Support NeoGAF

[mik]

The church changing isn't itself a problem. The church is changing because it HAS a problem. When you're losing market share--losing adherents--you have to change the message.

 

[CorvoSol]

You know I think you touched on something really important here.

There's a big difference between the older mormons and the younger set, and it's much more so than the typical generational gap.

My wife's family is as mormon as they come. I mean they can trace their ancestors back to the pioneers that came across with Brigham Young even to Joseph Smith. And have so much genealogy done that they don't even try anymore because they've gone back so far they can't find anything else. One thing that my father in law said sticks with me. He said, "The church as it is now is not the same church."

And I get that. Religion changes as time goes on but it's a very drastic change. If you look at my father in law's father the church is a little different but not much really. Compare him to his father and you'll find the same. But the church we have now compared his church is very different.

Heck, even the church now compared to the church I grew up with is very different. Soda ok, mastrbation now in "questionable" area instead of a damnable sin, the church not being involved in married couple's bedrooms, "mormon doctrine" out of print for good, no more talk about 'less valiant/more valiant' in the pre-existence. white and delightsome is essentially gone, prophets saying that they don't know if man can become gods, no more blood oaths. And I mean that's just in the last 15-20 years.

I mean talking with my wife's uncle he was talking about how Polygamy was a divine practice that we stopped because people couldn't handle it (just like the law of consecration). And I think if most mormons heard that today they'd be really creeped out. But honestly, where I grew up in very conservative utah county that wouldn't have been even out of place. I remember one of my BYU professors talking about how he knew he had a very righteous granddaugther because she said if polygamy was brought back she'd gladly take part for god. And no one batted an eye at it. that was in like 97. Now I doubt a BYU professor could say it and not have some sort of push back.

More and more I see the church "genericizing" itself pushing away from the doctrines that it taught and changing so quickly. I think it's a bit of a problem.

I wouldn't go that far. Even in Brazil, which is about as liberal as the Church can be right now, we joked about Polygamy rather openly. One of my companions is of the same lot as Romney, having descended from the missionaries who went to continue Polygamy in Mexico.

But things must change in the Church. That's always been a part of what it means to be Mormon. Change is a welcome and inevitable part of our religion. Seventies have varied in meaning and capacity about a gajillion times, all before I was even born. The age of missionaries and the length of missions.

And some things must be exorcised from the Church. We cannot continue on as a people with the some of the things people believed when my father was young. Namely, the beliefs concerning race. If we are to survive, and we shall, then those awkward and frankly obtuse beliefs about race must go.

But Mormonism's core will remain, I think. We will always believe that Joseph saw God and Jesus in the flesh. We will always believe that marriage in the temple is essential, we will always believe in the Book of Mormon, in Jesus, and in green jello. Those things haven't changed since my grandfather was young, and I don't think they will change between now and the days of my own grandchildren. Yes, Temple ceremonies have changed, and yes, the Church no longer prints books that were once common and easy to find, but I mean, what good is it saying we have a Prophet who speaks to God all the time if we're not willing to accept that "continuous revelation" brings with it an element of alteration and adaptability.

Someone once compared the Church to a nation to me, and it makes a great deal of sense in this scenario. America is a radically different place now from its founding, but in many ways, the country is the same as it ever was at its core.

The more things change and all that.

 

[mik]

Makes more sense to compare it to a corporation--one that's fighting for marketshare against competitors with their own compelling offers and propositions. If you're going to attract new clients, you need to improve those propositions and reframe your message from time to time to create brand preference.

 

[Fathead]

The more inclusive and the less exclusive the better. All of the changes are moving away from being stuck in the 1800s and realizing the way people live is changing. 1820s morality doesn't work in 2012 any more than an iPhone would work in 1820.

 

[ronito]

The more inclusive and the less exclusive the better. All of the changes are moving away from being stuck in the 1800s and realizing the way people live is changing. 1820s morality doesn't work in 2012 any more than an iPhone would work in 1820.

So that goes along with my theory of evolutionary religion (which I'll probably post a thread about in a few). But really the church claims to be the same today, yesterday and tomorrow. That God and the law is unchanging.

I loved Hinckley he is my favorite prophet of my lifetime. But I think he push the church too much into the mainstream and it's created what I think is a silent crisis of faith in the church, even if they membership doesn't know about it.

I get that it has to change, but there's been more change in the last 20 years than there were in the prior 70 (excluding the blacks and priesthood thing which was really one big change).
There are always changes in administration I get that.

I wouldn't go that far. Even in Brazil, which is about as liberal as the Church can be right now, we joked about Polygamy rather openly. One of my companions is of the same lot as Romney, having descended from the missionaries who went to continue Polygamy in Mexico.

There is a big difference from joking to full on endorsing.

But things must change in the Church. That's always been a part of what it means to be Mormon. Change is a welcome and inevitable part of our religion. Seventies have varied in meaning and capacity about a gajillion times, all before I was even born. The age of missionaries and the length of missions.

And some things must be exorcised from the Church. We cannot continue on as a people with the some of the things people believed when my father was young. Namely, the beliefs concerning race. If we are to survive, and we shall, then those awkward and frankly obtuse beliefs about race must go.

This I will agree with. But one must really think if the book of mormon is the most correct book on earth, then it should spawn few changes.

But Mormonism's core will remain, I think. We will always believe that Joseph saw God and Jesus in the flesh. We will always believe that marriage in the temple is essential, we will always believe in the Book of Mormon, in Jesus, and in green jello. Those things haven't changed since my grandfather was young, and I don't think they will change between now and the days of my own grandchildren. Yes, Temple ceremonies have changed, and yes, the Church no longer prints books that were once common and easy to find, but I mean, what good is it saying we have a Prophet who speaks to God all the time if we're not willing to accept that "continuous revelation" brings with it an element of alteration and adaptability.

But that's my point, the core keeps getting smaller. Eventually it will become "I believe in Joseph Smith and the Prophet" and that's it. And while I guess that's enough, it does pose a problem for the older generation like my wife's family. Who are perplexed to find themselves in a church with a smaller core than they grew up with.
Someone once compared the Church to a nation to me, and it makes a great deal of sense in this scenario. America is a radically different place now from its founding, but in many ways, the country is the same as it ever was at its core.

The more things change and all that.[/QUOTE]

 

[CorvoSol]

This I will agree with. But one must really think if the book of mormon is the most correct book on earth, then it should spawn few changes.

