#Christian response to Latter-day Saint beliefs | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

not-so-superheroine · 2 months ago

Note

how did you come to join rlds/coc?

Sorry it took me so long to get to this question. I just knew it was a long answer.

I think my testimony gives a good idea, and i'll include . Because I felt the presence of God calling me to go join them is the overarching answer, but I can also give points that drew me in.

But in a few some points:

I fell in love with the modern RLDS version of zion (and some of the old one too. nothing to do with israel.)

I saw they strived to be an inclusive place.

The Community of Christ's Enduring Principles are things I want to strive to live my life by.

The community made me feel very welcome and I saw people conduct themselves in a Christ-like manner

The community is very tight knit. society needs more of that.

Like, there is a certain behavioral affect (? cultural distinction?) that many members have that i thought was strange at first but it’s lovely. It’s kind, loving, and welcoming, and you adjust to it very quickly imo. Even to the lingo, which was a fun process.

Continuing Revelation. Saw evidence of fulfilled prophecy in the Doctrine and Covenants and the spiritual growth in the church over the years

Continuing Revelation in general. I like that my faith is alive like that. We have prophets, God could reveal new truths for new scripture tomorrow. We are encouraged to be prophetic ourselves and discern the future together, i like that.

Also, no new scripture allowed in the mainstream? why not? does God still not talk in this way? great points in my head.

The communal aspect to everything is good. Just like how any sect of mormonism should imo The people i reached out to while seeking (investigating) were very kind to me and open to my questions. They were also there for me spiritually, and became friends.

I could email leadership with questions and get responses. At one point, one of the church Presidents reached out to me.

It’s academically welcoming. I was able to accept the book of Mormon as scripture when taught from a 19th century point of view. This, in turn, made me much more comfortable with the Bible. Community of Christ has an official statement on how to read scripture and there is scripture on how to think about and use scripture too.

I can even acknowledge when the history and the religious text don’t match. Because scripture doesn’t need to be historically correct to be sacred and hold an important message from the Lord.

Not really a reason but it is there: Joseph Smith III rocked and was intended to be next. It shouldn’t matter. But what does matter is that he set the church on a good path imo. Emma too. Out of all the early schisms of mormonism I would have to go RLDS belief wise, because Nauvoo era theology isn’t something I believe in. I think Smith got caught up in his own head and desires for much of it. No offense meant to post Nauvoo mormon sects.

This does not mean I haven’t picked some things up from Brighamites. For example, Trinity doesn’t work for me. And I pray to Heavenly Mother. I believe in one Divine source with many expressions. But that doesn’t mean “anything goes” and I accept it, just knowing that God speaks to people of many cultures all over, as the good book (of mormon) says.

But yes. This is why Community of Christ. Not that there are all common Community of Christ beliefs, but I thrive here spiritually and am encouraged to grow all the same. Older testimony under cut that gives detail

I encourage y'all to watch this on video rather than just the text edited version i put here. not to be like "watch my talk on it" but please, watch my talk on the subject. I also talk about unity of the saints and what i have learned from other christians including other groups of latter day saints. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8w2M6PEKfg

I start giving my testimony and talk at 26:36

____________

I am Wednesday. Here I share a portion of myself and my testimony. At the time of this writing, I have lived 26 years. I am a Black woman of Gullah/Geechee ethnicity. I was raised in the African Methodist Episcopal church, which I am extremely grateful for. My nascent spirituality was nurtured here. I learned the meaning of community and was immersed in my culture. I was taught to love and respect my Black self, in a society that would not be inclined to show me the respect and love any human deserves. I may have converted, but I was meant to be nurtured here. I am a Lesbian, and have experienced discrimination in faith communities due attitudes towards LGBTQ+ persons. I despaired over thoughts that God didn’t love me, and wondered if I would be condemned to Hell. In part because of this and being scolded for my questioning nature regarding God and church doctrines, I fell away from faith. I grew a lot in this away time, but didn’t really deconstruct my faith until 2021. My isolation in the pandemic gave me time for introspection. I would watch content from mainly atheist ex-christians who discussed their deconstruction journey. They were usually ex-evangelical or ex-mormon, and were really helpful to me for unpacking the mess that was my faith. Then something peculiar happened that changed the path of my life. Through the ex-mormons, I encountered the Restoration. There was something intriguing about it, and I wanted to learn more, so I did. I learned history, and the doctrine of different Latter Day Saint sects. I loved how innovative and “of the people” the early church was and how alive the faith seemed to be. I listened to members and ex-members, past and present, talk about their experiences within their faith communities and how they experienced the Divine. These were some of the worst years of my life, but there was something here that gave me hope.

I came across an interview featuring John Hamer, in which he talked about Community of Christ as a home for those in faith transition. Many of the concerns I had about Christian faith communities were addressed. I craved such a spiritual home and became a seeker.

I asked many questions of missionaries, and my inquisitiveness was welcomed. I got myself an Inspired Version of the Bible, Doctrine and Covenants, and Book of Mormon. I was very impressed by the Doctrine and Covenants and found the contents to be Inspired and even prophetic, so I started attending Beyond the Walls services online.

One Sunday, the service was centered on the Worth of all Persons, Christian acceptance of LGBTQ+ persons, and the church in Tahiti. I listened to the members talk about their acceptance, their being guided by faith in Christ in the process, and how those things were compatible and complementary. The speakers affirmed God’s love and mercy for all. Their faith was strong, and they spoke with authority. Their Christ-like compassion was palpable. I felt what I now recognize as the Holy Spirit, come over me. After the message, the choir sang “Spirit of God like a fire is Burning” and I felt that fire burning in my chest and cried and praised the Lord for hours after.

My faith in God is stronger than ever. And my passion and belief in the Restoration bloomed.

