Support NeoGAF

[CorvoSol]

What if we chose willingly to go on our missions? I decided well before I was out of primary that I wanted to go (and I should probably mention that I continued with that thought after primary, since a little kid can't really understand what that choice entails), and I can honestly say that those two years were incredibly beneficial to me. I've come out of it well-connected, more mature, better educated about the world outside of my small town, capable of reading, writing, and speaking a second language, and yes, more interested in my own religion.

Some of us willingly go on our missions because we want to, enjoy that experience, and consider it a valuable use of our time.

I don't mean to suggest that there aren't people who don't want to go/likely should not, but I don't enjoy the suggestion that I was brainwashed into doing something I know for a fact I was not. I also don't mean to be confrontational here or anything. I just thought I should pitch in that there are those of us who really enjoyed our missions.

 

[Patryn]

What if we chose willingly to go on our missions? I decided well before I was out of primary that I wanted to go (and I should probably mention that I continued with that thought after primary, since a little kid can't really understand what that choice entails), and I can honestly say that those two years were incredibly beneficial to me. I've come out of it well-connected, more mature, better educated about the world outside of my small town, capable of reading, writing, and speaking a second language, and yes, more interested in my own religion.

Some of us willingly go on our missions because we want to, enjoy that experience, and consider it a valuable use of our time.

I don't mean to suggest that there aren't people who don't want to go/likely should not, but I don't enjoy the suggestion that I was brainwashed into doing something I know for a fact I was not. I also don't mean to be confrontational here or anything. I just thought I should pitch in that there are those of us who really enjoyed our missions.

That's why I said brilliant and reinforce. Because for the truly faithful, it probably does help reinforce your faith, and that's great.

But I really think they need to stop pushing the line hardcore that you MUST go on a mission.

 

[CorvoSol]

That's why I said brilliant and reinforce. Because for the truly faithful, it probably does help reinforce your faith, and that's great.

But I really think they need to stop pushing the line hardcore that you MUST go on a mission.

Ah, okay then. I actually agree with you on that. I met some guys on my mission who I really don't know if they should have been out there. I don't want to say that flat-out because it sounds judgmental to me, but there were guys who I think would have been happier had they stayed home and gone on with their lives instead.

 

[Shalashaska]

Seems to me most missions for non-Utah missionaries are more beneficial as there is less pressure to go and more of them seem to go because they want to.

 

[ronito]

Ah, okay then. I actually agree with you on that. I met some guys on my mission who I really don't know if they should have been out there. I don't want to say that flat-out because it sounds judgmental to me, but there were guys who I think would have been happier had they stayed home and gone on with their lives instead.

Yeah this is why I was so glad to hear the refocus to be more on worthy/willing boys instead of the Gary Oldman-esque "EVERYONE!!!"

I have a friend that used to work in the LDS travel agency where they set up the trips to and from home for missionaries and she was constantly alarmed by how many were sent home early (my fave story was about the 2 missionaries that were sent home because they got tattoos of "CTR" on their arms. They honestly thought it was a good idea, also interestingly found out that you can get married while on your mission, that's not technically against the rules, but everything leading up to it is).

I think that before the statement it was really a wedge that forced many out of the church without them really thinking it through (IE: I know I don't want to go on a mission, I don't know about the church, but I guess I gotta leave).

Sadly, parts of the culture are slow to get over the perception that someone who decides not to go isn't a vile sinner.

 

[ronito]

Seems to me most missions for non-Utah missionaries are more beneficial as there is less pressure to go and more of them seem to go because they want to.

Where the hell is your avatar? I miss "Yes!" Revolver.

 

[balddemon]

One thing I'm kind of worried about is the fallout from me choosing not to go on a mission. I've not flat out told my parents I'm not going, but I certainly have let enough hints slip that they should know by now, yet they (my mom at least) keep talking like I will go.

"oh you'll be on your mission by then"

"you won't need a new phone because you'll be on your mission when the contract ends"

"don't need to get you a car because you're leaving in a few months anyways"

A couple of my close LDS friends know I'm not going, but no one else inside the church does. It's really weird, because I've grown up in the same ward for probably 12 years, same adult leaders, same kids, all of whom I'm pretty good friends with. But when I don't go, I'm worried about what to do after the choice. Will my family accept me? Will the people I've grown up with, most of whom are some of my best friends (I don't have many friends outside the church, at least not in Kansas), still be my friends? I literally do not know what I can do after officially making the choice to not go. It's kind of frightening.

 

[Patryn]

One thing I'm kind of worried about is the fallout from me choosing not to go on a mission. I've not flat out told my parents I'm not going, but I certainly have let enough hints slip that they should know by now, yet they (my mom at least) keep talking like I will go.

"oh you'll be on your mission by then"

"you won't need a new phone because you'll be on your mission when the contract ends"

"don't need to get you a car because you're leaving in a few months anyways"

A couple of my close LDS friends know I'm not going, but no one else inside the church does. It's really weird, because I've grown up in the same ward for probably 12 years, same adult leaders, same kids, all of whom I'm pretty good friends with. But when I don't go, I'm worried about what to do after the choice. Will my family accept me? Will the people I've grown up with, most of whom are some of my best friends (I don't have many friends outside the church, at least not in Kansas), still be my friends? I literally do not know what I can do after officially making the choice to not go. It's kind of frightening.

I can't speak to the family bit, but for the church people, it'll probably become like the elephant in the room. Nobody will talk about it, but you'll be able to tell that everyone is silently judging you.

Expect things to get really awkward. Closer church friends may privately pressure you to go, but for the most part, as you know, Mormons don't go for the whole outburst thing. So you won't have a public shaming.

