Mass resignation event tomorrow (6/30/12)

[Pelado]

If I were their stake prez, I would Ex them before they could resign!!! Pull the rug right out from under them!

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that'd land you in some questionable legal waters...

http://www.mormonnomore.com/legal-precedent

That site only covers an excommunication after a resignation - it doesn't mention any legal consequences for a preemptive strike on their membership before their planned resignation.

Wally's strategy survives.

[SeattleUte]

It's a proven fact that religion makes people stupider. Like smoking and heart disease, not always. But it’s a risk factor. I may have suffered some long term damage myself.

[LiveCoug]

Sounds like a boring event. I will not be attending.

[PaloAltoCougar]

PAC has already said he intends to do this. But you should plan on doing it because I expect to outlive PAC. He's much older than I am.

Thank you for remembering. Notwithstanding the actuarial prognostications that suggest I won't be around to do your posthumous excommunication, I'm moving ahead and putting a case together. The witness list is beginning to resemble the Manhattan White Pages, and the disciplinary council will be look a lot like the Seinfeld finale.

And be assured that if YOhio tries to hold a council to get you ex'd as well, it won't happen. The Church is very careful about this sort of thing and the duplication of work for our kindred dead just doesn't happen. You're in good hands here.

[Indy Coug]

....please suggest ways we ignorant Americans can better protect mother Earth.

That's "Gaea", you nitwit.

[Blueintheface]

That's "Gaea", you nitwit.

I don't know her that well and choose to use her last name.

[SeattleUte]

Thank you for remembering. Notwithstanding the actuarial prognostications that suggest I won't be around to do your posthumous excommunication, I'm moving ahead and putting a case together. The witness list is beginning to resemble the Manhattan White Pages, and the disciplinary council will be look a lot like the Seinfeld finale.

And be assured that if YOhio tries to hold a council to get you ex'd as well, it won't happen. The Church is very careful about this sort of thing and the duplication of work for our kindred dead just doesn't happen. You're in good hands here.

He wants to hog the credit.

[The Rambam]

Believe it or not, this is something that is very, very hard for people to do. It takes a lot of courage for many people given what it will cost them, which is honestly why most don't. There are some very sad human tragedies for both people who resign and their loved ones who are still in the church that have unfolded and will unfold both in the lives of the people participating here and many, many others. While I realize this sort of thing is going to draw a very skeptical and defensive reaction from people, my only message would be that awareness of these transitions may lead people on both sides to think of ways to better treat each other and understand each other. There was a time when coming home from a mission carried a much more powerful stigma than it does now, just as one example. But as it happened more frequently and people had more experience with people who did the stigma has become much less. Being gay has a much lesser stigma now. Stigmas and strong differentiations lead people on both sides of the line to behave badly, IMO.

My hope is that these things will normalize somewhat over time. Just as knowing someone gay has made a lot of people turn the corner on that issue, maybe knowing someone who has resigned will do the same sort of thing. Like I said, I'm not involved in this but I hope it can do some good.

This is another way of saying they are attacking the Church by seeking to lessen the stigma associated with resigning membership which will make it easier to resign. The Church views those who would lessen the fear they feel towards the Church as attacking the Church. They rule by fear and you weaken that fear, you are an enemy.

some people desperately seeking attention

How about media whore resignation event for a couple dozen members?

LOL. You obviously don't know the organizers. They are leaving Mormonism behind. After spending years and impacting tens of thousands, they are walking completely away. Others are turning their Mormon-themed enterprises into careers and these folks are putting it all down and walking away. And they get accused by the ignorant of being media whores seeking attention.

Their motivation is to help break down barriers of fear members feel towards the Church. Agree or disagree that this goal is good, but don't misunderstand the dynamic at play. This is their parting gift, as they see it. Them standing up as saying, "You have nothing to fear from the Corporation masquerading as a church. Stop being afraid."

If it's about ceasing hostilities then this is a pretty poor approach.

It is not about ceasing hostilities. The Church will always be hostile to those who question authority. It is about leaving the lecture hall in an inspiring way.

And what better to address the sensitivities surrounding the issue than a media-hyped public resignation by a few dozen people while signing a Declaration of Independence from Mormonism followed by a hike to the This is the Place monument and letter dump at the Post Office.

As you know, the Declaration of Independence has significant meaning for Americans and it represents the the beginning of a war and ultimate victory of freedom over a tyrannical regime. So when the group uses this imagery as part of their resignation from the church it's clear that they're not as much interested in open and constructive dialogue as they are publicity and bomb throwing.