#community of christ #tumbstake #afrostake #latter day saints #queerstake #answers #mormon #which no one seems to want to be called so by personal choice i am “mormon”#converted to (a sect of) mormonism in part by ex-mormons is wild #tho the pastor that played a large role in my theological understanding is and ex-mormon (L-dS) and is now a Seventy (CofChrist)#i have no idea what a Seventy is for mountain mormons. General Authorities - i think #quite of few sect to sect converts #in my experience - queer people / families with queer kids #where i am it's baptist converts that seem to be most common #which - mood. i still go to my other church but my membership tithe and main attendance goes to CofC.#i do give money to my other church tho. they have given me money for college. every kid going to college in that church. def donate there #religion

16 notes · View notes

overtakebrownwren · 2 years ago

Text

Angry Rant about an article.

Wired did a whoops, I guess. In their article on author Brandon Sanderson, they accidentally and sorta casually insulted his fans, his religion, and utah mormon culture (which is a separate thing from the religion, in that the church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints has over 15 million members worldwide with a vast number of cultures and local traditions impacting worship styles).

Firstly, Sanderson responded publicly to agree that the article wasn’t kind but asked that his readers be kinder in their reactions. To that I will try to adhere, since, although it’s been a few years, I really loved Elantris and Mistborn, and I respected his co-writing of the last three books of Wheel of Time immensely. In Wheel of Time, he could have distanced himself from the polygamy aspects (as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints this is a point on which there is always going to be a lot of hard conversations and awkward talks when you are a member) but he kept the characters consistent and respectful in their relationships. So, I will try to be kind in responding to this article.

Read his response here. It’s surprisingly sweet. Read that if nothing else.

https://www.reddit.com/r/brandonsanderson/comments/1200dzk/on_the_wired_article/

Okay. SO the wired article.

Its title is “Brandon Sanderson Is Your God.” This isn’t necessarily a bad sign. Plenty of fantasy authors create fictional pantheons for fantasy worlds. This could be a clever reference or something about the ways that Latter Day Saints show respect in their worship. Or maybe it’s about the belief that heaven is a place where you can (over millennium) grow to become like heavenly father and many of his fans watch his youtube writing lessons to try to become writers like him.

Then he calls him a mormon.

Now. See here. It’s not disrespectful. We’ve had a reclamation movement over this term almost as long as people used it to mock and distance us from Christians. So. Okay. He probably didn’t notice that the past few years Latter Day Saints have been pushing for correct terminology- giving us our real name or a part of that (note my own use of Latter Day Saints, part of the title) But since it’s also a term for all of the churches that use the scriptures “The Book of Mormon” it is pretty imprecise. He’s probably missed the movement, or doesn’t remember which sect Sanderson belongs to . . Except, no. By the third paragraph he has to explain that LDS stands for Latter Day Saints and that that means Mormon. . . But this isn’t a lesson on theology or respectfully using people’s names for themselves. He’s just trying to connect to his readers so whatever.

And it’s whatever that he starts by mentioning Sanderson’s sales then saying that Wired worker’s never heard of him. He even says it’s whatever, “Sanderson has millions upon millions of fans all over the planet; it doesn’t matter that some losers at a single magazine (even if it is one of the nerdier ones) had never heard of him,” but then points out that no other big publishers have either.

Then he comes to his thesis. The reason that Sanderson isn’t a household name- “Could it be, finally, because he’s a weirdo Mormon?”

No comment. I’ll keep reading

Wait. New thesis found! “I find Sanderson depressingly, story-killingly lame.”

… not gonna comment. Gotta be kind. It’s his opinion. It’s his digital paper to waste.

Then, in front of his wife, Jared Kehe of Wired asks, “Maybe nobody writes about you, I say to Sanderson, because you don’t write very well.”

And look. In the early days of his website I remember being able to find and read his first book, one he never got published because it was too awkward of a book and format. It’s not there anymore (here), but it was pretty good- good in the way that I will devour a hundred chapter fanfiction from start to end regardless of the writing quality and all because of the joint enthusiasm of myself and the author over a base idea. His published writing? Much higher quality. Will it turn to shakespeare? Nope- not nearly enough sex and bawdy jokes or gender confusion for it to make the cut. But it’s still fun. His prose has grown, his world building is solid.

It’s just…

After reading this. After this article. I kinda want to be mean.

See, Jason Kehe, the author, is so critical of everything. He calls the men as the convention, “ men, boys, menboys, blurring together in a mass of pale, fleshy nerdery in Sanderson-appropriate graphic tees.” He says things like, “Sanderson is a bad writer; I’ve already said it.”

He sees the fandom and criticizes it for being all about worldbuilding over prose. “All this, I think to myself, is not the spirit of fantasy. If it’s worldbuilding, it’s only worldbuilding one thing: the worldbuilder’s world.” As though fun word play with no meaning- or such complex meaning that it takes forever and a codebreaker to discover it, is only important signifier of good writing. He comes off as such an elitist. And maybe it’s the middle school teacher in me, to want books with low entry points for my struggling readers, but not all books need to be super complex to be good. There is nothing wrong with some of Sanderson’s books being blatantly targeted to middle school students, others to adults, and to have a similar level of reading ability. I worked in a struggling school- some of the kids were in 8th grade with a kindergarten reading level.

Elitism comes through in other ways, too. For example, Sanderson, a successful writer, has a large home. But when Kehe comes over he seems freaked out by all the people there. Sanderson has friends and family over, like, all the time. His kids salt takeout. Sanderson wears a suit jacket over graphic tee-shirts. These are all written about as though the reader should know they are clearly disturbing qualities. Furthermore, there’s even a discussion on weather and how Sanderson feels and reacts to emotion that shows the writer edging towards vilification of the neurodivergent that made me personally uncomfortable (although it was more of a hint then a statement, so I might be overly sensitive).