The real difficulty is in the classes after sacrament meeting, as there's really nowhere appropriate for you to go at that point.

 

[ronito]

One thing I'm kind of worried about is the fallout from me choosing not to go on a mission. I've not flat out told my parents I'm not going, but I certainly have let enough hints slip that they should know by now, yet they (my mom at least) keep talking like I will go.

"oh you'll be on your mission by then"

"you won't need a new phone because you'll be on your mission when the contract ends"

"don't need to get you a car because you're leaving in a few months anyways"

A couple of my close LDS friends know I'm not going, but no one else inside the church does. It's really weird, because I've grown up in the same ward for probably 12 years, same adult leaders, same kids, all of whom I'm pretty good friends with. But when I don't go, I'm worried about what to do after the choice. Will my family accept me? Will the people I've grown up with, most of whom are some of my best friends (I don't have many friends outside the church, at least not in Kansas), still be my friends? I literally do not know what I can do after officially making the choice to not go. It's kind of frightening.

If this is too personal to air here we can PM, but I guess the reason why you chose not to go is important.

Take it from someone that didn't go that lived in Utah, I know the social stigma that comes from not going (of course I think it's gotten slightly better now) but it was the right decision, a mission would have totally broken me and I would've left the church a decade earlier than I did and while the end result would've been the same I needed that decade to find out for myself.

Unless your reason for not going is sin related, I'd say make sure that you show your friends/parents that you can live a moral life without going on a mission. So they can't say "Well he didn't go because he just wants to drink." If it's because of doubts, then be honest about them. Tell them that you have doubts and do not feel it would be right for you to go. Many will tell you to go to a mission as a way of gaining a testimony. Stick to your guns. Good luck dude, I know it's hard.

 

[CorvoSol]

One thing I'm kind of worried about is the fallout from me choosing not to go on a mission. I've not flat out told my parents I'm not going, but I certainly have let enough hints slip that they should know by now, yet they (my mom at least) keep talking like I will go.

"oh you'll be on your mission by then"

"you won't need a new phone because you'll be on your mission when the contract ends"

"don't need to get you a car because you're leaving in a few months anyways"

A couple of my close LDS friends know I'm not going, but no one else inside the church does. It's really weird, because I've grown up in the same ward for probably 12 years, same adult leaders, same kids, all of whom I'm pretty good friends with. But when I don't go, I'm worried about what to do after the choice. Will my family accept me? Will the people I've grown up with, most of whom are some of my best friends (I don't have many friends outside the church, at least not in Kansas), still be my friends? I literally do not know what I can do after officially making the choice to not go. It's kind of frightening.

I had a friend who decided not to go on his mission when we were in high school. I remember there was a lot of tension with his parents for awhile. Eventually, like, two years later, he decided to go, but what I remember most was the weird way all my friends were looking at me during it. Like, because I always said "Oh I'm def. going" they expected me to be mad at my friend for not going.

Don't sweat not going. I know lots of guys who haven't and they're perfectly cool and normal. Unless you live in like, freaking Utah, I don't know that it's that big of a deal. You'll probably get funny looks, but between you and me? You're bound to get those anyway. I went and people looked at me funny for not going fast enough. I got home and immediately got funny looks for not being married as soon as I was off the plane.

If anyone REALLY wants to get on your butt, remind them that the prophet didn't go on a mission and he seems to be a pretty upstanding guy.

 

[balddemon]

The reason for me not going is mostly cuz I got denied a chance after doing some stupid stuff, and just have spiraled downwards since. I already don't go to the 2 hours after sacrament meeting, and whenever someone asks me when I'm leaving or putting my papers in, it's really awkward because I'm just like "ya know, whenever I get a chance" because I guess I'm too scared to alienate them.

Plus, I'm living a "moral" life but not by my parents standards. I like to go out and drink and party and hook up with girls and everything I didn't get a chance to do in HS and my first year of college. I feel as long as I'm generally a good person, I'll be fine. But my parents want more, and while I'm living in their house, it's a constant weight hanging over my head.

Right now, I'm just trying to get my life straightened out, trying to find a job, pay off debts, accumulate other debts for school, finish school, etc. Feels like I really can't take 2 years off to do something besides handle those issues.

Thanks for the guidance though, guys. Much appreciated.

EDIT: Also, I didn't know President Monson didn't go on a mission, lol.

 

[CorvoSol]

In President Monson's defense, he didn't go on a mission because he was busy fighting in World War II. He WAS a Mission President, though, so he has some experience.

As to your parents, just be respectful of their rules. You have to live your life, but you know, while you live at home, don't bring things they don't want into the house, so to speak. Does that make sense? I can't think of how to explain it better.

 

[balddemon]

In President Monson's defense, he didn't go on a mission because he was busy fighting in World War II. He WAS a Mission President, though, so he has some experience.

As to your parents, just be respectful of their rules. You have to live your life, but you know, while you live at home, don't bring things they don't want into the house, so to speak. Does that make sense? I can't think of how to explain it better.

Oh duh I knew that haha.

And yeah, I don't. While I'm inside their walls, my life is 100% clean. Minus whatever dirty language I use while playing games >_> I totally understand though.

 

[ronito]

The reason for me not going is mostly cuz I got denied a chance after doing some stupid stuff, and just have spiraled downwards since. I already don't go to the 2 hours after sacrament meeting, and whenever someone asks me when I'm leaving or putting my papers in, it's really awkward because I'm just like "ya know, whenever I get a chance" because I guess I'm too scared to alienate them.

Plus, I'm living a "moral" life but not by my parents standards. I like to go out and drink and party and hook up with girls and everything I didn't get a chance to do in HS and my first year of college. I feel as long as I'm generally a good person, I'll be fine. But my parents want more, and while I'm living in their house, it's a constant weight hanging over my head.