I'm running behind this morning, but I thought I should address this point. It's worth noting that even IN the Book of Mormon the Church undergoes quite a few changes from the time of Nephi to the time of Moroni. Granted the coming of Christ is a part of that, but there is still quite a few shifts. Remember the old "line upon line thing".

As to losing the core, I have to disagree. I see your point, I mean, if I lived in a time before the Temple Ceremonies changed, I'd have been inclined to believe that that in itself was something untouchable, but then, if I'd been around during Polygamy I would have said the same of that, too. All the same, I feel there is a solid core that cannot be touched and that it's more substantial than just Joseph and the modern prophet. The Church will always believe in the Priesthood, the Book of Mormon, the temples, missionary work, having apostles, prophets seventies, bishops and all, having a Relief Society etc. There will always be the standard works, and the Church's ever-growing library of General conferences will always be there.

Something you're also not taking into account, which you should with any group of people who under go a lot of what could be classified as reforms, is the back-push. Today things become "generic" but give another sixty years and my grand children might be seeing a push back toward more classical Mormonism, hopefully without the errors it entailed.

That said, even Christ and His apostles adjusted the Church.

I think, to better explain, and I hope this makes as much sense written as in my head, my point, I think that the methodology of Mormonism can change, but the beliefs will not. Consider Polygamy. We don't practice it the same way, but it still exists within the Church. A man whose wife has passed away may be sealed to another knowing he will have both in the Resurrection. Or Polytheism. Although the Church has all the trappings of a Monotheistic Church and functionally is one, we still believe in a Goddess and in Gods besides God, Christ and the Holy Spirit. We don't endorse worship of them, but scripturally Adam and Jacob are Gods already. And these are things which, here at BYU they STILL openly will teach. People have been referring euphemistically to exaltation for years now, but everyone I've ever known will ultimately still be able to tell you that it means that the faithful will become Gods.

 

[ronito]

Yeah I get what you mean. I just see a lot of my wife's family and my older friends being like "WTF? That's not right." when it comes to the church today and there are times I myself am like that.

And yeah Jesus did adjust administration but he didn't go saying "Oh yeah I don't teach that anymore."

But I get you. I do think someday there will be a group that does a return.

 

[CorvoSol]

Yeah I get what you mean. I just see a lot of my wife's family and my older friends being like "WTF? That's not right." when it comes to the church today and there are times I myself am like that.

And yeah Jesus did adjust administration but he didn't go saying "Oh yeah I don't teach that anymore."

But I get you. I do think someday there will be a group that does a return.

He also didn't ever make mistakes.

The cool thing though, is that we can see each other's point and disagree and be cool about it. My AFP class is great for this reason, because we talk about all manner of disagreements Church leaders have had with others and each other and how they just kinda moved on anyway.

 

[Pollux]

Ronito,

For the sake of comparison since I'm not all that familiar with the Mormon Church, but would it be a valid comparison to say that the "crisis of faith" happening within the Mormon Church on account of the rapid changes you've been mentioning is similar to the crisis of faith that began in the Catholic Church post Vatican II?

 

[ronito]

Ronito,

For the sake of comparison since I'm not all that familiar with the Mormon Church, but would it be a valid comparison to say that the "crisis of faith" happening within the Mormon Church on account of the rapid changes you've been mentioning is similar to the crisis of faith that began in the Catholic Church post Vatican II?

Sorry man for taking a while.

Keep in mind I'm probably making it bigger than what most mormons would believe. But I don't really think it's much like Vatican 2. The thing with vatican 2's crisis was caused by explicit action by the leadership. While mormonism's is caused by lack of explicit action. They let the church be what it is as interpreted by each member in large part.

So now we have some polar opposites from where the church was. For example, masturbation as an abomination was fairly common place just 15 years ago whereas now you'll see many saying it's akin to swearing, not great but not terrible, it's just a bad habit. The leadership continues to say masturbation is bad, but unlike before (under the days of Benson and before) they don't specify how bad. So the membership is free to interpret as they will. Which makes the elder generation think of it as damnable sin and the younger generation as a bad habit.

Even until the 80s the church was against oral sex and anal sex (famously writing a letter to the membership decrying "unnatural and immoral" practices even in marriage in 82). In the 90s the church backed off saying that as long as couples were both ok with it anything within their bedroom was no business of the church. Again this leads to a disconnect between the younger and older set.

White and delightsome and race issues is also really big. Again Kimball and Benson were really against race mixing and pushed the belief that the holy you got the lighter your skin. Now they church is moving away from this going with "pure and delightsome" instead of white and delightsome.

Another example is the whole man can become a god thing. Ask any mormon that was in it pre-80/90s and they'll tell you that that was the whole point of the church. Now? The church's main FAQ site is ambiguous at best:

Do Latter-day Saints believe they can become “gods”?

Latter-day Saints believe that God wants us to become like Him. But this teaching is often misrepresented by those who caricature the faith. The Latter-day Saint belief is no different than the biblical teaching

If you'd ask an older mormon if they'd get their own planet again they'd be like "What's the point in being like God if I don't have my own realm to rule?" Now? again from the church's own site:

Do Latter-day Saints believe that they will “get their own planet”?

No. This idea is not taught in Latter-day Saint scripture, nor is it a doctrine of the Church.

The elder members take this as said with a "wink wink nudge nudge" as in "We'll say this, but you really know what we mean." But some younger members take it as it's written by the church they follow and they're like "Of course not!"

Polygamy is just another example. The church put a total end to it in 1914 (when they said in essence "no guys we really mean it"). But as Corvo pointed out in a way we still sorta practice it. That lead to many of the older generation viewing it as a divine practice that we simply don't do because we can't handle it. But when the church suddenly was in the limelight they fought very hard against polygamy saying it had no part of their church. So again much of the younger generation views it as an abhorrent practice was that was wrong to begin with.

This is just a small set of many disconnects between the older and younger generation there's tons more. (caffeine, jewelery, gays, who should serve missions, women's rights, etc)

And I totally understand that mormonism by the way it just is will always be open for interpretation and many different ways to be mormon. But the changes are accelerating at a huge pace where as I said many of the elder generation that have dealing with younger generation (outside of missionaries) have complained about a bewildered feeling of disconnect. Of course many don't see it because the older generation just tends to hang with older generation and younger with younger so they tend to echo chamber each other. But when you take them as a whole there is a disconnect that is wider than just generational. Like I had said, if my wife's grand father asked his father to list out what was a sin and what wasn't, they would come up with the same list. If her great-grandfather had asked her father to make the same list they'd match too. Now I bet if you ask for the same lists between her father and his son, there's a good chance that they'd be different. Hell, as I go online and I post what I was taught about sin there's already a disconnect and I'm only 36 and often get shouted down by younger mormons for holding to teachings that were taught to me as I child. Again, I can get that there's gradual changes over time but at 36? Really? I can only imagine how my father in law feels.