Then there is Kehe’s demand on Sanderson’s privacy. He writes about several medical conditions Sanderson has, even when asked not to do so in one case. “When I ask Sanderson later to confirm this, he does but asks if I really have to print it. I’m sorry, I say. I really do,” Kehe writes. Boundaries mean little to Journalists. I get that. But finding something medical out from an employee in the home of the author? I’m just saying there are lines, even in journalism, that shouldn’t be crossed.

Worst of all. Kehe, the author, complains about a lack of a big story for this writer. He whines about it. And even I can see there is clearly, even within his own writing, a really easy bland story. A gimmy as it were. Like. I could do this in two days.

Quotes from Kehe:

“In the five months or so it has taken me to sit down and write this magazine story, which is 4,000 words long, Sanderson has published two books. “

“Sanderson formed a writers’ group with almost 30 years ago, back in college at Brigham Young University, when he was a nobody and worked the graveyard shift at a hotel so he could write the nights away. “

“Sanderson has lived so much of his life and fame openly, self-promotionally. It’s a major reason for his success.”

Do you see it? Pull themselves up by their bootstraps author! A writer who didn’t let not being a prose writer stop them from being a prolific well published writer! Follow your dreams, don’t limit yourself, etc etc…..

Then, for quality writing, you sprinkle in some disbelief that a “bad prose writer” can still make it- top it off with a few mentions of Sanderson’s time teaching on accessible platforms like podcasts and youtube, his house full of friends and family who he didn’t let success separating him from, his home with three boys and a wife and a religious community, and you have a republican’s wet dream of an author.

There is plenty of material here for all kinds of stories. Plenty of publications did articles on his self publishing kickstarter. See here.

Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/03/books/brandon-sanderson-kickstarter.html

Gizmo: https://gizmodo.com/brandon-sanderson-s-message-to-publishing-is-mostly-a-m-1848673821

CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/04/media/kickstarter-brandon-sanderson-books/index.html

So Why? Why did Wired do an article about how creepy and bad Sanderson is? Was the assignment to find a hot take? And all they could find was his writing is bad actually? Also weirdo religion?

What the hell?

In the end, he comes back to the title. And no, the connection isn’t deep. God creates worlds. Sanderson writes worlds. Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believe that after a few millennia of learning in heaven, some people will grow to be like their Heavenly Father and become Gods. Thus, Sanderson is a God. Blah.

But Kehe goes about it in as insulting a manner as possible. Kehe’s words italics, Mine in parenthesis.

When Mormons ask God for a sign, they speak of a “burning in the bosom.” Say you’re a kid, wondering if you should be a fantasy writer when you grow up. You might ask God what He thinks. If there’s a burning in your bosom, that’s probably a yes. (This is a really bad example, since you are supposed to ask for things you need for confirmation and children don’t need to know their future career yet. A more common example would be “Should I call home for a ride or is it safe to walk home in this snow storm?” or the more spiritual and personal, “Is this stuff I’m learning at church true?”)

So I press Sanderson on the moments he has felt the burning. He says they’re too intimate, too special, to talk about. That’s fine. Then let’s talk about Mormonism in another way. (Clearly this is targeted questioning because he wants to show that Latter Day Saint faith is hooky and weird. Good on Sanderson for setting boundaries. These experiences are, for those who don’t have experience with the feeling of “sacred” akin to the moment when you realize your mother loves you no matter what. Or the moment you look at your child and realize you adore them. Not secret, but a quiet still moment of love and connection that it’s for your facebook page.) Let’s talk about it as it relates to fantasy. Because it’s no secret: Mormonism is the fantasy of religion. (RUDE. Like seriously. Who says this about a faith. Where did he get the next quote?) “The science-fiction edition of Christianity,” I’ve heard it called, with its angels and alternative histories (Isn’t alternative history a term you could apply to every Christianity that believes in resurrection?), embodied gods (God’s having a physical body isn’t weird except when compared to some specific forms of monotheism), visions and plates made of gold. I ask Sanderson if I’ve got the ultimate promise of the religion right—the ultimate promise being, as I understand it, that we humans will, if we’re good, and marry well (not limited to this life- marriage is an eternal thing and can be formed as spirits eventually), and memorize the passcodes (I hate that, due to the promise of privacy in certain ceremonies, I can’t explain why this is totally wrong and still a little sorta almost correct), eventually pass into the highest kingdom (because we don’t believe in a hell- just in your progress towards this goal being damned or stopped) and come into our divine inheritance. We’ll become gods, in other words, and get our own planets. (Yeah, that phrase “Heavenly Father” is considered literally in our church. We’re in, like, an elementary school called mortality? More or less. Look it up if it’s something you want to know more about https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/comeuntochrist/believe/life-has-purpose/your-life-has-a-purpose ).

Sanderson doesn’t balk at the characterization; he agrees that’s the gist, and he knows where I’m going. He knows I want to know if what he’s doing—writing fantasy books—is fundamentally, in some way, some very central way, Mormon. Of course it is, he says. The worldbuilding. The gods incarnate. The systems of magic. So much of Mormonism is about rules; so are his books, where miracles don’t happen unless you put in the work (Unless there is a reason). That’s when, between mouthfuls of pork cutlet, Sanderson makes the connection between his work and the work of his Heavenly Father explicit. This is when he speaks the seven words of truth, the only ones I’m certain he has never said, in quite this way, ever before: “As I build books,” Sanderson says, as I sit there, for once entirely enraptured, “God builds people.”

This dude. This author. He’s looking for something new and different about Sanderson. When Sanderson is just a nice midwestern author who writes a huge amount of fiction and goes to church on sunday and doesn’t have a specific childhood trauma that explains his writing’s power. Why didn’t this guy just look up a most prolific writer list and talk about how many of the authors on it are now considered racist.