Right now, I'm just trying to get my life straightened out, trying to find a job, pay off debts, accumulate other debts for school, finish school, etc. Feels like I really can't take 2 years off to do something besides handle those issues.

Thanks for the guidance though, guys. Much appreciated.

EDIT: Also, I didn't know President Monson didn't go on a mission, lol.

Not to sound like a parent or anything, just don't be a jack mormon. Make sure you know which side you stand on.

 

[Deleted member 1159]

Josh Powell killed his family because of porn.

...I don't think I will be spending much more time on KSL...

 

[Yoritomo]

One thing I'm kind of worried about is the fallout from me choosing not to go on a mission. I've not flat out told my parents I'm not going, but I certainly have let enough hints slip that they should know by now, yet they (my mom at least) keep talking like I will go.

"oh you'll be on your mission by then"

"you won't need a new phone because you'll be on your mission when the contract ends"

"don't need to get you a car because you're leaving in a few months anyways"

A couple of my close LDS friends know I'm not going, but no one else inside the church does. It's really weird, because I've grown up in the same ward for probably 12 years, same adult leaders, same kids, all of whom I'm pretty good friends with. But when I don't go, I'm worried about what to do after the choice. Will my family accept me? Will the people I've grown up with, most of whom are some of my best friends (I don't have many friends outside the church, at least not in Kansas), still be my friends? I literally do not know what I can do after officially making the choice to not go. It's kind of frightening.

I saved up for 9 months and paid for my own mission. I worked full-time instead of going to school during the interim period between high school and mission.

In hindsight, I regret it. I would rather have the 3 years than the experience of a mission. At least I'm fluent in spanish. The mission itself is completely ridiculous. Maybe they've changed structures a bit but the focus on numbers and rapid conversion completely put me off, and the majority of my companions and fellow missionaries were complete idiots.

 

[ronito]

Josh Powell killed his family because of porn.

...I don't think I will be spending much more time on KSL...

You know what else he did? He drank bottled water! You don't drink bottled water do you?

 

[Yoritomo]

You know what else he did? He drank bottled water! You don't drink bottled water do you?

Don't you see? Pornography leads to masturbation, leads to mutual masturbation, leads to homosexuality, leads to psychopathic behavior, leads to murdering your family!!!

Be careful of pornography brethren or you might find yourself murdering your family.

 

[Deleted member 1159]

So I once told my mom that the sole reason I hadn't resigned from the church was out of laziness, but if I ever got harassed about returning, or if I felt like that membership in the church became a pain in my ass in any way, I'd have my name removed from the records. Well, today I got the second voice mail in a week from some Elder's Quorum President, who I'm sure is a very nice guy, wondering why I wasn't at church on Sunday....which is fucking weird because the last time I went to church actively was at least 5 years ago, and I've never been while living in Salt Lake.

Anyway, I made a joke about it on facebook and an ex-Mormon friend of mine called me out for not having resigned yet. I remembered what I had told my mom and thought, "what the hell, I'm gonna do it eventually anyway..."

After some googling I found an e-mail address (msr-confrec@ldschurch.org). I guess recently people have been using that address to send resignation letters and have had success. So I decided to give it a shot:

To whom it may concern,

My name is Thaedolus, born ... 1985, baptized ... 1993 in Fremont, California by my father ... . I served a mission in the Argentina, Rosario mission in 2005. I have not actively attended church in over 5 years and have no way of knowing which ward I am officially listed in, but it could be in ... .

I hereby immediately resign my membership to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I request that my name be permanently removed from the records of the church, and request that I am no longer contacted by anyone from the church, except to confirm the receipt and execution of my request. You may address the confirmation to this e-mail address, or my current address at ..., Salt Lake City, UT.

I do not wish to consult anyone about my decision, nor do I wish anyone else to be contacted about my decision. I kindly ask that you respect my freedom of choice as I respect yours.

Thank you very much for your time,

-Thaedolus

...any bets on the chances of this working without any further hassle, or am I going to have to go sit down with some Stake President that I've never met to explain that I can't reactivated?

 

[ronito]

I'm pretty sure they always offer to have you meet with a Bishop. Though I'm not sure.

As for me? I don't think I'll ever get my name removed. I know it sounds silly but I was raised mormon and was a member for nearly 30 years. In a sense I will always be partially mormon, despite mine and mormons' misgivings. It's too ingrained in my life for me to really leave behind.

Who knows, perhaps this is just part of the process. First I decided that I sorta believed in my own way, then it was that I didn't believe in parts but a lot of it was still good, then I realized that I just didn't believe but the church was still important to me and it hurt no one if I continued living mormon, then I realized that people were being hurt by my going to church, I didn't really want the church and the church definitely didn't want me. Who's to say that someday I wont come back and get my name completely removed.

 

[Hitokage]

ronito: It's possible they'll force the issue and try to excommunicate you.

 

[Eight Diagram Bat Fighter]

One thing I'm kind of worried about is the fallout from me choosing not to go on a mission. I've not flat out told my parents I'm not going, but I certainly have let enough hints slip that they should know by now, yet they (my mom at least) keep talking like I will go.

"oh you'll be on your mission by then"

"you won't need a new phone because you'll be on your mission when the contract ends"

"don't need to get you a car because you're leaving in a few months anyways"

A couple of my close LDS friends know I'm not going, but no one else inside the church does. It's really weird, because I've grown up in the same ward for probably 12 years, same adult leaders, same kids, all of whom I'm pretty good friends with. But when I don't go, I'm worried about what to do after the choice. Will my family accept me? Will the people I've grown up with, most of whom are some of my best friends (I don't have many friends outside the church, at least not in Kansas), still be my friends? I literally do not know what I can do after officially making the choice to not go. It's kind of frightening.

