Did leaving religion change your ethics?

[_RockSlider]

i've only offered one opinion here. Seems to be a high correlation between divorce and unhappiness with the Church. I can see that with people I know. People here. I've always wondered about it. It's like an episode from the Office and Toby, divorced man.

Are divorced persons more willing to blame the Church?

Are divorced persons more knowledgeable about the Church's supposed failings?

Are divorced persons more willing to speak out against the Church?

It is a mystery to me.

Come on Bot, you started this. Are you currently married? How many times have you been married?

[_Meadowchik]

Xen,

You nailed it and a it’s a big fallacy in their divine claims. Mormon God teaches its members the temple ordinances are required for ALL mankind to return to Him. Mormon God baptizes and endows gays, criminals, terrorists, non-tithe payers, etc, but only when they are dead. That creates a bit of a problem when those people can just as easily do it for themselves while they are alive. Why then does Mormon God exclude the living from ordinances that are required and will happen when they die regardless of how they lived their lives simply because they don’t meet the “standard” of Mormon Gods mortal organization?

That’s a big disconnect in the narrative in my opinion.

They make the temple exclusive for living participants because the secrecy and exclusivity promotes group cohesion and loyalty. In other words, the church is more concerned with preserving itself and its influence over members than doing the work of saving souls.

[_Meadowchik]

For Yahoo Bot, I've been married for 19 years, never divorced. I would speculate the obvious: divorce puts a person at odds with the cultural ideals where an array of insights become visible, usually how the teachings, practice, and social norms treat a fringe person in the church. Thus they literally may know more and have more to complain about.

Per ethics, I'd say I give less deference to feelings alone as an authority on objective and spiritual truth. I am also convinced that the prevailing LDS paradigm of prophet is a form of spiritual violence. Telling someone you stand between them and God is unethical and immoral.

[_Choyo Chagas]

If I were to speculate, I'd say there is a sub rosa instinct among divorced persons to lash out at other than their own personal moral failings, and whether it be Judaism, the Catholic Church or Mormonism, the big Church is a likely target.

Good start with a speculative explanation. Would you suspect any additional correlation with the following possibilities?

1. Television watchers?
2. Right-handed people?
3. People who have read Lord of the Rings?
4. People who have eaten corn flakes?
5. People who have ridden in a Ford automobile?
6. People who eat their eggs fried?
7. People who shower?
8. Pedestrians?
9. People who live in the northern hemisphere?
10. People who talk about ethics?

11. the big endians; people who break their eggs upon the larger end ?

It is allowed on all hands,
that the primitive way of breaking eggs, before we eat them, was upon the
larger end; but his present majesty's grandfather, while he was a boy,
going to eat an egg, and breaking it according to the ancient practice,
happened to cut one of his fingers. Whereupon the emperor his father
published an edict, commanding all his subjects, upon great penalties, to
break the smaller end of their eggs. The people so highly resented this
law, that our histories tell us, there have been six rebellions raised on
that account; wherein one emperor lost his life, and another his crown.
These civil commotions were constantly fomented by the monarchs of
Blefuscu; and when they were quelled, the exiles always fled for refuge
to that empire. It is computed that eleven thousand persons have at
several times suffered death, rather than submit to break their eggs at
the smaller end. Many hundred large volumes have been published upon
this controversy: but the books of the Big-endians have been long
forbidden, and the whole party rendered incapable by law of holding
employments.

by the way
this quote below may be as well about definition of tea; as such, offtopic here...

During the course of these troubles, the emperors of
Blefuscu did frequently expostulate by their ambassadors, accusing us of
making a schism in religion, by offending against a fundamental doctrine
of our great prophet Lustrog, in the fifty-fourth chapter of the
Blundecral (which is their Alcoran). This, however, is thought to be a
mere strain upon the text; for the words are these: 'that all true
believers break their eggs at the convenient end.' And which is the
convenient end, seems, in my humble opinion to be left to every man's
conscience, or at least in the power of the chief magistrate to
determine.

oops... more a double off
microprocessors of motorola are big endian
microprocessors of intel are little endian

we should categorize the apologists and critics by usage of their devices during accessing this site

[_Jesse Pinkman]

My ethics didn't change, but I was gentler on myself if I messed up. My inner voice became more logical, more reasonable, kinder, loving, forgiving (of myself).