 

[Hitokage]

Sorry, I said 1980 earlier in this thread, but apparently it was 1990.

 

[ronito]

So after meeting with Romney Billy Graham's site removed the LDS church as a cult.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/...-reference-from-website-after-romney-meeting/

Shortly after Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney enjoyed cookies and soft drinks with the Rev. Billy Graham and his son Franklin Graham on Thursday at the elder Graham's mountaintop retreat, a reference to Mormonism as a cult was scrubbed from the website of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

In a section of the website called Billy Graham's My Answer there had been the question "What is a cult?"

Answer: "A cult is any group which teaches doctrines or beliefs that deviate from the biblical message of the Christian faith."

"Some of these groups are Jehovah's Witnesess, Mormons, the Unification Church, Unitarians, Spritualists, Scientologists, and others," the site continued.

No longer. On Tuesday, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association confirmed that page has recently been removed from the site.

“Our primary focus at the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association has always been promoting the Gospel of Jesus Christ," Ken Barun, chief of staff for the association, told CNN in a statement. "We removed the information from the website because we do not wish to participate in a theological debate about something that has become politicized during this campaign."

Romney is a lifelong member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, members of which are known as Mormons.

The theological question of where Mormons fit on the religious spectrum has drawn more attention because of Romney's candidacy. Mormons consider themselves to be strong Christians. Many traditional Christian denominations disagree, though rank-and-file members have their own views on the matter.

The removal of the post from the Graham group's website was first noted by the New Civil Rights Movement website and then later by the Asheville Citizen-Times, which reported that the information on cults was accessed as recently as Thursday afternoon.

Last week's meeting between Romney and Graham was their first.

After the 30 minute sit-down in Montreat, North Carolina, just outside Asheville, Romney campaign spokesman Rick Gorka told reporters that Billy Graham led a prayer for the Romneys, saying "I'll do all I can to help you. And you can quote me on that."

The evangelist who has been called America's pastor and has prayed with every American president since Harry Truman said in a statement following the meeting that "It was a privilege to pray with Gov. Romney — for his family and our country."

Graham met with President Barack Obama in 2010 and with Sen. John McCain when he was the presumptive Republican presidential nominee in 2008.

"I will turn 94 the day after the upcoming election, and I believe America is at a crossroads," Graham's statement continued. "I hope millions of Americans will join me in praying for our nation and to vote for candidates who will support the biblical definition of marriage, protect the sanctity of life and defend our religious freedoms."

When asked about Graham's beliefs about Mormonism, Graham spokesman A. Larry Ross said in a statement that "Through an inclusive evangelistic ministry spanning more than 60 years, Mr. Graham was called to preach the transformative message of the Gospel to the whole world, regardless of one’s religious background, affiliation or none. As such, he never proselytized, targeted or labeled specific people, groups, faiths or denominations.

"Neither did Mr. Graham attempt to divide his audience before he had opportunity to preach to them. He has a genuine love for all people, and faithfully proclaimed the love of God to everyone, providing opportunity for them to respond by making a faith commitment.

"Mr. Graham’s calling is not to pass judgment, but to proclaim the biblical truth that Jesus is the only way to heaven, allowing every individual and group to fall along that plumb line," the statement went on.

"He further stressed that salvation is the work of Almighty God, and that only He knows what is in each human heart," the statement said.

The Southern Baptist Convention, the nation's largest Protestant denomination, lists the LDS Church as a theological cult. The Catholic Church also does not recognize Mormon baptisms as being theologically compatible with its own.

The LDS Church has long bristled at being called a cult. Mormons note the many similarities and overlap between their teachings and that of other churches but point to their belief in other scriptures like the Book of Mormon as the reason they split with other churches.

In the 2012 campaign Romney has been generally quiet about his church, though his role as a lay church leader was prominently featured in the Republican National Convention, and his campaign has allowed members of the press pool accompanying Romney to film him attending services.

Frankly it's sad that the sole reason is political.

 

[A.E Suggs]

I think the Internet may have increased the pace of cultural change. Things can be brought up anonymously, groups forms, anonymous discussions take place, things can move to actual interest groups, campaigns form . . . all pretty quickly with messageboards, social media, etc.

Gay Marriage has gone from something no one would even consider an issue worth discussing, to a wedge issue for conservatives, to an issue at the 50% mark in about 15 years.

So if there are various issues that many people find troubling they are probably brought up online, discussed, and change happens faster.

Internet also made things worst in a way as well, but like with anything made there is a good and bad way to use it. One of the many problems with people on the net is that they will believe almost everything they see.

 

[ronito]

Internet also made things worst in a way as well, but like with anything made there is a good and bad way to use it. One of the many problems with people on the net is that they will believe almost everything they see.

Yeah but at the same time it's easy to verify everything too if you take the time. Which I do think can be a bad thing for the church. "Joseph Smith never said that!" <5 minutes on google> "Well damn..."

 

[elrechazado]

So after meeting with Romney Billy Graham's site removed the LDS church as a cult.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/...-reference-from-website-after-romney-meeting/



Frankly it's sad that the sole reason is political.

That bolded answer is a pretty...bold definition of a cult.

 

[ronito]

That bolded answer is a pretty...bold definition of a cult.

I interpreted it as "Anyone who doesn't agree with us."

 

[Fathead]

I'm gonna miss being part of a cult.

 

[mik]

The politically correct term is "new religious movement."

 

[SillyEskimo]

I'm gonna miss being part of a cult.

One of us! One of us! One of us!

 

[ronito]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55129357-78/missionaries-lds-missionary-mormon.html.csp

LDS apostle Jeffrey R. Holland predicted that lowering the age limits for young Mormon missionaries would trigger a "dramatic" uptick in their numbers.

Turns out, dramatic was an understatement. Try a 471 percent jump in applications — so far.

Just two weeks since LDS Church President Thomas S. Monson announced that young men could go on full-time missions at age 18 (down from 19) and young women could go at 19 (down from 21), the Utah-based faith has seen applications skyrocket from an average of 700 a week to 4,000 a week.

"Slightly more than half of the applicants are women," LDS Church spokesman Scott Trotter said Monday in a news release.

That represents a massive shift. Typically, women make up fewer than a fifth of the LDS missionary force, which currently stands at more than 58,000 worldwide.