My two brothers didn't go, and we were fine with that. My parents encouraged, but never forced. I went for myself and not because my parents forced me to and I feel it was the coolest thing I have ever experienced and taught me a lot about what I am capable of. And I went at a much later age of 24 when I felt ready.

Maybe you don't want to go, or maybe you just need more time. Regardless of which, you should tell your parents that if you're going, it's going to be because you want to, not because they want you to. If you're not doing it for yourself and have no desire to serve, you're wasting your time and the church's time. Some change around, but a lot more are sent home. The "Many are called but few are chosen" line is very true when it comes to missionary work.

 

[CorvoSol]

I don't mean to be a uhm, spoil sport, but can we just avoid the subject of Josh Powell? My parents know the Coxes, and the whole thing is a little close to home for me.

Oh! Uh, last time I checked asking to have your records removed or your name removed from the records or yourself put down as "do not contact" was usually enough. Frankly, I wish more people would do that. It'd avoid a lot of uncomfortable situations for everyone if people would just say, "Hey take me off the records." Or something. Because then we at least have a note saying "Hey guys don't go back there." Church records are occasionally a very messy thing. It used to drive me mad when Bishops would ask me to go down the ward roster and contact everyone on it to find out if they still lived there. I'd see names repeated like, 3 times.

 

[ronito]

ronito: It's possible they'll force the issue and try to excommunicate you.

True. But I doubt it. As much vitrol as I get from Mormons I'm really rather harmless. Besides if my Mom in law can go to church weekly and talk about praying to heavenly mother and vibrations and all that and be fine, church's got nothing to worry about from me and I've got nothing to worry about from the church.

 

[ronito]

My two brothers didn't go, and we were fine with that. My parents encouraged, but never forced. I went for myself and not because my parents forced me to and I feel it was the coolest thing I have ever experienced and taught me a lot about what I am capable of. And I went at a much later age of 24 when I felt ready.

Maybe you don't want to go, or maybe you just need more time. Regardless of which, you should tell your parents that if you're going, it's going to be because you want to, not because they want you to. If you're not doing it for yourself and have no desire to serve, you're wasting your time and the church's time. Some change around, but a lot more are sent home. The "Many are called but few are chosen" line is very true when it comes to missionary work.

24? I thought the cut off was 23. Did they move it up? I never got the whole "cut off" thing.

I don't mean to be a uhm, spoil sport, but can we just avoid the subject of Josh Powell? My parents know the Coxes, and the whole thing is a little close to home for me.

Yeah the whole thing is a mess.
Got Mormons saying "See what happens when you stop believing?/See what pron does to you?!" Meanwhile you got exmormons saying "See what the church does to you?"

Dude was just a messed up guy. There's messed up guys everywhere in every religion. It's a terrible situation.

 

[Eight Diagram Bat Fighter]

24? I thought the cut off was 23. Did they move it up? I never got the whole "cut off" thing.


Yeah the whole thing is a mess.
Got Mormons saying "See what happens when you stop believing?/See what pron does to you?!" Meanwhile you got exmormons saying "See what the church does to you?"

Dude was just a messed up guy. There's messed up guys everywhere in every religion. It's a terrible situation.

Had a guy on my mission who was 27. As far as Josh Powell is concerned, or anything else, I avoid religious opinions on it from others because religion-based opinions aren't always needed on every single matter where the person happens/happened to be Mormon. Save it for the more important stuff.

 

[CorvoSol]

24? I thought the cut off was 23. Did they move it up? I never got the whole "cut off" thing.


Yeah the whole thing is a mess.
Got Mormons saying "See what happens when you stop believing?/See what pron does to you?!" Meanwhile you got exmormons saying "See what the church does to you?"

Dude was just a messed up guy. There's messed up guys everywhere in every religion. It's a terrible situation.

Yeah. That's really all I see in it. It's a terrible tragedy and I just feel really bad for the Coxes. I mean, they lost their daughter, then their son in-law got unhinged, now they've lost their grandkids, the WBC wanted to use their suffering for attention and, I don't know. I just think about the times I lost people near me, and how much harder it would be if everyone were using my suffering for their platform.

Had a guy on my mission who was 27.

Me too! Guy was hilarious. I was with him toward the end of his mission, and we were out walking to lunch one day and he just stopped dead in the street and shouted, "I can't take it anymore!" I stared at him for like, five minutes trying to figure out if he meant the day-to-day grind of the mission or the uh, impending marriage awaiting him when he got home and all that that entailed.

 

[ronito]

Had a guy on my mission who was 27.

really? When I was coming up on mission time (mid 90s) they said 23 was the limit unless you had special permission otherwise.

I didn't get why the church would turn away anyone that wanted to serve. But then that was probably back when they had more missionaries than they knew what to do with.

 

[Eight Diagram Bat Fighter]

really? When I was coming up on mission time (mid 90s) they said 23 was the limit unless you had special permission otherwise.

I didn't get why the church would turn away anyone that wanted to serve. But then that was probably back when they had more missionaries than they knew what to do with.

The reason was because that is the best time to find a wife, and marriage is much more important than serving a mission, but for new converts, they make exceptions due to those wanting the experience they wouldn't get if they were older. But exceptions only went to those who had nothing else going on and were free to serve.

 

[CorvoSol]

really? When I was coming up on mission time (mid 90s) they said 23 was the limit unless you had special permission otherwise.

I didn't get why the church would turn away anyone that wanted to serve. But then that was probably back when they had more missionaries than they knew what to do with.