This.

Also, just because I decided that the LDS Church was not accurate did not mean that I gave up religion or believing in God. It simply meant that I didn't necessarily believe in the LDS version of God.

[_Jesse Pinkman]

i've only offered one opinion here. Seems to be a high correlation between divorce and unhappiness with the Church. I can see that with people I know. People here. I've always wondered about it. It's like an episode from the Office and Toby, divorced man.

Are divorced persons more willing to blame the Church?

Are divorced persons more knowledgeable about the Church's supposed failings?

Are divorced persons more willing to speak out against the Church?

It is a mystery to me.

My divorce had nothing to do with my feelings regarding the Church. Actually, since my divorce, I have probably gained more respect for it in some ways than before. The members I will forever treasure and it is the people that keep my one foot in the door.

[_Jesse Pinkman]

Mormon God teaches its members the temple ordinances are required for ALL mankind to return to Him. Mormon God baptizes and endows gays, criminals, terrorists, non-tithe payers, etc, but only when they are dead. That creates a bit of a problem when those people can just as easily do it for themselves while they are alive. Why then does Mormon God exclude the living from ordinances that are required and will happen when they die regardless of how they lived their lives simply because they don’t meet the “standard” of Mormon Gods mortal organization?

That’s a big disconnect in the narrative in my opinion.

If there is any validity to the teachings of Christ in regards to the 'uttermost farthing' and that no unclean thing can enter into the kingdom of heaven, it might not seem so unreasonable that folks that are disposed to disbelieve and/or come out in opposition to the Lord...the church...or obedience to the commandments would be put 'on hold' until a later time when they are able to fully repent and/or understand what the ramifications are behind their actions. If they are currently moving in a direction that runs in opposition to the teachings of the church, common sense...at least to me...would dictate that they shouldn't be in the temple.

Regards,
MG

That’s a very Mormon answer.

Yes, it is. But a doctrinal one. It counters your opinion and explains why the worthiness interviews are set up as they are. I'm not saying I agree that this is the right policy or approach, but that is the Mormon doctrinal explanation for why the temple keeps its doors closed to the public.

[Guest]

So let me apply Bot's stellar reasoning here to my own experience. Most of the divorced people I know are Mormon. I have always wondered why that is.

Are divorced people, divorced because they are Mormons?

Are divorced Mormons divorced because they know more about Mormonism?

Are divorced Mormons more willing to speak about what it is in Mormonism that led to their divorce?

It is a mystery to me.

Edited to add:
I am in my fourth decade of my first marriage but I suppose there is still time to become one of those unhappy divorced critics Bot claims exist.

[_bcuzbcuz]

With that said, did leaving religion change your ethics?

I considered myself ethical when I was religious......but I was not accountable for a good number of those years. Either I was too young to be considered ethical/unethical (or does pulling wings off mosquitos count), and then I was baptised at 8 = clean slate ??

Up to the age of 16 most youth get a legal free pass (I hadn't murdered anyone,,,,,yet) but I did cheat on some school exams, along with asking in prayer that God feed me some answers.

I didn't commit any major ethical trespasses until I went through the temple, at which point I was threatened to keep my ethical compass always tuned in the direction of the GA's, or else. I was threatened with a sentence of death. That, in my book, was obedience by coercion.

Can actions be considered ethical if they are forced? I think not. I behaved the way that was expected, so that I would not be punished in the future. That is not ethical behaviour.

When I left the church all those punishments? or rewards? were removed. I have a bishop's letter to prove it. At that point I became responsible for all my own actions without any coercion.

Did leaving Mormonism change my ethics? Yes, completely. I am now an ethical person, not because of punishments or rewards promised, but because I want to be ethical.

Atheism 1 ; Mormonism 0

[_Tator]

When I was a Mormon I lived a lie when I left I quit living a lie.