At a news conference after the historic change, Holland said The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was gearing up immediately to accommodate a larger missionary force — reducing by a third the time missionaries spend in training centers and hiring additional staff to manage the budding proselytizers’ language skills.

"The Lord is hastening this work," Holland said, "and he needs more and more willing missionaries."

Six days later, LDS officials announced that the church was rethinking the expansion of its flagship Provo Missionary Training Center, including a nine-story building that neighbors had opposed.

Ultimately, Mormon leaders hope more missionaries will translate into more converts. Indeed, that may happen.

Matt Martinich, who tracks LDS growth, has analyzed the ratio of missionaries to converts. In the past 33 years, he found each missionary has baptized — on average — six converts, though that number has dipped to five during the past decade.

The church reported 281,312 converts last year. If it sustains the current ratio of one missionary for every five converts a year, Martinich said, there would be 300,000 such baptisms when the number of missionaries reaches 60,000; 350,000 if the number of missionaries reaches 70,000; and 400,000 if the proselytizing force reaches 80,000.

This missionary age adjustment could generate as many as 15,000 more young elders and 7,500 more sisters in the first year, Martinich said in a report at cumorah.com. "There were reports from members and missionaries in Eastern Europe that an international LDS Church leader reported that the number of missionaries serving would reach 90,000 as a result of lowering the minimum age for missionary service."

Trotter cautioned against projecting any increases.

"These are early numbers," he said, "and it is difficult to say exactly where we will be over the coming months."

So the lowering the age did exactly what everyone thought it would. I do wonder what this will do to the female demographic of the church. I wonder if the society is now going to change how they view female missionaries as a "nice thing to do if you don't get married" to "What are you still doing here?"

So yeah this will probably turn into more converts they'll need to address the ~50% inactivation rate however.

 

[Patryn]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55129357-78/missionaries-lds-missionary-mormon.html.csp


So the lowering the age did exactly what everyone thought it would. I do wonder what this will do to the female demographic of the church. I wonder if the society is now going to change how they view female missionaries as a "nice thing to do if you don't get married" to "What are you still doing here?"

So yeah this will probably turn into more converts they'll need to address the ~50% inactivation rate however.

I don't think you can judge this on immediate results. Let's see if the numbers hold up in 5 years.

 

[Yoritomo]

Yum, sister missionaries before they've put on college weight.

 

[speculawyer]

The word "cult" is a very arbitrary. All it seems to denote is a religion that has not yet reached the minimum number of followers before the larger society accepts them.


Of course their definition of cult is just damn silly:
Answer: "A cult is any group which teaches doctrines or beliefs that deviate from the biblical message of the Christian faith."

So basically Jews, buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, . . . even atheists belong to a 'cult'?

 

[Hitokage]

The word "cult" is a very arbitrary. All it seems to denote is a religion that has not yet reached the minimum number of followers before the larger society accepts them.

Well, it's more accurate to say that the word has become so semantically muddy as to become meaningless, and simply using it invariably creates an argument over what you mean by doing so. You pretty much have to use qualifiers to derive a specific meaning from it now, like "destructive cult" for groups with harmful group dynamics.

 

[mik]

So yeah this will probably turn into more converts they'll need to address the ~50% inactivation rate however.

No one cares but themselves. The church's numbers are utterly fatuous.

 

[Zerokku]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55129357-78/missionaries-lds-missionary-mormon.html.csp


So the lowering the age did exactly what everyone thought it would. I do wonder what this will do to the female demographic of the church. I wonder if the society is now going to change how they view female missionaries as a "nice thing to do if you don't get married" to "What are you still doing here?"

So yeah this will probably turn into more converts they'll need to address the ~50% inactivation rate however.

There was a comment over on r/exmormon on this, lemme find it...

This is a misleading comparison. If the numbers are accurate, they're surprisingly low.
To give an analogy, imagine running a hose into an above ground pool that is already full of water. The water represents potential missionaries and the walls of the pool are the age limit. As the water overflows the pool, missionaries come of age and embark on their missions. Now imagine that the amount of water is the same, but the pool walls are suddenly an inch shorter. A lot of water would suddenly escape, but this rate of overflow is temporary.
600 applications per week equals 31200 per year. Most of these 31200 missionaries are 19 years old. If the age change was 100% effective, the influx in missionaries would have been around 31200, not a mere 6400 (one-fifth of the newly-eligible).

That being said, in my local singles ward and institute building, it definitely seems like many more young women are considering missions than had previously. Seems like 1 in every 3 or 4 is saying they want to go on a mission now. Anecdotal and all, but yah.

 

[ronito]

There was a comment over on r/exmormon on this, lemme find it...



That being said, in my local singles ward and institute building, it definitely seems like many more young women are considering missions than had previously. Seems like 1 in every 3 or 4 is saying they want to go on a mission now. Anecdotal and all, but yah.

I don't think the math is that simple. You wouldn't have gotten a huge influx for men and yeah there are more women eligible now but we don't really know what that number is.

Also this is just the # of people that were able to get their apps in within two weeks. I don't think it's as small as that post would make it out to be. We'll have to see how it keeps up. Like I said I do wonder if women are now going to be treated the way many men are when they're in their 19-21.

 

[CorvoSol]

Do lots of Mormons not believe that Exaltation means becoming a God nowadays? Because I honestly have never met any Mormon who has ever denied it. There's the much more PR friendly "Being with God and your family in a state of eternal happiness forever" But the Gospel Principles Manual that came out in 2010 still flat out says it. It's still considered canon as far as a 2010 manual is concerned.


That said, I think I'm gonna go inactive . . . from FHE. Once again I've come to dislike my FHE group altogether and I'm honestly tired of the way they're treating me. My roomie compared my face to his rotten pumpkin all night yesterday, and has convinced the girls in our group to assert that my dream woman is Princess Zelda, and a bunch of other stuff. He came in here a few minutes ago to apologize to me . . . that we took so long in getting home yesterday.

I'm trying to not even be passive aggressive about this stuff with them, but I'm really pretty fed up with being treated the same way I was treated in Junior High, so I think I'm gonna opt out of FHE. Which is wrong, because it's my "responsibility" but I don't have the patience for the crap they're giving me, plus my new calling, plus my classes, plus my own personal stuff.

It's not like I do anything for that "responsibility" anyway.

Sorry, I'm just in a really foul mood about this today. I am so not staying in this ward next semester. Which is a shame, because there's a really nice girl in this ward I'd like to get to know better, but this junk is not something I feel like putting up with, and that said roommate's "good buddy" will be joining the apartment next semester does not inspire confidence that the situation will improve.