Look. My opinion as a teacher. It’s hard enough getting kids into reading now a days. Sometimes because of reading level. Sometimes because they look up an author to make sure they don’t need to worry about supporting a bigot and find something they said that makes them angry. Death of the author is nothing more than an action plan to my middle schoolers. So having articles like this, where authors and fans are citicted for being authors and fans- it doesn’t help anyone. It doesn’t make being a writer or author seem fun. And that’s what Sanderson’s books were for me, growing up. They were fun. They were emotional. They were a gateway into series far greater than my own.

Sanderson, in his gentle talk to fans, talks about Terry Pratchett’s Going Postal. He says “The man who collects those pins--Stanley Howler--IS special. In part BECAUSE of his passion. And the more you get to know him, or anyone, the more interesting you find them. This is a truism in life. People are interesting, every one of them--and being a writer is about finding out why.”

And this. This is what I want my kids to take away from books. Not great pose or being able to build a metaphor. Those get them past the state exams and then they can spend the rest of their life learning the intricacies of language. What I want them to take from our reading is empathy. Is the knowledge that in the hands of a master, no one, no life, is boring or small or dull. That their stories matter and so do those of the people who have nothing in common to them.

And that is why I’m being mean now, and saying that Wired Sanderson article is a failure in writing. They make Sanderson’s life other and different and wrong for being different. And they make me and my life feel smaller and worse for it.

#teaching #religion #brandon sanderson #wired #opinion

8 notes · View notes

freebiblestudyhub · 5 months ago

Text

Why Did Joseph Smith Create Mormonism?

Joseph Smith, the founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is a pivotal figure in the history of American religion. His establishment of what is commonly referred to as Mormonism—an extensive and distinct religious tradition—was driven by a combination of personal experiences, theological aspirations, and socio-historical contexts. This article explores the multifaceted reasons behind Joseph Smith’s creation of Mormonism, delving into his personal background, religious motivations, socio-political influences, and the broader implications of his movement.

1. Joseph Smith’s Early Life and Religious Context

The Frontier Religious Landscape

Joseph Smith was born on December 23, 1805, in Sharon, Vermont, during a period of intense religious revival known as the Second Great Awakening. This era was characterized by a proliferation of new religious movements and a heightened emphasis on individual spiritual experiences. The American frontier was a hotbed of religious experimentation, where revivalist preachers and new denominations frequently emerged.

Smith’s Personal Background

Smith’s early life was marked by economic instability and limited formal education. His family moved to Palmyra, New York, a region ripe with religious fervor and sectarian competition. Despite his humble beginnings, Smith grew up in a context where religious seeking was commonplace. His own spiritual quests were influenced by the religious turbulence of the time and his exposure to various Christian denominations.

The First Vision and Early Revelations

In 1820, at the age of 14, Smith claimed to have experienced a vision in which God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him. This vision, known as the First Vision, is considered by Latter-day Saints to be a foundational event that set the stage for the restoration of true Christianity. This experience was followed by a series of angelic visitations and revelations, including those from Moroni, who guided Smith to the golden plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated.

2. Theological Motivations

Restorationism

A central theological motivation for Joseph Smith was the concept of Restorationism—the belief that the original Christian church had been corrupted and needed to be restored to its primitive state. Smith saw himself as a prophet called to restore what he believed were lost doctrines and practices, including priesthood authority and the full gospel of Jesus Christ.

The Book of Mormon and Its Role

The Book of Mormon, published in 1830, was presented by Smith as another testament of Jesus Christ. It purportedly chronicled the history of ancient American civilizations and their dealings with God. For Smith and his followers, the Book of Mormon was a key element in restoring lost biblical truths and provided new doctrinal insights that differentiated Mormonism from traditional Christian denominations.

The Concept of Modern Revelation

Joseph Smith emphasized the role of ongoing revelation in his teachings. Unlike many Christian denominations that viewed the Bible as the final word, Smith taught that God continued to communicate with humankind through modern prophets. This idea was revolutionary and positioned Mormonism as a dynamic and evolving faith rather than a static tradition.

3. Socio-Political Influences

The Quest for Religious Authority

Smith’s claim of prophetic authority and his establishment of a new religious movement were, in part, responses to the perceived failings of existing religious institutions. The fragmented nature of Christianity in early 19th-century America created a context where new religious leaders could challenge traditional authorities and assert new claims of divine legitimacy.

The Role of Community and Social Organization

Mormonism was not only a religious movement but also a social one. Smith’s teachings emphasized communal living, cooperative economics, and a strong sense of collective identity. This was particularly attractive to followers who faced social and economic instability. The formation of communities such as Kirtland, Ohio; Nauvoo, Illinois; and later Salt Lake City, Utah, provided members with a sense of belonging and purpose, aligning with Smith’s vision of a righteous and unified community.

Persecution and Its Impact

Smith and his followers faced significant persecution, including violence and expulsion from various communities. This opposition helped to solidify the group’s sense of identity and mission. The hardships they encountered often reinforced their commitment to the movement and motivated their drive to establish a sanctuary where they could practice their faith freely.

See also: Who Founded the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints?

4. The Establishment and Expansion of Mormonism

Organizational Developments

Smith’s efforts to establish a new religious organization were marked by a series of institutional innovations. The creation of a hierarchical church structure, complete with a presidency, apostles, and other leadership roles, was crucial in providing organizational coherence and authority. This structure enabled the movement to grow and adapt as it faced various challenges.

Missionary Work and Growth

One of the key strategies for expanding Mormonism was its emphasis on missionary work. Smith encouraged followers to actively proselytize and spread the message of the restored gospel. This proactive approach to evangelism helped the movement to gain followers both in the United States and abroad.