From what I understand, it goes like this: Any young man who passes an interview with his Bishop can apply starting at 18. He can go from ages 19-25 (or is it 26?), hitting 27ish while he's out. Any woman 21 until dead can go.

This is slightly off topic, but the topic about Muslim super heroes has reminded me of one of my own questions: Are there any actual LDS super heroes in comics? I heard rumors that Cypher was supposed to be one, but I think that was just someone confusing him with Ultimate Doug Ramsey, who was a parody of Ken Jennings.

 

[ronito]

The reason was because that is the best time to find a wife, and marriage is much more important than serving a mission, but for new converts, they make exceptions due to those wanting the experience they wouldn't get if they were older. But exceptions only went to those who had nothing else going on and were free to serve.

ah that does make sense.

 

[ronito]

From what I understand, it goes like this: Any young man who passes an interview with his Bishop can apply starting at 18. He can go from ages 19-25 (or is it 26?), hitting 27ish while he's out. Any woman 21 until dead can go.

This is slightly off topic, but the topic about Muslim super heroes has reminded me of one of my own questions: Are there any actual LDS super heroes in comics? I heard rumors that Cypher was supposed to be one, but I think that was just someone confusing him with Ultimate Doug Ramsey, who was a parody of Ken Jennings.

Here's something interesting. Though I don't know how reliable it is

http://www.comicbookreligion.com/?Religion=Latter-day_Saint_/_Mormon&Hero=1

 

[Laurentius]

Here's something interesting. Though I don't know how reliable it is

http://www.comicbookreligion.com/?Religion=Latter-day_Saint_/_Mormon&Hero=1

I don't know much about any of those comic book characters, but I know for a fact that the Red Prophet isn't Mormon. Just because the author is Mormon doesn't make the character Mormon...

Yes, I know that the Alvin Maker series is loosely based on the life of Joseph Smith, but Mormonism doesn't exist at all in that universe.

 

[Bornstellar]

Way too much in here to catch up with, but I'll weigh in on one point nonetheless. I'm an active member and I can say that a mission IS a waste of time if you don't have some testimony of the truthfulness of the Gospel. As for myself, my mission has been the most valuable experience of my life thus far. Without going into the nitty-gritty (a medium as impersonal as this forum won't do, sorry), my mission has not only provided me with a body of evidence of the truthfulness of the work, but has improved my life in every imaginable way. That's coming from someone who is about as cynical and critical as you can get. Though of course I can't convince anyone based on my experience - you have to live it yourself.

Short version: Church is true.

 

[Bornstellar]

The reason for me not going is mostly cuz I got denied a chance after doing some stupid stuff, and just have spiraled downwards since. I already don't go to the 2 hours after sacrament meeting, and whenever someone asks me when I'm leaving or putting my papers in, it's really awkward because I'm just like "ya know, whenever I get a chance" because I guess I'm too scared to alienate them.

Plus, I'm living a "moral" life but not by my parents standards. I like to go out and drink and party and hook up with girls and everything I didn't get a chance to do in HS and my first year of college. I feel as long as I'm generally a good person, I'll be fine. But my parents want more, and while I'm living in their house, it's a constant weight hanging over my head.

Right now, I'm just trying to get my life straightened out, trying to find a job, pay off debts, accumulate other debts for school, finish school, etc. Feels like I really can't take 2 years off to do something besides handle those issues.

Thanks for the guidance though, guys. Much appreciated.

EDIT: Also, I didn't know President Monson didn't go on a mission, lol.

I guess I'll respond to this as well. The choice is yours to make - don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Now, this may ring hollow coming from someone who doesn't know you (I'm well aware of this), but if you choose to do a little searching, clean up, and serve a mission - it will be the best thing that you have ever done. One of my companions in the MTC had been in a similar situation and had finally decided to go at age 26 after surviving a wreck on his motorcycle. Having known him from the beginning until the end two years later, the change was absolutely remarkable. But for better or worse, the choice is yours.

 

[Deleted member 1159]

I don't mean to be a uhm, spoil sport, but can we just avoid the subject of Josh Powell? My parents know the Coxes, and the whole thing is a little close to home for me.

Oh! Uh, last time I checked asking to have your records removed or your name removed from the records or yourself put down as "do not contact" was usually enough. Frankly, I wish more people would do that. It'd avoid a lot of uncomfortable situations for everyone if people would just say, "Hey take me off the records." Or something. Because then we at least have a note saying "Hey guys don't go back there." Church records are occasionally a very messy thing. It used to drive me mad when Bishops would ask me to go down the ward roster and contact everyone on it to find out if they still lived there. I'd see names repeated like, 3 times.

See, I specifically asked a nice old lady from "headquarters" who called me asking for my address a couple years back to not to contact me again, and I thought it had worked. Apparently not, unless someone outside the regular chain of command (like a concerned relative) threw my number out to the Elders Quorum President. I find that unlikely though because I heard from three other inactive/ex-Mormon friends that they got calls out of the blue in the past couple weeks.

Anyway, I got a letter in the mail today. I am shocked at how quickly it came, but basically it was the standard "We have received your letter and are writing to inform you that it is an ecclesiastical matter. We have forwarded it to your Stake President in such and such stake, who will instruct your Bishop in such and such ward to contact you..."

I'm undecided on how to proceed from here. I have every right to refuse any further contact and just wait for the confirmation that my records have been removed. On the other hand, I know that the Stake President and Bishop are probably simply following the protocol laid out for them in the church handbook in good faith, and I don't want to be a disrespectful dick. I really haven't had any bad experiences with a Bishop or Stake President, they've always been genuine to me. I will probably wait for their response, politely decline to meet with them and await the removal confirmation in another month or so. But there is some appeal to going in and pleading my case for disbelief. Meh. I'll wait and see.