Long story short, the crow will seek somewhere else to roost next semester, because this joint ruffles his feathers.

 

[Yoritomo]

There was a comment over on r/exmormon on this, lemme find it...



That being said, in my local singles ward and institute building, it definitely seems like many more young women are considering missions than had previously. Seems like 1 in every 3 or 4 is saying they want to go on a mission now. Anecdotal and all, but yah.

It takes a little while to get your papers in. This short a time frame isn't a good representation. You have to undergo a physical, meet with two tiers of leadership, make sure you have funding in place, etc...

 

[Zerokku]

It takes a little while to get your papers in. This short a time frame isn't a good representation. You have to undergo a physical, meet with two tiers of leadership, make sure you have funding in place, etc...

I know, and its definitely a gross oversimplification, but at the same time I think the people flipping out over "OMG So many applications!" are overreacting. The real question is around what number will it settle to.

 

[ronito]

Do lots of Mormons not believe that Exaltation means becoming a God nowadays? Because I honestly have never met any Mormon who has ever denied it. There's the much more PR friendly "Being with God and your family in a state of eternal happiness forever" But the Gospel Principles Manual that came out in 2010 still flat out says it. It's still considered canon as far as a 2010 manual is concerned.

That's the thing, when I bring this confusion up mormons are like "What are you talking about? Nothing's changed." But the church's website is the church's website and they're pretty darn clear and I have found several younger members who honestly don't know about it.

Like I said it's the "wink wink nudge nudge" approach. The church has to claim to the outside to quell the people shouting about it being a cult but then turning to members and being like "Ignore what I just said." I mean this very thing happened with Hinckley he went on Larry King live and Larry asked him if mormons believed that man could become like god. And Hinckley brought out the couplet and said it was 'deep doctrine' that he didn't really think about and that it wasn't that important and he 'didn't know' if we still taught it. Then he did the same thing with Time magazine. In the next conference he said something to the effect of "I know you might have heard some stuff in the media and some people think that I don't know what we teach. I know what we teach and I was just misquoted."

It's not terribly surprising for those not in on that "dog whistle" would view it as the doctrine being put in 'questionable' territory.

That said, I think I'm gonna go inactive . . . from FHE. Once again I've come to dislike my FHE group altogether and I'm honestly tired of the way they're treating me. My roomie compared my face to his rotten pumpkin all night yesterday, and has convinced the girls in our group to assert that my dream woman is Princess Zelda, and a bunch of other stuff. He came in here a few minutes ago to apologize to me . . . that we took so long in getting home yesterday.

I'm trying to not even be passive aggressive about this stuff with them, but I'm really pretty fed up with being treated the same way I was treated in Junior High, so I think I'm gonna opt out of FHE. Which is wrong, because it's my "responsibility" but I don't have the patience for the crap they're giving me, plus my new calling, plus my classes, plus my own personal stuff.

It's not like I do anything for that "responsibility" anyway.

Sorry, I'm just in a really foul mood about this today. I am so not staying in this ward next semester. Which is a shame, because there's a really nice girl in this ward I'd like to get to know better, but this junk is not something I feel like putting up with, and that said roommate's "good buddy" will be joining the apartment next semester does not inspire confidence that the situation will improve.

Long story short, the crow will seek somewhere else to roost next semester, because this joint ruffles his feathers.

What I'm about to say is either going to strike you as very wise or satanic. But it worked for me even when I was a member so I'll pass it along.

I had exactly the same problem as you, FHE group people just making fun of me and everything. Here's what I came to. The church always teaches you to be like the sword of gryffyndor "only take in that which makes you stronger." And has you apply that in your choice of food, drink, schedule, friends, music, study, entertainment, clothes, EVERYTHING....except the church. I figured, why stop there?

I know it sounds "anti" but stay with me here, I did this while I was still very much active. But many wards, especially YSA wards and wards with high concentration activity, tend to get caught up in administration and ritual more than spirituality. For me I just looked at it and thought, "Does this FHE calling really help further the church? Could I be fine without it? Would the people in FHE be fine with out it?" And I found that it was pretty silly for me to think that my or anyone else's testimony would be affected if I wasn't leading the FHE group and that instead of using that hour on what I'd call "ritual" I could use it on other things that I enjoyed or made me better.

Have you read Small Gods? If not read it. It's fun. But the story is that there are these gods and they feed on people's belief and they were mighty once but very much out of power now. The reason was that when they were in their prime they set up things such as "offerings" to them and what not. And these became rituals. And the people believed in the rituals and not in the gods and that lead to their ruin. The same thing happens in the church everyday. There are so many rules, so many things you "have to do" and a lot of those things don't help, and might even hurt you. They mean well, sure FHE means well. But does that mean you have to do it the way the ward demands? Not at all. You'd probably be better off just spending that hour talking to your family or reading scriptures or something. Would you bishop get mad or think you're turning inactive? Maybe. Would god? Not at all (and if he did he's no god I'd want to believe in anyway).

You don't have to take in anything that makes you weaker just because the church says so. Like in this example, the church says FHE is important, which I'll agree to, but they don't say YSA FHE ran by groups is important. It's just a way to try and keep that rule and provide people away from their families a way to have it. Doesn't mean you have to go and do it. It's not like you're Elder's quorum president or teacher or something.

I see many of my mormon friend made miserable by stuff like this all the time and I keep thinking to myself "It's so simple. The church has already taught you what to do. Just apply what the church has taught you to do with the world and apply it to the church." It totally made me a better mormon when I was still mormon. Unorthodox? Perhaps but people knew I knew the score.

Oh and others (possibly your bishop) will say that it's an opportunity for you to confront your roomies and make your roomies better people. I say, "Fuck that" it's not your job to make them better, that's their job. Your job is focus on yourself to get to yourself in a position where you are comfortable and confident in the church's work and help those that want help. Not to drag others across the finish line.

Of course I'm no longer mormon so perhaps you shouldn't take any of my advice about the church. But I will say it made all the difference. I'll stop being satan now.

 

[ronito]

So PRI's the world did a story on Latino Mormons and Romney

http://www.theworld.org/2012/10/latino-mormons-romney-immigration/

As a former latino mormon I think they should've renamed it Mexican Mormons. I'm not overly impressed with this but eh, it's something.

 

[CorvoSol]

That's the thing, when I bring this confusion up mormons are like "What are you talking about? Nothing's changed." But the church's website is the church's website and they're pretty darn clear and I have found several younger members who honestly don't know about it.