The Utah Pioneer Era

After Smith’s death in 1844, Brigham Young led the majority of Mormons to the Salt Lake Valley, establishing a new center of the faith in what is now Utah. This migration was driven by the desire for religious freedom and self-determination. The settlement of the West allowed the Mormon community to build a thriving society based on their religious principles.

Legacy and Impact

Theological Contributions

Smith’s creation of Mormonism had significant theological implications. The introduction of new scriptures, doctrines, and practices contributed to the broader landscape of American religion and provided a unique perspective on Christian theology. The concept of ongoing revelation, for example, has influenced other religious movements and discussions about prophetic authority.

Social and Cultural Influence

The development of Mormonism also had a notable impact on American society and culture. The establishment of a distinct community with its own social norms, economic practices, and cultural traditions has shaped the identity of the Latter-day Saints and influenced regional dynamics in the American West.

Joseph Smith’s creation of Mormonism was a complex and multifaceted process driven by a combination of personal, theological, and socio-political factors. His experiences, religious visions, and the broader religious and social environment of early 19th-century America played crucial roles in shaping the movement. By examining these various influences, we gain a clearer understanding of why Joseph Smith established Mormonism and how it has evolved into a significant global religious tradition.

0 notes

kamreadsandrecs · 5 months ago

Text

Title: The Kingdom

Author: Emmanuel Carrère, trans. by John Lambert

Genre/s: literary fiction, historical

Content/Trigger Warning/s: misogyny, racism, Islamophobia, antisemitism, fatphobia, ableism

Summary (from the publisher's website): A sweeping fictional account of the early Christians, whose unlikely beliefs conquered the world

Gripped by the tale of a Messiah whose blood we drink and body we eat, the genre-defying author Emmanuel Carrère revisits the story of the early Church in his latest work. With an idiosyncratic and at times iconoclastic take on the charms and foibles of the Church fathers, Carrère ferries readers through his “doors” into the biblical narrative. Once inside, he follows the ragtag group of early Christians through the tumultuous days of the faith’s founding.

Shouldering biblical scholarship like a camcorder, Carrère re-creates the climate of the New Testament with the acumen of a seasoned storyteller, intertwining his own account of reckoning with the central tenets of the faith with the lives of the first Christians. Carrère puts himself in the shoes of Saint Paul and above all Saint Luke, charting Luke’s encounter with the marginal Jewish sect that eventually became Christianity, and retracing his investigation of its founder, an obscure religious freak who died under notorious circumstances.

Boldly blending scholarship with speculation, memoir with journalistic muckraking, Carrère sets out on a headlong chase through the latter part of the Bible, drawing out protagonists who believed they were caught up in the most important events of their time. An expansive and clever meditation on belief, The Kingdom chronicles the advent of a religion, and the ongoing quest to find a place within it.

Buy Here: https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-kingdom-emmanuel-carrere/1408878

Spoiler-Free Review: Okay. OKAY. This was an interesting ride. And I honestly don’t know any other term to describe it except that.

First things first: the author is VERY egotistical. Like, his ego is large as a planet and it permeates EVERY SINGLE THING in this book. The ENTIRE FIRST FOURTH of the book is just him explaining (though some might argue he’s actually just whining) about how he fell into a deep Catholic fervor for around two years before he drifted out of it after a while.

But, once one gets past this part (or even while reading it), one will also have to deal with the author’s many prejudices, including: misogyny, racism, Islamophobia, antisemitism, fatphobia, ableism, and imperialism. These, on top of the author’s aforementioned ego, will DEFINITELY grind on a reader who tries to get into this based solely on the premise that the book’s blurbs present: that this is a book about the history of the early Church.

If the above two points don’t make a reader drop the book, then this third one probably will: the author’s utter disregard scholarly responsibility. Oh sure, at first it seems like he cares about it, but it quickly becomes clear that he doesn’t really give a damn. He constantly throws out pronouncements that will read like he’s stating fact, when he really, really isn’t. He also has a tendency to pick and choose which version of an idea or theory he prefers, and THEN puts that forward as fact, just because he likes the way it comes together in his head, or supports some prejudice he has, or some other, silly reason that will definitely raise the blood pressure of any scholars who read this book, no matter which subject they study.

There is a moment in the book where, after he claims to have read all the important texts related to early Church history, he says that, like a chef who’s read many cookbooks, he is now ready to do away with the experts and write what he wants. Which, if the reader approaches this book as a nonfiction piece of work - and it certainly feels like it at the beginning - will be utterly rage-inducing because who the hell claims to have read EVERYTHING in terms of scholarly documentation? This is especially true when it comes to a subject like history, which is constantly changing and being updated as discoveries are made and previous evidence is adjusted and altered.

Which brings me to the question of narrative style. This book reads A LOT like nonfiction: like an autobiography at first, and then nonfictional history of the early Church. But there’s a reason why this book is categorized as "fiction": precisely because of the author’s aforementioned tendencies to play VERY fast and loose with facts, both about himself and the story he’s trying to tell about Church history. For a while I contemplated calling the narrative slightly Borgesian, because Borges does a similar thing with his writing where he blurs the edges of the fictional and the nonfictional, but I quickly withdrew that notion. The comparison would be an insult to Borges’ work, not least because his technique is far more subtle than what’s going on here.

Honestly I think the best way to actually get through this book is to think of it as absolutely fictional instead of nonfictional. As in: do not even consider the facts to be facts, just presume they’re all made up. When I started viewing the book that way it became a bit more tolerable because then I could consider the author/narrator as a fictional entity, instead of a real life person who is also an absolute shithead. This also has the benefit of making all the scholarship-related bullshit a bit more tolerable too, because then one can approach the material in the same way one would a historical novel: with some grace to allow for artistic license.