 

[Barrett2]

Interesting Slate graph showing Mormon population by county. Great Plains hates Mormons.

Link

 

[ronito]

What I find interesting is the dearth of Mormons in the great plains broken up with a county as dark as Utah. That's weird. Also I was surprised by the fact that mormons weren't more populus in Arizona. I mean that's part of the mormon corridor.

 

[JetBlackPanda]

I know this has come up a few times on GAF.

LDS Church issues statement after report of proxy baptism for Anne Frank

SALT LAKE CITY -- The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is again warning its members not to submit names of Holocaust victims for proxy baptism. The church statement comes on the same day of reports that Anne Frank was posthumously baptized last week.

According to the Huffington Post, former LDS church member and Salt Lake City researcher Helen Radkey reported the ordinance for Annelies Marie Frank (1929-1945) was recorded as taking place in the Santo Domingo Dominican Republic Temple on Feb. 18, 2012.

The LDS Church and Jewish leaders agreed in 1995 that the church would not allow the posthumous baptism of Holocaust victims except in the case of direct ancestors of Mormons. Last week church leaders apologized to the family of Holocaust survivor and Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal after his parents were posthumously baptized.

Frank died at the Bergen Belsen death camp in 1945 at age 15. Radkey said versions of Frank's name have been submitted at least a dozen times for proxy rites and the ordinance has been performed at least nine times from 1989 to 1999.

In response to questions about violations of the Church's proxy baptism policy, the Church said it will consider whether Church disciplinary action should be taken against those who violate the rule.

"The Church keeps its word and is absolutely firm in its commitment to not accept the names of Holocaust victims for proxy baptism," the statement reads. "It takes a good deal of deception and manipulation to get an improper submission through the safeguards we have put in place.

"While no system is foolproof in preventing the handful of individuals who are determined to falsify submissions we are committed to taking action against individual abusers by suspending the submitter's access privileges. We will also consider whether other Church disciplinary action should be taken.

"It is distressing when an individual willfully violates the Church's policy and something that should be understood to be an offering based on love and respect becomes a source of contention."

Mormons believe posthumous baptism by proxy allows deceased persons to receive the Gospel in the afterlife. The church believes departed souls can then accept or reject the baptismal rites and contends the offerings are not intended to offend anyone.

 

[Deleted member 1159]

BTW if anyone's interested, I received a call from the bishop my letter was forwarded to last week. I've never met the man, but he was very cordial and basically explained that if I wanted to resign, I needed to send him a signed letter requesting it and he'd pass it up the proper channels for me. He wasn't rude or condemning at all, but he did ask what the reason was and I (briefly) explained myself to him. He was very kind and said even if I wasn't a member anymore, I could always call if I needed anything. It was a rather pleasant and easy phone call.

I sent the letter Saturday. Waiting for confirmation that my request has been carried out.

 

[ronito]

BTW if anyone's interested, I received a call from the bishop my letter was forwarded to last week. I've never met the man, but he was very cordial and basically explained that if I wanted to resign, I needed to send him a signed letter requesting it and he'd pass it up the proper channels for me. He wasn't rude or condemning at all, but he did ask what the reason was and I (briefly) explained myself to him. He was very kind and said even if I wasn't a member anymore, I could always call if I needed anything. It was a rather pleasant and easy phone call.

I sent the letter Saturday. Waiting for confirmation that my request has been carried out.

That's interesting. Good that the guy was cordial. I wonder if they get cynical "Oh another resignation letter from another heretic..."

I have no envy for Bishops they have a tough job and get no credit/pay for it.

 

[ronito]

Saw this today and it gave me a good laugh.

 

[ronito]

Another day mo' drama:

http://www.abc4.com/content/news/to...ersial-statements/viRppZCGfEyX4U9RI5aYXw.cspx

SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) – Comments made by a BYU Theology professor opening up old wounds about the LDS church’s policy on African Americans and priesthood.

It was June 9th, 1978 when LDS President Spencer Kimball announced the church was opening its priesthood ranks to all worthy men. Some 30 years later the question why the church denied African Americans priesthood once again taking center stage because a Mormon is running for President.

During an interview with The Washington Post BYU Professor Randy Bott’s explains the denial of priesthood to blacks as saving them from “the lowest rungs of hell reserved for people who abuse their priesthood powers.”

Bott quoted as saying, "You couldn't fall off the top of the ladder because you weren't on the top of the ladder. So, in reality the blacks not having the priesthood was the greatest blessing god could give them."

Don Harwell is the president of the Genesis group for African American Mormons. “How do people come up with this stuff?” asked Harwell. "I get confused and a little discouraged that people still think this way."

Even more disappointing to Harwell is Bott had served in local leadership positions within the church such as a bishop, high councilor and mission president.

Harwell said, "I have yet to read in the scriptures that says the Lord denied us the priesthood. I could be wrong but I read my scriptures every night."

The LDS church had no comment on Bott’s recent interview, but LDS apostle Jeffrey Holland had this to say during an interview with PBS in 2006. "We simply do not know why that practice, that policy, that doctrine was in place,” said Holland.

This much is clear to Harwell. "If it was a commandment believe me it would be written down there would be no mistaking it.”

Which prompted the church to release this statement as damage control:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=19...-tolerate-racism-in-any-form&s_cid=featured-1

SALT LAKE CITY — The LDS Church responded Wednesday to statements made to the Washington Post by a popular Brigham Young University professor.

In a Feb. 28 Washington Post article, Randy Bott, an associate professor in BYU's Department of Church History, provided what he reportedly believed to be a possible explanation for the church's policy until 1978 of forbidding blacks from holding the priesthood.

"What is discrimination?" Bott told the Post. "I think that is keeping something from somebody that would be a benefit for them, right? But what if it wouldn't have been a benefit to them?"

