Newordermormon.org

[UtahDan]

I am not sure this has anything to do with the church. Angry people just aren't a lot of fun to be around in any setting.

It's like when someone gets doused by bear spray up at RES. Your views of whether that sort of things really happens and whether it is worthy of being really mad about affect both how you see the person telling their story and your willingness to sit and listen. Righteous anger can be really fun to be around and share in!

[lambdacoug]

So what was your motivation for choosing the username of "atheistcougar"?

Well, I am an atheist and I'm a cougar fan, so it seemed a fair description of what I am and relevant to the context of the board. I wanted to avoid using any moniker that I've used elsewhere or that is personally identifiable as I made that mistake once and a few over-zealous mormons took it upon themselves to attempt to get me fired. They failed, but the VP of HR was given a good lesson in just how far some mormons will go to silence critics.

[Indy Coug]

Well, I am an atheist and I'm a cougar fan, so it seemed a fair description of what I am and relevant to the context of the board. I wanted to avoid using any moniker that I've used elsewhere or that is personally identifiable as I made that mistake once and a few over-zealous mormons took it upon themselves to attempt to get me fired. They failed, but the VP of HR was given a good lesson in just how far some mormons will go to silence critics.

Were you working in the PR department of the LDS church?

[lambdacoug]

Were you working in the PR department of the LDS church?

No.

[Northwestcoug]

Oh, it's an issue on both sides. That's why I listed some of the labels for the orthodox as well. Some orthodox derive just as much pride in being a TBM or defender of the faith as the unorthodox does in being labeled just that. It shouldn't matter to anyone. I've always said and maintain that I am for a big tent. It should be hard for anyone to leave and easy for anyone to come back. That's where I stand. I wasn't trying to stir any pot. I just think these types of smaller tents outside of the Church slowly devolve into what Jay and Moliere described until they eventually pull up stakes and go. And I think that has more to do with the labels they ascribe to themselves, focusing on what makes them different than what they share with the Church.

I don't think labels are necessarily helpful. However, the communities that label themselves are. There is a reason why these online communities arise. Many of them really want to maintain a relationship with the church, no matter how tenuous. But they don't feel comfortable discussing many issues in church-approved or other existing forums. I suspect CUF had a similar genesis.

But I agree that the trajectory of these forums does seem to be towards leaving the church.

[jay santos]

Why can't people just be Mormon? It seems like most of these groups like NOM all want a big tent church where unorthodoxy is accepted, but their approach seems counterproductive by pitching their own tents outside the church's tent.

I understand where you're coming from, but what about this.

Let's assume there is a significant portion of LDS members that have extremely unorthodox testimonies, ranging in what you would say is faithless to none at all.

These members want to stay affiliated for a variety of reasons: spouse, kids, they like to observe a religion though they don't believe in it, affinity for the culture and heritage, etc.

These people don't want to disrupt things at church, so they don't question doctrines, argue, etc at church. But they feel like they need a place to talk things out, express their feelings, join with like minded people, etc. Surely you can see the need for this, right?

So one question would be: do you want these people attending church or would you rather they stay away? And if you would have them attend church, do you see the value they would get from participating in a forum like newordermormon.org?

[YOhio]

New order Mormon is dorky, it tries too hard and itself sounds cultish. Why can't everyone just call themselves progressive Mormons?

Not everyone is a progressive Mormon.

[Indy Coug]

What would a regressive Mormon be?

[UtahDan]

I don't think labels are necessarily helpful. However, the communities that label themselves are. There is a reason why these online communities arise. Many of them really want to maintain a relationship with the church, no matter how tenuous. But they don't feel comfortable discussing many issues in church-approved or other existing forums. I suspect CUF had a similar genesis.

But I agree that the trajectory of these forums does seem to be towards leaving the church.

That last sentence may be right but I think it is sort of the self selecting nature of them. In other words, the people who arrive there and are really relieved to have found a place where they are comfortable stay and, in a majority of cases, leave the church in time. Others arrive there, stay a while, but eventually get uncomfortable with what is at the bottom of that slippery slope and decide it is not for them.

[UtahDan]

What would a regressive Mormon be?

[taekwondave]

This right here made my day.
:clap:

[Goatnapper'96]

I find it informative that former mormons are frowned upon for being angry. I'm sure you and everyone on this board is different though and you only think people that leave the church are angry when they really are. Yes, I am still hurt by the time I spent in the church and what harm it caused me. Then again, I'm only hurt because it was such a central part of my life for 30+ years. Why should I not be hurt? One thing I find very telling is that people react with sympathy, generally, when someone has gone through an awful divorce. Yet the reaction from the same person is likely to be very different when one has gone through a nasty exit from the religion of their birth. The hypocrisy is not lost on me.

Anyway, all of that aside, labels are still a powerful tool used to keep people in line. As for whether the church officially sanctions such labels, it doesn't really matter, they still are applied and they still have a strong affect. As I was exiting and my bishop came by and I didn't have the courage to turn him away, he'd ask what it would take to get me to come back. I stated that first and foremost there needs to be room for a dissenting opinion, and that those that voice it need to be embraced and not shunned. His response was typical, he said "That isn't the way the church works." So I told him, I simply wouldn't be returning. Perhaps I just come from a very orthodox area, but based on my experience in the church, I highly doubt this is isolated to my area.

I am pretty convinced that whenever life deals you a setback you always take time to remind yourself that you are the victim!

Good to know while you run so hard from mormonism you seem very, very mormon to me.

[Goatnapper'96]

I see that to some extent. But don't we all want to be one?
I have no doubt that John's heart is in the right place. I have a relative that emailed him for advice, before he was going to talk to his bishop. He didn't expect more than an email in reply, but John offered to talk to him over the phone. They ended up talking for awhile, and I know he was very appreciative.

Absolutely. I think John Dehlin is pretty much like every other human being whose individual motivations are a mixed bag.

I have no issues with John. I think Joseph Smith liked the catbird seat and I think JD does as well.

[lambdacoug]

I am pretty convinced that whenever life deals you a setback you always take time to remind yourself that you are the victim!

Good to know while you run so hard from mormonism you seem very, very mormon to me.

Well, I was raised a mormon and followed the path that was proscribed as faithfully as possible. Its no wonder it left an indelible mark. You'll have to excuse me if my mormon upbringing is still apparent, I spent 33 years in the faith, and only the last 4 outside of it. I'm unsurprised that the 33 show through, no matter how much I wish it didn't.

[The Rambam]

But I agree that the trajectory of these forums does seem to be towards leaving the church.

It is hard to justify the paying of 10% of your income to a corporate entity that you don't think actually speaks for God. Once you stop paying the 10%, you lose your Temple recommend. Once you lose your recommend, you are a second-class member, a project, and all leadership opportunities are lost to you. Unless you are willing to stay in the Church with those limitations, you leave. The vast majority, finding themselves thus ostracized (by their own realizations/choices) do not wish to abide as second class citizens and leave.

It all starts with realizing that the President isn't necessarily a Prophet, pretty soon you don't want to fund massive land purchases in Nebraska or Swarovski Crystal shops in high end shopping centers, and it is a very slippery slope from there to out.

Very few can put the demons back in Pandora's box and very few can be happy in a society that views them as apostate, weak, and/or dangerous.