Religion is Personal

[SoonerCoug]

Can Mormons dish it out but not take it?

Here's what I mean:

I recently had a conversation with a Mormon about proselytizing. He told me how offensive he thought it was that I flaunt my agnosticism.

I responded: "I'm not trying to convert anyone to agnosticism. I'm just admitting my personal agnosticism. You are constantly trying to get me to go to Church, but when have I ever asked you NOT to go to Church? When have I ever invited you to become an agnostic like me?"

He said: "Well then you should avoid talking about religion altogether. People find it offensive."

I said: "I was sent by the LDS Church to Russia for two years in order to talk about religion with people. Are you telling me that it was OK for me to talk about religion and even try to convert people when I was promoting LDS theology, but now that I'm openly agnostic, it's not OK for me to share my beliefs with people anymore?"

He said: "Yes, that's what I'm telling you. Religion is personal, and people find your beliefs to be offensive. And what you did on your mission was different. On your mission, you were inviting people to a better life."

I'm a little perplexed by this, and I think there is a huge double standard within Mormonism. If religion is so personal that I should not talk about it, then why was I sent on a mission? I think this is primarily a reflection of the fact that many Mormons fear discussion, and also that they refuse to accept a diversity of viewpoints.

[byu71]

Can Mormons dish it out but not take it?

Here's what I mean:

I recently had a conversation with a Mormon about proselytizing. He told me how offensive he thought it was that I flaunt my agnosticism.

I responded: "I'm not trying to convert anyone to agnosticism. I'm just admitting my personal agnosticism. You are constantly trying to get me to go to Church, but, when have I ever asked you NOT to go to Church? When have I ever invited you to become an agnostic like me?"

He said: "Well then you should avoid talking about religion altogether. People find it offensive."

I said: "I was sent by the LDS Church to Russia for two years in order to talk about religion with people. Are you telling me that it was OK for me to talk about religion and even try to convert people when I was promoting LDS theology, but now that I'm an agnostic, it's not OK for me to share my beliefs with people anymore?"

He said: "Yes, that's what I'm telling you. Religion is personal, and people find your beliefs to be offensive. And what you did on your mission was different. On your mission, you were inviting people to a better life."

I'm a little perplexed by this, and I think there is a huge double standard within Mormonism. If religion is so personal that I should not talk about it, then why was I sent on a mission? I think this is primarily a reflection of the fact that many Mormons fear discussion, and also that they refuse to accept a diversity of viewpoints.

So you are taking your encounter with one person and applying it to everyone. Why do you let "some" mormons get under your skin so much. You should toghen up and not let them get to you like they do.

[SoonerCoug]

So you are taking your encounter with one person and applying it to everyone. Why do you let "some" mormons get under your skin so much. You should toghen up and not let them get to you like they do.

This not about me being tough or not. I think it's pretty clear that silencing dissent is a global problem within Mormonism (e.g. Cougarboard). This isn't about me at all. I'm interested in discussing the double standard.

[byu71]

This not about me being tough or not. I think it's pretty clear that silencing dissent is a global problem within Mormonism (e.g. Cougarboard). This isn't about me at all. I'm interested in discussing the double standard.

I will be interested in reading the thread. I won't be able to contribute though because I think the double standard is all in your head.

[Katy Lied]

dont you find it exhausting poking all those mormon bears?

and yes, you are able to get the goat of many mormons, unlike say, catholics, because you used to be mormon. If you converted to catholicism for 4 years, and then went and talked about how you are now agnostic, you'd bug all the catholics, while the mormons would eat it up.

but for now, you're loaded for mormon bear, and you just talk about how mormons are sensitive, and how other religions are not so sensitive. it's not a fair comparison.

i say this assuming that you are a pretty righteous man, probably far more righteous than most mormon defenders of the faith.

[YOhio]

I'm sure that there are some, maybe even many Mormons who maintain a double standard when discussing religion. The rest don't.

[SoonerCoug]

but for now, you're loaded for mormon bear, and you just talk about how mormons are sensitive, and how other religions are not so sensitive. it's not a fair comparison..

When have I said that other religions are not sensitive? I'd argue that factions of Islam are slightly more sensitive than Mormons.

[Katy Lied]

okay, you don't talk about how other religions are sensitive. You don't really talk at all about other faiths. Like I said, loaded for marmon b'ar.

[SoonerCoug]

okay, you don't talk about how other religions are sensitive. You don't really talk at all about other faiths. Like I said, loaded for marmon b'ar.

I don't think I'd be very good at discussing Catholicism with Catholics. I think I could discuss God in general with them, though. Anyone know any good Catholic sports message boards?

Also, I have started a whole bunch of threads on Scientology, and I mentioned Catholicism in at least one of them.

http://cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=4165

http://cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=10540

http://cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=22271

http://cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=55375

http://cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=4068

[PaloAltoCougar]

I am LDS. I rarely dish it out. I can take it. Hope this helps answer your question.

[SoonerCoug]

I am LDS. I rarely dish it out. I can take it. Hope this helps answer your question.

I believe you.

And just to clarify:

By dishing it out, I was referring to attempts to discuss religion or even convert people or proselytize, of course.

[byu71]

I am LDS. I rarely dish it out. I can take it. Hope this helps answer your question.

LOL, you are good that way. I like to dish it out, but feel because I do, I should man up and take it when it comes my way.

[SoonerCoug]

LOL, you are good that way. I like to dish it out, but feel because I do, I should man up and take it when it comes my way.

You and PAC make me wonder if this is more of a generational question.

In any case, I bring this up because I view it as a great opportunity for Mormonism. Vigorous debate is refreshing and intellectually stimulating.

Mormon leadership has a chance to encourage open discussion, but instead they have cowered behind boring, watered-down lesson manuals.

To you older CUFFERS: Was Sunday School different back in the 60s and 70s? I was but an ovum. Have things been simplified and watered down? Or is that just my perception?

[mUUser]

In this case, he was wrong. You were right. The older I get, the less I care what others think. Don't know what that says about me though.

[byu71]

You and PAC make me wonder if this is more of a generational question.

In any case, I bring this up because I view it as a great opportunity for Mormonism. Vigorous debate is refreshing and intellectually stimulating.

Mormon leadership has a chance to encourage open discussion, but instead they have cowered behind boring, watered-down lesson manuals.

To you older CUFFERS: Was Sunday School different back in the 60s and 70s? I was but an ovum. Have things been simplified and watered down? Or is that just my perception?

IMHO your perception would be more valid back in the 60's and 70's.