Bott reportedly told the Post the ban protected blacks from what the newspaper described as "the lowest rungs of hell," where they would have been sent had they abused their priesthood powers.

"You couldn't fall off the top of the ladder, because you weren't on the top of the ladder," he reportedly told the Post. "So, in reality the blacks not having the priesthood was the greatest blessing God could give them."

In a statement issued Wednesday by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Spokesperson Michael Purdy said Bott's statements "absolutely do not represent the teachings and doctrines" of the LDS Church, adding that "it is unfortunate that the Church was not given a chance to respond to what others said."

"The Church's position is clear—we believe all people are God's children and are equal in His eyes and in the Church," Purdy said. "We do not tolerate racism in any form … We condemn racism, including any and all past racism by individuals both inside and outside the Church."

Bott reportedly told the Post that the Book of Abraham, a text found in LDS scripture, suggests descendants of Egyptus — herself a descendant of Cain, who according to Christian theology killed his brother — and Ham, himself cursed, were black-skinned because of the curse, and thus banned from holding the priesthood.

Purdy said it is not clear why the restriction on blacks holding the priesthood was put in place, or why it was lifted in 1978, but that attempts to explain the restriction should be "viewed as speculation and opinion, not doctrine."

"The Church is not bound by speculation or opinions given with limited understanding," Purdy said.

University officials added Wednesday to Purdy's comments.

"The comments attributed to Professor Bott do not reflect the teachings in the classroom at Brigham Young University," said Terry Ball, dean of Religious Education at BYU.

The Church also posted Wednesday on its newsroom blog a more detailed explanation of the history of the ban and an unequivocal condemnation of "any and all past racism by individuals both inside and outside the Church."

"The gospel of Jesus Christ is for everyone," the post read. "The Book of Mormon states, ‘black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God.'"

I actually studied under Terry Ball when I was at BYU. But the irony is that when I was at BYU I was taught similar stuff from at least two different teachers (one of which was a son of a prophet). The reasoning that the blacks weren't given the priesthood because they couldn't "handle" it and that it was a mercy instead of racism is hardly new.

 

[Mudita]

Thought I would peek into this thread because I recently moved to Utah and have been being exposed to Mormonism for the first time really. I did a lot of internet reading when I first got here and was fascinated for awhile by the history and some of the more wacky aspects. I have also lived in the deep south and there people bring up their religion all the time, but here I have yet to have any Mormon talk about being a Mormon. And I usually only know they're Mormon because they don't drink coffee + super clean cut or I see a BYU shirt or something like that. It's like figuring out they're mormon sneaks up on me, like the time this woman was talking on her cell obnoxiously on the bus and then started mentioning things like bishops and wards and I was like aha! It's one of those Mormons I keep hearing about! No one has tried to convert me, which is nice.

 

[Bornstellar]

It's an important issue to understand and I feel that far too many members simply attempt to ignore it or (worse possibly) justify it with non-doctrine.

My own opinion is that the Church as a whole was hindered by the type of racism prevalent in the United States (and the Church membership) at the time. The priesthood was withheld not by commandment or revelation (let us consider those black members who were given the priesthood in the earliest days of the Church), but by the prejudices of those who professed belief. It strikes me as similar to the plight of the Gentiles after the death and resurrection of Christ who were subject to similar prejudices from the jewish base of the early Church.

There's a good article on the issue here.

 

[Bornstellar]

Thought I would peek into this thread because I recently moved to Utah and have been being exposed to Mormonism for the first time really. I did a lot of internet reading when I first got here and was fascinated for awhile by the history and some of the more wacky aspects. I have also lived in the deep south and there people bring up their religion all the time, but here I have yet to have any Mormon talk about being a Mormon. And I usually only know they're Mormon because they don't drink coffee + super clean cut or I see a BYU shirt or something like that. It's like figuring out they're mormon sneaks up on me, like the time this woman was talking on her cell obnoxiously on the bus and then started mentioning things like bishops and wards and I was like aha! It's one of those Mormons I keep hearing about! No one has tried to convert me, which is nice.

The thing that you have to know about Utah is that everyone assumes you are Mormon until you do something to show otherwise. Be warned though, as soon as someone finds out expect a visit from the missionaries. Please be kind to them and if you are genuinely not interested let them know. Furthermore, personally, I only bring up my faith when asked or when it is pertinent to the conversation (though people tend to figure it out fairly quickly in normal environments).

 

[ronito]

It's an important issue to understand and I feel that far too many members simply attempt to ignore it or (worse possibly) justify it with non-doctrine.

My own opinion is that the Church as a whole was hindered by the type of racism prevalent in the United States (and the Church membership) at the time. The priesthood was withheld not by commandment or revelation (let us consider those black members who were given the priesthood in the earliest days of the Church), but by the prejudices of those who professed belief. It strikes me as similar to the plight of the Gentiles after the death and resurrection of Christ who were subject to similar prejudices from the jewish base of the early Church.

There's a good article on the issue here.

I could understand the argument of "it was just the times!" if the ban hadn't taken until 1978, well after the civil rights movement and a lot of the cultural stigma was gone. If the church had done this in the 60s that argument would make sense, even the late sixties/early seventies. But 1978? Come on, we're looking at something more systemic than just going with the tide.

I also think that the church is in a sticky spot with it. For decades they went around enforcing the priesthood ban as prophecy. But they can't really go back and say, "Oh yeah, all that stuff? It was just some dude's opinion after all!" Because then the membership will start thinking "Well if THAT was just opinion, what else is just opinion?" So the church ends up doing a tap dance around it using code words like "imperfect knowledge" or "We don't know why God made us do that." and stuff and it just looks and feels disingenuous, because frankly it is.