But despite ALL OF THAT, there is something very compelling about this book, and it has to do with reading how the author grapples with his Catholic faith. It’s fascinating to read how the author goes from falling in, then out, of love with Catholicism, and how he basically uses this entire book to wrestle with how he feels about it, struggling to come to a conclusion about how to answer the question: “Do you believe in God?”

Overall, this is definitely a read that will require immense patience, and many readers will give up within one-fourth of the book, maybe even after the first five chapters. But for readers who decide to be stubborn mules about it and hang in there (if for no other reason than they don’t want to be beaten by this asshole of an author), they might find a read that’s complicated and also interesting. There is PLENTY to dislike about this book, very many reasons to put it down before I actually finished it, but as I said, it’s immensely compelling. I attribute that a little bit to the writing style itself (which is a credit to both the author and - especially - to the translator), but I think the main reason I stuck around to the end is because I’m a lapsed Catholic myself and related, in some small way, to what the author was going through when he was struggling with his faith. The final line is the answer to his main question of “Do you believe in God?”, and I have to say: it’s an answer I agree with.

Rating: 2 and a half gospels (2.5 stars)

#book review #book reviews #the kingdom #emmanuel carrère #john lambert #literary fiction #historical fiction #books

1 note · View note

fusion360 · 1 year ago

Text

Blacks in Mormonism: Race and the Mormon Priesthood

Blacks in Mormonism have been an integral part of the history and development of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), commonly known as the Mormon Church. However, the relationship between blacks and the Mormon priesthood has been a complex and contentious issue that has evolved over time. This article explores the historical context, the doctrinal shifts, and the eventual policy changes that have shaped the church's stance on race and the priesthood.

The Early Years: Racial Exclusion

In its early years, the LDS Church practiced racial exclusion, a reflection of prevailing racial attitudes in the 19th century United States. Church founder Joseph Smith initially extended priesthood and temple blessings to black members, but as the church grew and faced societal pressure, it began to restrict these privileges. By the late 19th century, the Mormon Church officially adopted a policy that denied black men access to the priesthood, limiting their participation in key religious ordinances and leadership roles.

Doctrinal Rationale and Controversies

The racial exclusion policy was justified through various doctrinal interpretations. One widely cited belief was the "curse of Ham," an interpretation of a biblical story that was used to rationalize the subordinate status of blacks. This belief was not unique to Mormonism but was shared by other Christian denominations as well. However, it is important to note that this doctrine was not universally accepted among church leaders and members, leading to internal debates and differing opinions.

The racial exclusion policy faced increased scrutiny and criticism in the 20th century as civil rights movements gained momentum. Activists within and outside the church questioned the morality of the policy, leading to internal discussions about its validity. As the broader society began to reject racial segregation and discrimination, pressure mounted on the LDS Church to reconsider its stance.

The Revelation and Change

In 1978, a pivotal moment occurred in the history of blacks in Mormonism. The then-president of the LDS Church, Spencer W. Kimball, received a revelation that extended the priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members, regardless of race. This marked a significant departure from the longstanding policy and was seen as a response to both changing societal attitudes and divine guidance. The announcement was met with mixed reactions; while many celebrated the change as a step towards inclusivity, some struggled to reconcile the reversal with their previous beliefs.

The revelation did not erase all racial disparities within the church, as cultural and structural challenges persisted. However, it signaled a willingness to adapt to modern sensibilities and acknowledge the evolving understanding of racial equality. The change also paved the way for increased diversity within the Mormon leadership and membership, bringing new perspectives to the faith.

Ongoing Challenges and Progress

Despite the 1978 revelation, blacks in Mormonism continue to navigate challenges related to race. While the policy change officially ended racial exclusion, it did not eliminate all racial biases within the church or society. Conversations about race and representation remain important as the church strives to create an environment of genuine inclusivity.

The LDS Church has taken steps to address its history of racial exclusion and promote racial harmony. It has publicly disavowed past racist teachings and acknowledged the pain caused by those teachings. Efforts have been made to ensure that the teachings and policies of the church align with its core principles of love, equality, and respect for all individuals.

Conclusion

In the trajectory of blacks in Mormonism, the evolution of the church's stance on race and the priesthood is a reflection of broader societal shifts and changing moral perspectives. From a history marred by racial exclusion, the church moved towards a more inclusive stance, signaling a willingness to adapt its doctrines to align with evolving societal norms. The 1978 revelation was a significant milestone, indicating that the church recognized the need for change and sought to rectify past injustices.

However, challenges persist, as the legacy of racial exclusion continues to affect the experiences of black members within the church. Open and ongoing conversations about race, representation, and equality are essential for the LDS Church to continue progressing on its journey toward true inclusivity.

As black people continue to contribute to the church's growth and diversity, their experiences serve as a reminder of the power of change, compassion, and the human capacity for growth. The story of race and the Mormon priesthood is a testament to the potential for transformation within religious institutions and society at large.

#joseph smith #josephsmithwives

0 notes

mindfulldsliving · 3 days ago

Text

Jesus as the Eternal God: Responding to Life After Ministry - "BOM: Jesus is God"

Critics consistently present information that causes misunderstandings of Latter-day Saint teachings. Specifically, they tend to confuse LDS understanding of Christ and His divinity. They often claim contradictions between the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and LDS teaching. The clear truth – the harmony affirms Jesus as the Eternal God and yet the Son of the Living God subordinate to the…

