If you weren't a Mormon what would you be?

[_Polygamy Porter]

Thanks for the non answer, I won't ask again.

They were non-denominational quasi-believers in a theistic kind of way some of the time but we never discussed it much, if that helps. My Dad approached the Mormon faith perhaps like Runtu does, except less politely.

Perhaps more like Moi? :)

[_Polygamy Porter]

Baptism is indoctrination.

Do you think that LDS baptism is any more harmful than say, a Catholic or Presbyterian baptism which is done when the child is a baby?

Well since those other religions don't hunt down their inactives, I'd say the latter two are far less harmful than the Mormon cult baptism.

My wife was still attending when my daughter turned eight and she was perplexed over whether she should have her pass through the submerged turnstile in the baptismal font. The pushy bishop told my wife, that of course children could not make such decisions and that is why parents will be held responsible for them being dunked.

Needless to say, I did not do the dunking. I left that to my TBM father in law. I did attend and sat right next to my sweet child and held her close whilst shooting skunk eyes to the jerk off bishoprick counselor who blatantly targeted me in his stupid talk, "You have made a wise decision today, it will make you happy... unlike others who make bad choices that will make them unhappy..." He was lucky we was in a suit, or I would have tossed his arrogant ass in the frigging font.

Our next daughter is turning eight in several months.. and guess what!! She will be the first non member in our family!!! THAT is exciting! Even though we have been inactive to six months, a few weeks ago she did ask whether she would be dunked. My older daughter beat me to the answer, and did a superb job, "NO WAY!!"

"Why not?" the younger one asked

"Because its all a bunch of lies!", my older daughter responded, "Plus they would make you go back and sit in BOOORING church!"

"Ohhhhh yeahhhh.... YUCK! never mind!", the youngest quipped.

My wife and I had a good laugh.

[Alf'Omega]

You send a letter to the Bishop and walk away. Everything else strikes me as personal drama.

Dude... this is some serious naiveté, the kind demonstrated only by the most ignorant of TBMs.

Yeah, I walked away from the church. No problem. And my believing family members walked away from me. Personal drama? I suppose, but guess who's encouraging that personal drama? I suppose I should just get over it, huh? I mean, they're only family members, right? Who are they compared to the almighty church? (<-insert massive sarcasm).

There are so many reasons people are pissed off when they realize the church is a fraud (including feeling conned, paying incredible amounts of their money to a fraud, giving incredible amounts of their time to a fraud, etc). Only a belligerent Mormon couldn't understand and empathize.

I'd love to hear you repeat this same sentiment once your own family was torn apart by the ridiculous claims of your cult. It's exactly comments like yours that make me think the only difference between a Mormon and a moron is an 'm'.

Curiously enough though, I still believe that the Universe was intellegently created and their is a purpose to life. And our life force does continue on to live on after this body dies. I sat down once and tried to reconcile all that I know about physics. the universe and the sub atomic energy that appears to be the bases of physical matter and came up a GOD theory (Grand Organized Design). Well, it works for me.... What more can I ask?

Doesn't it strike you as odd that for a supposedly intelligently designed universe which apparently was designed for our inhabitance that less than 0.00000000000000001% of it is actually inhabitable by us? If the design is so intelligent, why can we mere mortals see so many obvious problems with its design? The illusion of design you've superimposed over what you see around you is simply compensation for not being privy to the billions of years it took the earth to get to where it is today.

Sounds good, but it is a rare 6 year old that will not at that point choose the faith her friends choose. I intend to raise my kids in the LDS faith. If they choose to leave it I will not judge or estrange myself from them.

You have some stats on this? I'd be interested in the study conducted that drew this conclusion.

My daughter goes to visit her cousins in the summer and during spring break, and usually spends a week or so there (since they live one state over). She loves them to death, considers the youngest her best friend, but she's told me on several occasions that the only thing she doesn't like about being there is having to go to their church (Baptists). I don't think she's in any danger of picking up on their "faith." Even if she does, that's actually a good thing. I'd be much more proud of my daughter for thinking for herself rather than submitting to whatever I believe because "I told her so." Talk about encouraging your kids to grow up to be children. But the fact of the matter is that I highly doubt she'll submit to any faith. She's far too rational, intelligent, and talented to fall into that trap.

[_Mercury]

You rmaking my po9int Jersey. A child doesent need to understand a concept in depth to know the difference between right and wrong. A basic knowledge is all that is required. With that basic concept in place, they receive the gift of the Holy Ghost to assist them in their gaining of this new tool.

Its interesting that in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence, you claim hat jersey is making your point. You could not be farther from the truth.

[_Mercury]

That strikes me as irrelevant. The average 19-year old undergrad sins more in a week than an 8-year old in a year :)

Your an idiot.