Like I said it's the "wink wink nudge nudge" approach. The church has to claim to the outside to quell the people shouting about it being a cult but then turning to members and being like "Ignore what I just said." I mean this very thing happened with Hinckley he went on Larry King live and Larry asked him if mormons believed that man could become like god. And Hinckley brought out the couplet and said it was 'deep doctrine' that he didn't really think about and that it wasn't that important and he 'didn't know' if we still taught it. Then he did the same thing with Time magazine. In the next conference he said something to the effect of "I know you might have heard some stuff in the media and some people think that I don't know what we teach. I know what we teach and I was just misquoted."

It's not terribly surprising for those not in on that "dog whistle" would view it as the doctrine being put in 'questionable' territory.

See, I understand that there has been confusion, but I mean, if a basic manual came out saying it in 2010, I'd think it's pretty clearly still in force. I could write off people's frankness about it in Brazil as them being Brazilian, as in Brazil they are VERY frank about all kinds of things. Even the members are super open about sex there. Like, maybe not to the point of the Bishop telling you how he nailed his wife, but that the Bishop is open about the fact that he is frequently nailing his wife was a pretty big difference from the Church in America.

What I'm about to say is either going to strike you as very wise or satanic. But it worked for me even when I was a member so I'll pass it along.

I had exactly the same problem as you, FHE group people just making fun of me and everything. Here's what I came to. The church always teaches you to be like the sword of gryffyndor "only take in that which makes you stronger." And has you apply that in your choice of food, drink, schedule, friends, music, study, entertainment, clothes, EVERYTHING....except the church. I figured, why stop there?

I know it sounds "anti" but stay with me here, I did this while I was still very much active. But many wards, especially YSA wards and wards with high concentration activity, tend to get caught up in administration and ritual more than spirituality. For me I just looked at it and thought, "Does this FHE calling really help further the church? Could I be fine without it? Would the people in FHE be fine with out it?" And I found that it was pretty silly for me to think that my or anyone else's testimony would be affected if I wasn't leading the FHE group and that instead of using that hour on what I'd call "ritual" I could use it on other things that I enjoyed or made me better.

Have you read Small Gods? If not read it. It's fun. But the story is that there are these gods and they feed on people's belief and they were mighty once but very much out of power now. The reason was that when they were in their prime they set up things such as "offerings" to them and what not. And these became rituals. And the people believed in the rituals and not in the gods and that lead to their ruin. The same thing happens in the church everyday. There are so many rules, so many things you "have to do" and a lot of those things don't help, and might even hurt you. They mean well, sure FHE means well. But does that mean you have to do it the way the ward demands? Not at all. You'd probably be better off just spending that hour talking to your family or reading scriptures or something. Would you bishop get mad or think you're turning inactive? Maybe. Would god? Not at all (and if he did he's no god I'd want to believe in anyway).

You don't have to take in anything that makes you weaker just because the church says so. Like in this example, the church says FHE is important, which I'll agree to, but they don't say YSA FHE ran by groups is important. It's just a way to try and keep that rule and provide people away from their families a way to have it. Doesn't mean you have to go and do it. It's not like you're Elder's quorum president or teacher or something.

I see many of my mormon friend made miserable by stuff like this all the time and I keep thinking to myself "It's so simple. The church has already taught you what to do. Just apply what the church has taught you to do with the world and apply it to the church." It totally made me a better mormon when I was still mormon. Unorthodox? Perhaps but people knew I knew the score.

Oh and others (possibly your bishop) will say that it's an opportunity for you to confront your roomies and make your roomies better people. I say, "Fuck that" it's not your job to make them better, that's their job. Your job is focus on yourself to get to yourself in a position where you are comfortable and confident in the church's work and help those that want help. Not to drag others across the finish line.

Of course I'm no longer mormon so perhaps you shouldn't take any of my advice about the church. But I will say it made all the difference. I'll stop being satan now.

Hahaha, you're not being Satan. Not really. I could say it was Satanic of me to hate my FHE group forever, but I don't think I will. What you've said is basically the conclusion at which I arrived these past few days. The Bishop never extended the calling to me, I just heard that I have it. My calling as Elder's Quorum Teacher I got set apart for, yeah, and I'll hold to that because that is a calling, but this is a designation I received without interview. And at first I was afraid that if I quit going, I was running away, but after consideration, it's only really running away if these people meant something to me, which they don't. I call them FHE "brothers and sisters" but they really haven't been treating me in a way worthy of the title, and I honestly barely know them and have no great desire to know them any further.

After speaking with my dad and my best friends, I really do think it's in my best interest to 1) Drop FHE, 2) Leave the apartment and probably the ward at the end of the semester and 3) let go of the stress. My best friend thinks I should confront my roomie, and my dad thinks I should at least talk to the Elder's Quorum president, and I think those are both good ideas I'll think about.

I mean, I really like FHE back in my YSA back home, and there is no drama. Everyone gets along and has a good time. And I like the idea of FHE in general and want to have that in my family. But these people treat me the way I was treated in JUNIOR HIGH, and I'm not going through that again. Not for people I barely know.

So yeah, I think I'll either drop FHE or find someone else's FHE group to join somehow, because I'm not here for drama. I am in Rexburg for 3 reasons: 1) To get my college education, 2) to better my chances of finding a wife, and 3) To make connections to further my career. I don't see putting up with people saying Princess Zelda is my dream girl anywhere on that list.

 

[ronito]

Man, I gotta admit it's been a while since I heard anyone say they have a goal of finding a spouse.

So strange cause when I was at BYU that was completely common place. Outside? Not so much. People want dates and relationships and if marriage happens it happens but as a set goal. Not so much.

 

[CorvoSol]

Man, I gotta admit it's been a while since I heard anyone say they have a goal of finding a spouse.

So strange cause when I was at BYU that was completely common place. Outside? Not so much. People want dates and relationships and if marriage happens it happens but as a set goal. Not so much.

Well I am nothing if not the stereotypical Mormon when it comes to this. I have a compelling and legitimate if ultimately depressing reason for seeking companionship, but when it boils down to it, everybody seeking a relationship is just looking for that: companionship.

And I feel nothing, if not very, very alone these days.

Besides, they don't call it BYU-I DO for nothin' (oh God what a terrible joke.)

 

[Yoritomo]

If the only way to have sex is if you have a spouse and you desperately want to have sex... you will want a spouse. The level of companionship on a relationship with significant barriers to touch and emotion won't be as fulfilling as one that is unfettered in it's ability to express love. They're all around other people and everyone is lonely.