 

[Bornstellar]

I could understand the argument of "it was just the times!" if the ban hadn't taken until 1978, well after the civil rights movement and a lot of the cultural stigma was gone. If the church had done this in the 60s that argument would make sense, even the late sixties/early seventies. But 1978? Come on, we're looking at something more systemic than just going with the tide.

I also think that the church is in a sticky spot with it. For decades they went around enforcing the priesthood ban as prophecy. But they can't really go back and say, "Oh yeah, all that stuff? It was just some dude's opinion after all!" Because then the membership will start thinking "Well if THAT was just opinion, what else is just opinion?" So the church ends up doing a tap dance around it using code words like "imperfect knowledge" or "We don't know why God made us do that." and stuff and it just looks and feels disingenuous, because frankly it is.

It's naive to say that all racist feeling had left the country during the 60's - some still persists today as many well know. Nor was it ever enforced as prophecy though perhaps taught as doctrine (without the support of revelation - what may be described as false doctrine), only policy. Similar to how many members believe any consumption of caffeine is contrary to the word of wisdom (though it is not) and have sought to enforce that standard. The teaching of opinion as doctrine has always been disingenuous and is hopefully something that more members will come to avoid. We must remember that the church as it is composed by the members is a fallible entity, thus the doctrine of revelation is required to perfect the church in the same way that each individual member must undergo the slow process of perfection.

 

[ronito]

It's naive to say that all racist feeling had left the country during the 60's - some still persists today as many well know. Nor was it ever enforced as prophecy though perhaps taught as doctrine (without the support of revelation - what may be described as false doctrine), only policy. Similar to how many members believe any consumption of caffeine is contrary to the word of wisdom (though it is not) and have sought to enforce that standard. The teaching of opinion as doctrine has always been disingenuous and is hopefully something that more members will come to avoid. We must remember that the church as it is composed by the members is a fallible entity, thus the doctrine of revelation is required to perfect the church in the same way that each individual member must undergo the slow process of perfection.

That's a fair statement but I don't find it out of place to say that a religion stopping a race based policy in 1978 is far too late to attribute to public sentitment. Further I also understand that it's due to opinion but to say it's like caffiene isn't necessarily a fair comparison. First off obviously if your bishop kept you from the temple because you drank Pepsi you'd be right to complain to your stake president and he'd set it right. Further the stance on not drinking Pepsi hasn't been reiterated by the first presidency over and over.

I get that the "men are fallible" argument will be made but this seems a little beyond the pale. We're not talking about saying "Mr. Jones is a dirty poo poo head." We're talking 145 years of systemic denial of the fullness of the gospel to an entire race, something that can only continue if the entire leadership is not only fallible but majorly so. Ergo why I say the church is in a sticky situation with this. What can they really say in their defense?

Back to the latest news. More news on this professor:

http://thestudentreview.org/2012/02...asted-for-interview-with-the-washignton-post/

BYU Professor Randy Bott, well known for his mission preparation classes, was quoted in the Washington Post Tuesday explaining blacks’ denial of Mormon priesthood until 1978 as an act of God’s discrimination and the blacks’ lack of preparedness.

The article says Bott then went on to compare blacks to a young child asking for the keys to the car.

BYU Spokeswoman Carri Jenkins said in an interview BYU was not aware Bott had spoken to any media.

“Professors are free to speak when it comes to their research and subject,” she said, “but we ask that they do not speak on behalf of the Church or BYU.”

Jenkins neither confirmed or denied rumors of Bott possibly being fired saying, “We are handling it internally.”

Many students were upset including Terrell Wyche, a black BYU graduate.

“I refuse to believe God is discriminatory to anyone,” Wyche stated in a Facebook message in the page of the Provo Peace Forum, “at least not the God I know and love.”

Camlyn Giddins, another a black student currently studying at BYU, said she found little to worry about in it.

“It’s just an opinion, so why should I get mad?” she said.

Of all these voices, however, the one that came down loudest and hardest was that of the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In what may have been record time, the Church leaders issued a public response through the LDS/Mormon Newsroom clearly stating Bott’s views were his own.

In fact, when asked to explain his position on the situation, Bott emailed the Student Review with only a link to the press release and the statement: “I have been asked by the Church to forward their response and endorse it. In order to be obedient, that will be the extent of my comment.”

The document reads, ”BYU faculty members do not speak for the Church. It is unfortunate that the Church was not given a chance to respond to what others said. The Church’s position is clear—we believe all people are God’s children and are equal in His eyes and in the Church. We do not tolerate racism in any form.”

It then went on to state that there is no officially known reason as to why the priesthood was withheld from blacks.

In actuality I do feel really bad for this guy. I mean he's getting publically crucified and apparently internally so as well for something that I was taught openly several times at the church's own university and heard in church not more than 12 years ago and something that was no doubt a prevelant theory and still is in some circles.

 

[Laurentius]

Re: the Church's response.

I liked this part:

We condemn racism, including any and all past racism by individuals both inside and outside the Church.

I think it's a step forward to admit that there has been racism in the church, and to try to come to terms with that.

To bad it flies in the face of this:

It is not known precisely why, how, or when this restriction began in the Church but what is clear is that it ended decades ago.

I'm just kind of sick of the church's current "we just don't know" policy. Everytime something difficult comes up in the church the official response is "we just don't know, have faith". Seriously, the church claims to be the one true church with a living prophet, and yet the church still cannot give answers to most of the difficult questions facing it. It's the church's duty to honestly respond to these things. They've caused so much heartache and suffering even among members of the church (I'm not just talking about blacks and the priesthood, but about all of the problems that people have with the church). Myself included.