again. I've never felt so suppressed (more in my own mind) than I did while married and when I had little children to raise (mostly alone) and a house payment to make and bills to pay. My ex has just in the last year finally started paying for half the house payment and bills (he lives here--I live here half the time).

I'll NEVER let anyone do to me again what marriage did to me. I will NEVER let anyone tell me how to live, how to spend MY money, what I can do or not do for my kids.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2012 07:57PM by cl2.

That's just horrible, CL2. I figured this was probably the case for many LDS women trying to fulfill her church role.

I think I wrote something like: Church leaders must understand that once the wife has children, she is trapped.

The kind of marriage they push in the mormon community is not healthy.

I need to point out that, from a woman's point of view, there are PLENTY of men that are either asexual, or FAR less sexual than a given woman is...and the women (and, very likely the men) don't realize this until after they are married (because they just don't literally know enough to realize this), plus--in a lot of cases--when the adolescent hormone surge starts to lessen and it becomes obvious that the male is WAY less sexual than his wife.

To say that "a woman can get sex anytime she wants" is just grossly inaccurate for a huge percentage of women. A woman can get trapped just as easily as can a man in the "not enough sex" or "no sex" trap.

I know that what you are saying is true for many women, but you cannot say it is true for most or all women, but because for a very large percentage of women, it is not true.

And these women don't find out the same thing that you're talking about until THEY are trapped, too.

(Of course that's the case regardless of religious affiliation, IMHO)

I think they all believe in it. I haven't found enough proof out there to convince me otherwise and believe me, I've looked for it because I would like nothing more than for one to stand up in front of the world and denounce their faith.

I continue to be amazed at the complexity of the psychology used by LDS Inc.

They have all of their bases covered.

I think it starts with the testimony thing. Instillation of groupthink, literally from the womb.

Sexual control. Control over picking a spouse. Financial control. Time control. Giving everyone a job.

Perhaps the most sinister aspect of this is the indoctrination of parents to indoctrinate their children.

This is a huge scam, and a dangerous scam.

They did have to make an adjustment.
when I was a teen in the 70's they put a lot of effort in discouraging women to get an education.

We all got married, then divorced. Went to the church for help. After that they started encouraging women to get educated. They don't want to take care of divorcees and their kids.

I could never commit to marriage as a young adult in the Church. At the time I just felt like I could not make that kind of commitment to a woman, the church, and God. Now looking back I realize just how manipulative the situation really is, and wonder if somewhere in the back of my mind that is why I could never commit.

I really do appreciate the original post, but I recognize that it makes some broad generalizations that might not hold true for every individual.

I think that there is an important point to make about the damaging psychological effects of taking SUICIDE OATHS. It makes your mind so stubbornly biased in one line of thinking that a person can make up a whole world of illusion to support the lies. The only other choice to the church being true is to take a chance of death by suicide or murder (thinking back to the danites).

Those types of fears are DEEP and ingrained into our conscious and subconscious thought patterns. A person then gathers their own evidence and perpetuates the illusion further....finding your keys can become an answer from god in this type of thinking.

Remember that the temple also has a higher secret oath and covenant that all these guys have entered into. The Second Endowment. And if there is a second there is sure to be a third and fourth for the 3/12. B.Y. had men married to him (sealed) so these guys may be sealed to each other.

I believe they know it is false just as much as a bishop or stake president who knows it is false but cannot admit it and lives with cognative dissonance, and probably depression. They have read history and refuse to step out of the covenants they have made to the organization.

Fear Drives Them. Threats, fear, and intimidation agianst the flock is their method because it is their deepest fear.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2012 11:22AM by upsidedown.