#Addressing misconceptions about Mormon beliefs #Bible and Book of Mormon unity #Biblical and Book of Mormon teachings on Christ #Biblical evidence of Christ&039;s divinity #Christ as Redeemer in Mormon doctrine #Christ&039;s divinity LDS clarification #Eternal God in LDS doctrine #Examining Jesus Christ’s divinity in LDS scripture #Exegesis of Exodus 3:13-14 LDS #Faith-building LDS teachings #How Latter-day Saints view Jesus Christ as God #How the Book of Mormon testifies of Christ #Jesus as Jehovah in the Bible #Jesus Christ divinity LDS perspective #Jesus Christ in Book of Mormon #Jesus Christ YHWH teachings #Latter-day Saint beliefs about Jesus #LDS commentary on John 4:26 and John 8:58 #LDS defense of Christ’s divinity #LDS interpretation of Jesus as the Great “I Am”#LDS Jesus and Abrahamic Covenant #LDS response to critics of faith #LDS understanding of the Godhead #LDS vs traditional Christian doctrine #LDS vs traditional Christian views of the Trinity #Misconceptions about LDS faith #The role of Jesus in LDS theology explained #Understanding Jesus as Jehovah in LDS beliefs #Understanding the Trinity in LDS faith #Unity of scripture LDS perspective

1 note · View note

steveezekiel · 2 years ago

Text

TRAVAILING UNTIL CHRIST IS FORMED IN YOU [Galatians 4f]

“My little children, with whom I am again in TRAVAIL UNTIL CHRIST BE FORMED IN YOU.”

Galatians 4:19 (RSV)

• A Leader has a responsibility to labour and travail in prayer, for Christ to be formed in the lives of the people under their leadership.

YOU do that through supplications in prayer and fellowshipping with God.

- If you feed your people with the Word of God and pray for them that Christ be formed in them, they would not be a prey to false teachers.

- The diluted Truth would be like the real truth to a spiritual famished soul—very hungry soul.

- Jehovah witnesses and other groups whom the Bible scholars called cults, go about with poisonous DOCTRINES or teachings, and they are leading many away from the truth to destruction.

NOTE: Cult is defined by a dictionary as a small group of people who have extreme religious beliefs and who are not part of any established RELIGION.

- Some naive and ignorant nominal Christians and professed believers who are carnal, who do not have understanding of the Bible, have found themselves in the traps of these religious Cults.

THESE Cults are not Christians, yet they professed to be Christians, they use Christian phraseology and terminology to deceive the ignoramuses; those who are ignorant, lacking knowledge about the Bible in the body of Christ.

- At the time Paul was writing his Epistles, the battle was with the Judaizers, those who preach and teach salvation through the works of the LAW (Galatians 1:6-8).

- Christ, however, is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes (Romans 10:4).

- Salvation, being reconciled with God, and having a right standing with Him are through faith in Christ Jesus (Romans 10:9,10; 4:25; 2 Corinthians 5:18,19).

9. “that if you CONFESS WITH YOUR MOUTH the LORD JESUS and BELIEVE IN YOUR HEART that God has RAISED HIM from the dead, YOU WILL BE SAVED.

10. FOR WITH THE HEART ONE BELIEVES UNTO RIGHTEOUSNESS, AND WITH THE MOUTH CONFESSION IS MADE UNTO SALVATION.”

Romans 10:9,10 (NKJV)

• It was the Judaizers in Paul’s Day who were persuading the GENTILES BELIEVERS to be circumcised and observed the Old Testament LAW (Galatians 5:4,6); but, in our contemporary time we take issue with religious Cults; such as Jehovah witnesses, Christian Science, Jesus of Latter-Day-Saints; And other religions of the world.

28. And you, dear brothers and sisters, ARE CHILDREN OF THE PROMISE, just like Isaac.

29. BUT YOU ARE NOW BEING PERSECUTED BY THOSE WHO WANT YOU TO KEEP THE [Jewish] LAW [however, in the present time: it is those who want you to be part of their Cults, or their religion], JUST AS ISHMAEL, the child born by human effort, PERSECUTED ISAAC, the CHILD BORN BY THE POWER OF THE SPIRIT."

Galatians 4:28,29 (NLT)

• Christians are Being persecuted by the religious Cults, Islam, and other religions in the world.

- A Pastor was sharing with me how one of his members left FOR Jehovah witnesses people.

- According to the Pastor, he said the brother made an offer of marriage to a Lady who happened to be a Jehovah witness, in the process of time the brother was not regular in attendance AGAIN and they started visiting and admonishing Him.

THE brother eventually left the church—Stopped attending the church meetings completely.

NOTE: In my own view I could deduced that the Pastor, who shared the story with me, is not mature enough.

- To my understanding he does not know the difference between genuine Christian groups AND the false ones.

• Admonition

- If you as a minister of God is not knowledgeable enough in the things of the Kingdom, you would do well to update your knowledge.

- A novice should not be a leader in the church of Christ: “A BISHOP [pastor or overseer] THEN MUST BE BLAMELESS… NOT A NOVICE…” (1 Timothy 3:2,6).

- Study to equip yourself that you may be able to lead the people under you aright: "STUDY AND DO YOUR BEST TO PRESENT YOURSELF TO GOD APPROVED, a workman [tested by trial] who has no reason to be ashamed, ACCURATELY HANDLING AND SKILLFULLY TEACHING THE WORD OF TRUTH."

2 Timothy 2:15 (AMP)

READ: 1 Timothy 4:13-16

- You can only give what you have, if you have nothing in you, you are lacking in knowledge of the Word of God, you will not have what to teach the people under your leadership.

"Then Peter said, “Silver and gold I do not have, BUT WHAT I DO HAVE I GIVE YOU: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk.”

Acts 3:6 (NKJV)

• You will not fail in Jesus' name.

Peace!