Again, you see it this way because you think it is a good thing that people live in fear of the Church. You think this makes them happier than they would be wandering in the evil world. You don't want these people to be seen happily and safely leaving the Church. You don't want them to inspire others to lay aside their fears. So you call them bomb throwers. Yes they are threatening the Church with harm--the loss of the fear of the members would be devastating to revenue.

I think the church needs more options than the "all-in" or "all-out" approach that seems to exist. Let them figure out the relationship they want with the church that they are most comfortable with. It's not enough that they attend, they need to have a calling. It's not enough to have a calling, they need to pay tithing. It's not enough that they pay tithing, they need to attend the temple. It's not enough .... That's when some believing members just opt to stay home and enjoy their Sunday.

This is brilliant and true. Thank you. But they have painted themselves into a corner and can't get out until the paint dries. It will take a generation or so. The Church will ultimately become an uncorrelated big tent, or it will become a tiny sect of unsufferable pricks, albeit a wealthy one. We will tend towards the latter for a while it seems. But I haven't given up hope on the former.

The whole notion of a church conducting an evidentiary hearing is silly. Sorry.

If anyone has ever heard of a Church Court being held, evidence being heard, and a not guilty/no discipline determination being made, I'd like to hear about it. Certainly there must have been an exception sometime somewhere.

I've enjoyed your responses and I think you truly are looking for dialogue, and not just on CUF, but I take minor exception with being lumped into a group of people simply because I find the event silly. You're assuming those responding aren't in fact sympathetic when people like myself find the announcement quite self-serving but remain sympathetic to any crises of faith. I think that's an important distinction.

If you think the organizers of the event are trying to serve themselves by today's effort, you don't get what is going on at all. It is much more fascinating than your shallow analysis allows. And much more dangerous to the Church. As long as the Church and their parrots see such events in purely base personal terms, they will not be able to engage in a meaningful way to counteract the weakening of their hold on members. If Church managers are sincere in truly believing that they bind on earth and bind in heaven and the only way back to God is through their approving nod (and I believe they are completely sincere), they have a sacred duty to do better as shepherds than the name calling effort seen on this thread.

http://www.mormonnomore.com/legal-precedent

I had not seen this care before. Thanks for sharing it. Very interesting.

[Rosebud]

Here's the thing Rambam:

Martin Luther King Jr. was successful at empowering people and initiating change because he had a dream. Promoting dreams is more powerful than promoting grievances even when the motives for both types of promotions are the same.

This is an example of the promotion of grievances.

[All-American]

http://www.mormonnomore.com/legal-precedent

You missed the key point: the people in the cases were ex-ed AFTER they resigned. The trick is to hit them while they're still in the ring.

[UtahDan]

You missed the key point: the people in the cases were ex-ed AFTER they resigned. The trick is to hit them while they're still in the ring.

But you see that is practically impossible right? The current policy calls for a hearing and that the person on trial be given notice. So that will always afford them the opportunity to resign before the discipline is carried out.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Holy overreaction, Batman.

I am giving Rambam an official "oh brother".

[All-American]

But you see that is practically impossible right? The current policy calls for a hearing and that the person on trial be given notice. So that will always afford them the opportunity to resign before the discipline is carried out.

Sure, if their only goal is to beat the fall of the curtain. But if you have a "mass resignation" planned for Saturday . . . .

[Pheidippides]

Holy overreaction, Batman.

I am giving Rambam an official "oh brother".

I'm going to give Rambam the benefit of the doubt, and then ask who in the holy name of hell is their intended audience? If we progmos, as SU calls us, are having this sort of a reaction, who do they think they are going to influence for good?

[UtahDan]

Here's the thing Rambam:

Martin Luther King Jr. was successful at empowering people and initiating change because he had a dream. Promoting dreams is more powerful than promoting grievances even when the motives for both types of promotions are the same.

This is an example of the promotion of grievances.

I completely disagree. Some people dream of being free of it, other people dream of having their cake and eat it too. The whole "I have a grievance" thing is a clever quip and I love the person who I heard say it, but I think it falls apart if you think about it too hard. While I understand there are some other underlying issues here, I would be careful in leveling this particular criticism because I think it hands ammunition to your enemies who will ask why is that true of what they are doing and not of what you are doing? The distinction isn't that big. And it is not a fair criticism of either.