 

[ronito]

If the only way to have sex is if you have a spouse and you desperately want to have sex... you will want a spouse. The level of companionship on a relationship with significant barriers to touch and emotion won't be as fulfilling as one that is unfettered in it's ability to express love. They're all around other people and everyone is lonely.

I do think the church has an issue with it's narrative for younger people in this.

The narrative has always been
- Go through primary get to Priesthood
- Be a deacon
- Be a teacher
- Be a priest
- Graduate Highschool/get your eagle scout
- Go on a mission
- Get married
- endure to the end.

That might've worked even through the 90s but it's just not the same world anymore. With women now living their own lives and differences in culture I think the church doesn't do very good on the post mission thing. It's hard because marriage is important, but many take it to be their sole purpose from when they're off their mission. I think it's a bit of self sabotage, as it should happen naturally instead of being forced and there's plenty of mormons that get married because they feel they should instead of really wanting to.

And don't get me started on the church and sexuality, I could write a book.

 

[ronito]

Oh noes! Drama in evangelical circles!

(RNS) The Rev. Samuel Wynn admired Billy Graham and his evangelistic association for decades, joining its spiritual crusades and urging fellow Christians to do the same. But no more.

“I will never again support anything by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association,” said Wynn, the superintendent of a United Methodist Church district in Fayetteville, N.C.

The source of Wynn’s ire: The BGEA’s recent removal of language on its website calling Mormonism a “cult.”

The scrubbing followed GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney's pilgrimage to Billy Graham’s mountaintop home in Montreat, N.C. After the Oct. 11 meeting, Graham pledged to “do all I can to help" Romney, according to a campaign aide.

The BGEA said it cut the “cult” language “because we do not wish to participate in a theological debate about something that has become politicized during this campaign.”

But Wynn and other conservative Christians accuse Graham of putting partisanship above piety and risking Christian souls to help Romney, a Mormon, win the White House.

"My question to Billy Graham is, What’s more important for the kingdom of God: politics or the message of Jesus Christ?” said Wynn.

Evangelicals berating Billy Graham is like Catholics dissing the pope. Through his world-crossing crusades and passionate preaching, the nearly 94-year-old evangelist has converted countless Christians and almost single-handedly ushered evangelicalism into the modern age.

But when “the greatest proclaimer of the gospel in the last century,” as one Southern Baptist called Graham, embraced Mormonism last week, he confirmed conservative evangelicals’ worst fears about the 2012 election: That Romney’s rise would lift his Mormon church to cultural prominence and acceptance within mainstream Christianity.

Howell Scott, senior pastor Bethel Baptist Church in Alamogordo, N.M., said Graham's declassification of Mormonism as a cult “will have disastrous unintended consequences.”

“The most immediate consequence will be the acceptance and approval of Mormonism as a legitimate Christian 'denomination' or faith group,” Scott wrote on his blog last week. "The blurring will only increase if Mitt Romney is elected president."

Most evangelicals do not consider Mormons Christian because Latter-day Saints revere Joseph Smith as a prophet, consider the Book of Mormon on par with the Bible and conceive of the Christian Trinity as three separate gods. Mormons acknowledge those differences but insist they are Christians.

Graham has been accused of crossing sectarian lines before, said Bill Leonard, a professor of church history at Wake Forest School of Divinity in North Carolina. The evangelist irked fundamentalists decades ago by inviting mainline Protestants and Roman Catholics to join him on stage during his crusades.

But Graham’s implicit acceptance of Mormonism last week came on the heels of a much-hyped study showing that Protestants are losing ground in the United States. It also came amid a presidential campaign that includes -- for the first time in history -- a GOP ticket without a Protestant.

“There’s a sense that Protestants are beleaguered right now,” said Leonard, “and in another four years may be even more so.”

Leonard and other experts suspect that Billy Graham's son, Franklin, who is also the BGEA’s president and CEO, was behind the move to declassify Mormonism as a cult. The younger Graham is a more eager culture warrior, while Billy Graham has expressed regret for his past partisanship.

Just this week, Franklin Graham published an editorial entitled "Can An Evangelical Christian Vote for a Mormon?” The answer was an enthusiastic yes.

Several conservative Christian bloggers, including Scott, note that the BGEA, Franklin Graham and his Christian aid group, Samaritan’s Purse, are all longtime clients of public relations executive Mark DeMoss, a Romney campaign adviser.

DeMoss said he knew nothing about removing the “cult” language until he read media stories last week. In fact, DeMoss said, for the last six years -- since Romney’s first White House run -- he has urged evangelicals to forget about candidates' theology and focus on their values.

“I am not advising anyone about how they discuss or treat theological differences in a political context," DeMoss said, "and there is no evidence I have done so with Franklin Graham or his father."

The BGEA did not respond to a request for comment.

In a recent article in Christianity Today, a magazine founded by Billy Graham, several evangelical leaders supported the BGEA’s cult declassification.

“One very good thing about the Romney candidacy is that it is causing both evangelicals and Mormons to clarify terminology in civil dialogue -- as among friends,” Jerry Root, director of an evangelism institute at Wheaton College in Illinois, told the magazine. Other evangelicals quoted in the article disagreed with the decision.

In the end, the Grahams’ attempts to ease evangelical consciences about voting for a Mormon may backfire.

Bart Barber, pastor of First Baptist Church in Farmersville, Texas, said was prepared to vote for Romney -- until last week.

“The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association probably cost Mitt Romney my November ballot when it stopped calling Mormonism a cult explicitly because of this election,” Barber wrote on his blog.

“For the sake of my congregation, when Billy Graham is muddying the waters of the gospel, I have an obligation to provide clarity,” Barber continued.

“For the sake of Mormons in my community who need to know of their need for the gospel of Jesus Christ and who are being reassured in their damnable heresy by none less than Billy Graham,” Barber said, “I have an obligation to provide clarity.”

Oh man that was a hilarious read.

As a non-believer it was sorta like hearing someone yelling "Your definition of your imaginary friend is totally different than mine so you're going to hell!"

But I just lost it at the whole "Protestants being beleaguered" since when? They've had their way for the entire history of the US. Come now.

 

[Brianemone]

I'm deciding whether I join in the discussion about changing principles and focus of the church, it would probably be more writing than I'm willing to smash out on an iPhone.

Just hanging around at the hospital waiting for my wife to be induced. I could almost be an active member again on the sole basis of having enough kids to need a people mover.