Were not talking about your imaginary rules you use to feel better about yourself, were talking about child development. You obviously do not get that.

It strikes you as irrelevant because were talking over your head. Gaz, your not as much of an idiot but Geez! your in the same trap this asshat is locked into. The common thread of course being faith-based reliance on Mormonism.

[_Yoda]

Some Schmo--

I think that the reason that most people grasp onto some type of religion is to make sense of what happens to a person when they die. There is a sense of longing of missing those who are close to us who have died, and the hope of somehow being able to be reunited with them again.

Religion does help take the sting of death away.

I was just curious about how you have come to terms with the idea of death. Has it made it more difficult for you to deal with the death of family members or close friends?

[_The Nehor]

That strikes me as irrelevant. The average 19-year old undergrad sins more in a week than an 8-year old in a year :)

Your an idiot.

Were not talking about your imaginary rules you use to feel better about yourself, were talking about child development. You obviously do not get that.

It strikes you as irrelevant because were talking over your head. Gaz, your not as much of an idiot but Geez! your in the same trap this asshat is locked into. The common thread of course being faith-based reliance on Mormonism.

I'm not using imaginary rules. I am saying that an understanding of ethics is not always (or even usually) a precursor for a moral life. I was arguing that his analogy didn't work but I guess that went too far over or under your head.

Does anyone else think it's a sign of a small mind that someone is unable to disagree with someone without hurling obscenities and personal attacks?

[_Some Schmo]

Some Schmo--

I think that the reason that most people grasp onto some type of religion is to make sense of what happens to a person when they die. There is a sense of longing of missing those who are close to us who have died, and the hope of somehow being able to be reunited with them again.

Religion does help take the sting of death away.

I was just curious about how you have come to terms with the idea of death. Has it made it more difficult for you to deal with the death of family members or close friends?

I agree with you when you say, "the reason that most people grasp onto some type of religion is to make sense of what happens to a person when they die." I've felt for a very long time the number one reason for religion's popularity is comfort. I've thought of creating an ad campaign for a new prescription medicine:

Religitol - Strong relief for all your existential pain.

But just because something is comforting, it doesn't make it right or true. Aspirin does cure you of what ails you; it simply masks the pain. Yes, it's comforting to think that you'll see a loved one again when you die. That really helps when you're grieving (believe me; that's all I thought about as a boy of eight trying to reconcile my mother's death).

But here's the thing: understanding that there is likely no life after death ("likely" being used after considering it in terms of probabilities), that actually makes my day to day living far more important. This is it, man! This is all you've got. Make the most of it, because this tiny spec of existence is a gift you best not waste.

Am I afraid to die? Not really. I'm afraid of any potential pain leading up to my death, and I feel for how my wife and daughter might react to it, but once I'm gone, I will no longer have a central nervous system, I will have no consciousness, so what's there to be afraid of? I was just fine before I was born, and I imagine it'll be just like that once I'm gone.

In terms of how I currently deal with friends and family members' deaths, all I can say is that it is what it is. It's sad, like a lot of different aspects of life. Your entire life is a series of gifts and takeaways. It's just the way the game is played. No sense lamenting about it. Once you can accept the pain of your loved ones' deaths for what it is, it can help you to transcend the difficulty of feeling their loss. I think it does their memory a great disservice to look forward to what will never be rather than looking back on who they were and what they gave the world.

[_Some Schmo]

Does anyone else think it's a sign of a small mind that someone is unable to disagree with someone without hurling obscenities and personal attacks?

I don't think there's necessarily a direct correlation, no. It largely depends on why someone is "unable to disagree with someone without hurling obscenities and personal attacks." There could be some very valid reasons for it, in fact. What if the person being disagreed with is demonstrably wrong, but refuses to see it? That can be very frustrating, and one way to exorcise that frustration might be to hurl obscenities and personal attacks. It probably doesn't do much for their argument, but it can be very liberating.

So yeah, while it could potentially be a sign of a small mind, I don't see a one-to-one relationship there.

[_The Nehor]

Does anyone else think it's a sign of a small mind that someone is unable to disagree with someone without hurling obscenities and personal attacks?

I don't think there's necessarily a direct correlation, no. It largely depends on why someone is "unable to disagree with someone without hurling obscenities and personal attacks." There could be some very valid reasons for it, in fact. What if the person being disagreed with is demonstrably wrong, but refuses to see it? That can be very frustrating, and one way to exorcise that frustration might be to hurl obscenities and personal attacks. It probably doesn't do much for their argument, but it can be very liberating.

So yeah, while it could potentially be a sign of a small mind, I don't see a one-to-one relationship there.

You're probably right. I'm a little more on edge today due to lack of sleep and cramming for finals. Hopefully it will pass.