This thread on hatred towards the GAs and the different feelings expressed ranging from hatred to indifference troubled me.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,757778

It especially troubled me that many are indifferent because it is best for them. I can agree with the principle, it's correct. So, how do we separate self-destructive bitterness from righteous, appropriate indignation with a desire to protect and prevent the spread of Mormonism. How do these compare with knowing indifference?

Here's my proposition.

You have a button in front of you. It changes nothing in your life personally, no one knows you pushed the button, you are not accountable, you would only do this because you value pushing the button over not pushing the button.

What does the button do?

The button stops the Mormon church! I can't say how, but all is revealed, made clear to the most indoctrinated and stubborn. They still have to deal with the fallout, they will suffer the same feelings of loss and separation that many of us have felt after realizing the truth of the Mormon fraud. They can still choose to go to Church, but no tax write-off. It's no longer a Church. Mormon stories of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon can still be told, but there will be clear, irrefutable, evidence they a frauds. They can socialize, marry each other, reject others, anything they want. Just no more pretense.

You will only feel the consequences of pushing the button in that you will experience the way the Mormns respond to this situation.

Do you push the button or ignore the button in the spirit of live and let live?

My question is what fills the void? The church right now is pretty much morphing into a corporate entity. It's ran by a few fat cats and they pretty much just care about money.

If you zap it away some gung ho zelot will fill the void and you might end up with a bigger bunch of nutcases. Salt Lake City could become Colorado City. LOL!

So no crossing the Rubicon for Rubicon?

"You will only feel the consequences of pushing the button in that you will experience the way Mormons respond to the situation."

In such a scenario Mormons may very well reassemble in an even more bizarre cult than Mormonism. That's a possibility in this scenario.

It's the "when a doctor removes a cancer what does he replace it with" argument.

As Hitchens says;

"Religious faith is, precisely because we are still-evolving creatures, ineradicable. It will never die out, or at least not until we get over our fear of death, and of the dark, and of the unknown, and of each other. For this reason, I would not prohibit it even if I thought I could. Very generous of me, you may say. But will the religious grant me the same indulgence? I ask because there is a real and serious difference between me and my religious friends, and the real and serious friends are sufficiently honest to admit it. I would be quite content to go to their children's bar mitzvahs, to marvel at their Gothic cathedrals, to "respect" their belief that the Koran was dictated, though exclusively in Arabic, to an illiterate merchant, or to interest myself in Wicca and Hindu and Jain consolations. And as it happens, I will continue to do this without insisting on the polite reciprocal condition—which is that they in turn leave me alone. But this, religion is ultimately incapable of doing. As I write these words, and as you read them, people of faith are in their different ways planning your and my destruction, and the destruction of all the hard-won human attainments that I have touched upon. Religion poisons everything."

So, the reciprocal question, if the religious had a way to MAKE us believe, would they push the button? Oh, wait, they often have.. The Inquisition.

So yes, I believe they would.

And yes, I would, for the sake of allowing the human race to finally evolve past our "first and worst explanation". Though mormonism, is more like our 100th and worst.

Wild horses couldn't stop me.

I would look like a telegraph operator!

What Levi said!

I just don't care, and don't even think about it since I moved to Nevada.

I'd be terrified to push that button. Such a massive, simultaneous loss of faith could have devastating consequences. Everyone who believes in the LDS Church realizes it's a fraud all at once? That could cause mass panic, rioting, complete anarchy. It wouldn't be pretty. Who knows what would happen to Utah? And as has been said, it might lead to the sudden and desperate formation of a cult born from the church's ashes.


I'd be more likely to press a button that would trigger everyone to start their quest searching, or plant the *seed* that gets them out. At least that way, it's staggered, people fall away a little more gradually, and not all at once, so they all have the time to adjust.


My other big fear is, is this button interfering with their agency? If I can just push a button and remove these people's lifelong beliefs, that is a power I do NOT want or deserve. I'm a firm believer in the right to freedom of choice, free will.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 06:49AM by doubtisavirtue.

I would definitely push it without hesitating. People deserve to know the truth, no matter what the consequences.

My fantasy 'push the button' scenario deals with a one, 'religion of peace'.

Yes. In a heartbeat.

Any time there is a button with the opportunity to end a cycle of abuse where the abused become the abusers, I would push it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 11:51AM by bc.

I would push it. People deserve to know the truth and I don't think the "fall out" would be as devastating to people as some of you may think. They WILL get over it and as long as they have others around them experiencing the same thing, they have a HUGE support group.

Yes. In a heartbeat.

While the initial 'fall out' might be difficult for some, the long term benefits for most (including people I love) would be enormous.

I'd push it FOR HER. I have a friend who I definitely believes needs mormonism. I used to think my daughter needed it. Nope, my daughter needs a reality check.

I'd push the button.

” What does the button do?
”The button stops the Mormon church! I can't say how, but all is revealed, made clear to the most indoctrinated and stubborn.”

Yes, it's the honest thing to do. Someone has to make that button. I'm wearing the engineer hat, so to speak.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 12:35PM by Jesus Smith.

I do not have the right to force such a change on people. I do want the change, but change by persuasion not force.

As a gay man, I imagine a button that would change me to straight that someone else could push, and I am offended.

As an Atheist, I imagine a button that would make me a theist that someone else could push, and I am offended.

I would not want to push a button that would change someone else when having that done to me is such an offensive concept.

How would any of you feel if there was a button that would make you a faithful member of TSCC that a Mormon could push?