 

[ronito]

I'm deciding whether I join in the discussion about changing principles and focus of the church, it would probably be more writing than I'm willing to smash out on an iPhone.

Just hanging around at the hospital waiting for my wife to be induced. I could almost be an active member again on the sole basis of having enough kids to need a people mover.

You left out the most important part. Your wife is being induced? What are you expecting?

 

[Brianemone]

You left out the most important part. Your wife is being induced? What are you expecting?

A boy this time, will make 2 of each. Balance restored.

Turns out that the baby spun around though and they won't induce, more waiting

 

[GhaleonEB]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55129357-78/missionaries-lds-missionary-mormon.html.csp


So the lowering the age did exactly what everyone thought it would. I do wonder what this will do to the female demographic of the church. I wonder if the society is now going to change how they view female missionaries as a "nice thing to do if you don't get married" to "What are you still doing here?"

So yeah this will probably turn into more converts they'll need to address the ~50% inactivation rate however.

What's the continued justification for different ages of eligability for men and women?

 

[ronito]

A boy this time, will make 2 of each. Balance restored.

Turns out that the baby spun around though and they won't induce, more waiting

Congrats on the boy, but waiting sucks.

What's the continued justification for different ages of eligability for men and women?

Elder Holland said that it in the past they've noticed it's better if there's a bit of an age gap between sisters and elders.

I guess it had to do with courtship and dating in the field but now that there's just a year I don't really see why even keep it.

 

[mik]

Interesting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...d1eb16-1dfc-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_story.html

I think the church only likes to fight where it can win.

 

[ronito]

Interesting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...d1eb16-1dfc-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_story.html

I think the church only likes to fight where it can win.

I think that the article's probably right about not wanting to cause a shitstorm for Romney. Especially after hearing they're ramping up for a big fight in New Zealand about this (http://www.ldschurch.org.nz/church/...ittee?lang=eng&country=nz&cid=facebook-shared) .

I'd also like to think they might have learned their lesson from all the negative publicity Prop 8 got them that they shouldn't take the forefront on that fight again.

 

[Brianemone]

I think that the article's probably right about not wanting to cause a shitstorm for Romney. Especially after hearing they're ramping up for a big fight in New Zealand about this (http://www.ldschurch.org.nz/church/...ittee?lang=eng&country=nz&cid=facebook-shared) .

I'd also like to think they might have learned their lesson from all the negative publicity Prop 8 got them that they shouldn't take the forefront on that fight again.

It's scary how narrow minded some of the Mormons in NZ are. I live about 3 minutes drive from the Temple and the Mormon community that lives around it. The amount of propaganda I see on Facebook is scary. I remember even a few years back when I was still sporadically attending meetings the hatred and misinformation being spewed from the pulpits about political issues was astounding.
While I think it is a good idea for the church to stay out of politics I think it is dangerous that it might still be secretly (or at least not officially) condoning political action that espouses inequality

 

[ronito]

It's scary how narrow minded some of the Mormons in NZ are. I live about 3 minutes drive from the Temple and the Mormon community that lives around it. The amount of propaganda I see on Facebook is scary. I remember even a few years back when I was still sporadically attending meetings the hatred and misinformation being spewed from the pulpits about political issues was astounding.
While I think it is a good idea for the church to stay out of politics I think it is dangerous that it might still be secretly (or at least not officially) condoning political action that espouses inequality

Are there are a lot of mormons in NZ? I know we send tons of missionaries there.

Also how'd things go with the kid?

 

[ronito]

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...-humanitarian-effort-for-Syrian-refugees.html

With tens of thousands of ill-prepared refugees fleeing war-torn Syria in search of peace and protection across the border in Jordan, LDS Charities has answered the Jordanian government’s call for help with more than $1 million in humanitarian aid already provided or in the works during the next few months.

A press release issued late Thursday indicated that LDS Charities, a non-governmental organization sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “has made a substantial commitment to support efforts by the Jordanian government and other charitable partners to provide relief to the thousands of Syrians displaced from their homeland.”

The humanitarian contribution to date has been $590,000 in supplies, with another $588,000 set to be spent during the coming months.

“LDS Charities has been a valued and trusted partner in assisting us to meet the needs of those coming in to Jordan seeking relief,” said Ayman R. Al-Mufleh, secretary general of the Jordanian Hashemite Charity Organization. “This is a strong and important partnership and we are grateful for it.”

Elder Bruce D. Porter of the LDS Church’s First Quorum of the Seventy was recently in Amman, meeting with several Jordanian government officials. “They were all moved by the commitment that LDS Charities has made to assist the Syrian refugees and graciously expressed their appreciation for the church’s contribution to this humanitarian cause,” Elder Porter said. “We are, of course, very happy to be part of these important relief efforts.”

Sharon Eubank, director of LDS Charities, said the organization has been scrambling to provide all of the hygiene kits, formula, diapers and feminine hygiene products it could find in the area.

“Our focus has been on the particular needs of women and children,” Eubank said, citing numbers from a recent New York Times story indicating that half of the refuges are under 12 years of age, and women in the refugee camps outnumber the men two to one.

“As the crisis unfolded in Syria it became more difficult for people to stay there,” Eubank said. “More and more people started coming across the border into Jordan. At first they were absorbed into the cities and towns, but soon the cities couldn’t absorb any more. The refugees were straining the country’s infrastructure."

In May, the Jordanian government started setting up the refugee camps, and soon they were bursting at the seams.

Well good on the church.

 

[CorvoSol]

If the only way to have sex is if you have a spouse and you desperately want to have sex... you will want a spouse. The level of companionship on a relationship with significant barriers to touch and emotion won't be as fulfilling as one that is unfettered in it's ability to express love. They're all around other people and everyone is lonely.

I'd be a dirty rotten liar if I denied that Yoritomo has a point on this, but I'd like to point out that being single carries over into other annoying areas as well. Here on campus being single means that all of my peers are at least 4 years my junior, and that can be annoying in social settings and at church. The vast majority of people who are actually my peers are all in married wards, so while they're having and making friends of their own age, I'm sort of stuck babysitting.

So, I mean, sex and physical intimacy is a fair and large point, but there are other areas of annoyance as well. And of course, until I wed, I'm half-stuck in what I can do in the Church.

Granted I'm not in a HURRY to get married, but I'd like to make token progress in that direction.

 

[Brianemone]

Are there are a lot of mormons in NZ? I know we send tons of missionaries there.

Also how'd things go with the kid?

I haven't seen any recent figures, but yes there is a large population of Mormons in NZ, in my city especially because there was until a few years ago a church run high school