As for forcing the "truth" on to Mormons, the three examples above, people could believe they were forcing the truth onto me.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 12:32PM by MJ.

Point of clarification. Mormonism would stop. People would have to cope with that stop. Just if Sears would go away. It's been around a long time, adapted, changed, absorbed other businesses.

The only forcing would be that Mormons wouldn't have the same Mormon church they used to have. It's gone, but they can start another Church with the same beliefs, still associate as they will, hate or teach that god hates gays and blacks. Shun family members who do not agree with their beliefs.

Does that still force people to give up on Mormonism, to make the Mormon church and its' leaders go away? It's a belief, not a building.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 12:34PM by gentlestrength.

You would still be forcing your views and wants onto others, exactly what so many claim to hate about the LDS.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You would still be forcing your views and wants
> onto others, exactly what so many claim to hate
> about the LDS.


What does the button do?

The button stops the Mormon church! ... all is revealed, made clear to the most indoctrinated and stubborn.

How is publishing the truth so clearly that it undoes the Mormon church forcing anything?

As I pointed out elsewhere:

"...all is revealed, made clear to the most indoctrinated and stubborn" You would be forcing a revelation onto "the most indoctrinated and stubborn"

"They still have to deal with the fallout, they will suffer the same feelings of loss and separation that many of us have felt after realizing the truth of the Mormon fraud." you are forcing them to "deal with the fallout" and to "suffer".

And you are ok with forcing SUFFERING onto people without their consent?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 12:43PM by MJ.

"...all is revealed, made clear to the most indoctrinated and stubborn" You would be forcing a revelation onto "the most indoctrinated and stubborn"

"They still have to deal with the fallout, they will suffer the same feelings of loss and separation that many of us have felt after realizing the truth of the Mormon fraud." you are forcing them to "deal with the fallout" and to "suffer"

Need I really go on?

Does the lack of sun force us to put on warm clothing or are we adapting? People assign a value to a belief or situation and then adapt accordingly.

It is cold out, I am going to a fun, sexy beach party with heaters. I can dress anyway I want. Is the cold forcing me to wear warm clothing?

Not persuaded, I guess you need to go on if you feel forced to do so.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 12:44PM by gentlestrength.

Do you realize that your response makes it sound like you feel you can play GOD?

This is exactly why I oppose the button.

Think of it this way, if the sun melts a person's ice cream, the ice cream is lost by nobody's fault except the person that left the ice cream to melt.

Now if you pushed a button that took the ice cream away from the person, that could be considered theft and YOU would be at fault.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 12:51PM by MJ.

No I am claiming I control how I dress, if I go to a party, if I stay outside near heaters, or go anywhere I want with warm clothing, if I want to be cold for a little bit that I can wear layers and take a coat off andput it back on when I am cold.

Adaptation. I do have limited control over burning up the posts on this thread, I just wanted to make sure that a post that added a false premise to the proposition didn't negatively influence the contribution of others.

It would seem the loss of your chocolate ice cream cone, makes all chocolate ice cream go away. All other ice creams are still available, even other deserts. Do you have a One True ice cream cone?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 12:56PM by gentlestrength.

You do not have the right to force others to dress the way YOU think they should dress. You do NOT have the right to change how they think or to inflict suffering as you have already claimed your button would do.

You also do not have the right to take away choice of chocolate ice cream. If you pushed a button that took away all the chocolate ice cream, you would still be a thief. It would not matter if you left other choices, you would still be a thief.

I do love how your first paragraph is about how YOU have the right to dress how YOU choose, but your button takes away the choices of others.

You still do not address your explicit claim that the button would force suffering on people.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 01:13PM by MJ.

"So, how do we separate self-destructive bitterness from righteous, appropriate indignation with a desire to protect and prevent the spread of Mormonism?"

I think that needs to be deconstructed first.

There are a lot of assumptions in that statement about what's "good" and what's "bad" that may not be so black and white.

If you have a better exercise to address the issue, please start one. I can't say this is not flawed, but it designed to enlighten if allowed. Science usually is forced to ask black and white questions too and then build upon the findings.

This isn't scientific, but when allowed to develop wil enlighten I think. If detractors have better questions they want to ask, it seems to be a rather generous forum. If the point is to disagree with cause in this one, I think a post or two is adequate. Don't you?

I think it would be "good" to push the button and I don't really care if you think it "bad".


Forcing one person's choice onto another is not the answer. What is "good" for you may not be "good" for others.

Change should be made through discourse, not force.

The better way is to join the conversation and debate ideas, not push a button forcing everyone to become stepford wives.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 01:56PM by MJ.

Determined MJ--did someone say the first line you posted here, just above. I don't see a quote attribution, it's not in the premise--this seems like an unnecessary hijacking. Threads do have a shelf life and a post life.

We can all agree you would not push the button. We can also agree you think the absence of Mormonism, forces people to change their beliefs.

You referenced your homosexuality. If no one else is a homosexual, do you stop believing you are a homosexual. Do you stop being a homosexual? Do others being homosexual keep you trapped as a homosexual even if you don't want to be a homosexual? Do homosexual parents force you to be homosexual? Does having homosexual parents make it more likely you will be homosexual?

I truly just don't agree with most of your challenges, it's like you are arguing a question that wasn't asked to make a point you want to make. A new thread is in order for the expression your positions and comments of others.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 01:59PM by gentlestrength.

Because I think it the right thing to do.