TO BE CONTINUED

#christianity #gospel #christian living #christian blog #the bible #jesus #devotion #faith #my writing #prayer

0 notes

piano-hoarder · 1 year ago

Text

I think part of the reason that people focus on Elokhar is the interrupted redemption arc. Additionally, Moash killed Teft while under Odium's control, while Elokhar was killed within a (mostly) clear mind. But you do have a point: It was still Moash's choice to allow Odium's control, still his choice to not take responsibility. Both deaths were just as heinous, Teft's probably even more so considering that they were FRIENDS and Teft did nothing against him. It was just Moash's sick way to get revenge on Kaladin that just happened to align with Odium's goals.

But here's the thing. A good person is someone who does morally good things, who considers the consequences of their actions, and tries to become better (which is why Dalinar is considered a good person). Also a lot of Brandon's writing philosophies stem from Christian beliefs, in this case the idea of forgiveness and improvement: That what you do now is more important than your past decisions, that if you're trying to do better and you can prove that you've changed and given up your evil ways, your past decisions can be forgiven.

(I know a lot of people complain about how Brandon's status as a Latter-Day Saint gets into his books so much).

A good character, on the other hand, may not make objectively good or wise decisions, but they add depth, complexity, and intrigue to the story (such as Shallan or Taravangian). Additionally, the best characters (good or bad) are the ones that you understand, that you can relate to.

I struggle with self-hate and I 10000% understand what it's like to hate yourself so much for the decisions you've made that you wish you could just stop feeling. Yes, he killed Teft, and I hate that his choices led to that. He should have dealt with his choices instead of running from them. He should have tried to become better, should have owned up and accepted the consequences. But he didn't. He's proved that he's a coward and a wretch.

BUT Hot take: I don't actually hate Moash. I hate the decisions he's made but I don't hate him. And that's because he's a terrible person but a good character. I understand him. He adds emotion and depth and interest to the story.

(Because for me, my enjoyment of a story stems primarily from how much emotion it gives me, whether or not they are "positive" emotions,. I like to feel. And this means the story itself, characters and plotline; if the writing is bad or certain underlying principles are upsetting or disappointing I don't like it)

So if a character can make me feel, give me strong emotions, that's a good character. And a lot of Moash's good character comes from the fact that he is not a good person.

Can i get an explanation on how people think Moash isn't a bad person, importantly not bad character. I'm not saying he's worse than the other bad people in stormlight, dear god there's a lot of those, but none of them except perhaps dalinar, are treated as good people. Even dalinar isnt made out as a good person by the books that's the fandom version, the book version of dalinar is when he "spices up" his romantic life with a characteristically high body count.

Tldr: im sick of moash killing teft getting ignored and people focusing on elhokar

#sorry that was a lot #hope that made sense #you don't have to agree but that's my take #moash #vyre #moashposting #moash stormlight #cosmere #the cosmere #stormlight archive #cremposting #stormlight

54 notes · View notes

samwisethewitch · 4 years ago

Text

Coping with religious trauma

CONTENT WARNING: THIS POST CONTAINS DISCUSSIONS OF MENTAL ILLNESS, TRAUMA RECOVERY, AND HOMOPHOBIA. The advice in this post is intended for an adult audience, not for those who are legal minors.

A lot of people find their way to paganism after having traumatic experiences with organized religion, especially in countries like the United States, where 65% of the population identifies as Christian. (This number is actually at an all-time low — historically, the percentage has been much higher.) Paganism, which is necessarily less dogmatic and hierarchical than the Abrahamic religions, offers a chance to experience religion without having to fit a certain mold. This can be extremely liberating for people who have felt hurt, abused, or ignored by mainstream religion.

To avoid making generalizations that might offend people, I’ll share my own story as an example.

My family joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, better known as the Mormons, when I was nine years old. The Mormons are an extremely conservative sect of evangelical Christianity that places a heavy emphasis on maintaining a strong community that upholds their religious values. The problem with that is that Mormon values are inherently racist, sexist, homophobic, and transphobic. As a teenager in the Mormon Church, I was told that as a woman, my only purpose in life was to marry a (Mormon) man and raise (Mormon) children. I was discouraged from pursuing a college education if it meant delaying marriage. I was not allowed to participate in the full extent of religious ritual because I was not a man. I was not allowed to express myself in ways that went against Mormon culture, and I kept my bisexuality secret for fear I would be ostracized. I didn’t have any sort of support system outside the Church, which inevitably made the mental health issues that come with being a queer woman in a conservative Christian setting much, much worse.

I left the Mormons when I was seventeen, and by that time I had some major issues stemming from my time in the Church. I had been extremely depressed and anxious for most of my teen years. I struggled with internalized misogyny and homophobia. I had very low self-esteem. I had anxiety around sex and sexuality that would take years of therapy and self-work to overcome. I wanted to form a connection with the divine, but I wasn’t sure if I was worthy of such a connection.

I was attracted to paganism, specifically Wicca, because it seemed like everything Mormonism wasn’t. Wicca teaches equality between men and women, with a heavy focus on the Goddess in worship. It places an emphasis on doing what is right for you, as long as it doesn’t harm anyone else. It encourages sexuality and healthy sexual expression. Learning about Wicca, and later other types of paganism, helped me develop the kind of healthy spirituality I’d never experienced as a Mormon. Although Wicca is no longer the backbone of my religious practice, it was a necessary and deeply healing step on my spiritual journey.

I’m not sharing my story to gain sympathy or to make anyone feel bad — I’m sharing it because my situation is not an uncommon one in pagan circles. The vast majority of pagans are converts, meaning they didn’t grow up pagan. Some had healthy upbringings in other faiths, or no faith at all, and simply found that paganism was a better fit for them. Others, like myself, had deeply traumatic experiences with organized religion and are attracted to paganism because of the freedom, autonomy, and empowerment it offers.

If you fall into this latter category, this post is for you. Untangling the threads of religious trauma can be an extremely difficult and overwhelming task. In this post, I lay out six steps to recovery based on my own experiences and those of other people, both pagan and non-pagan, who have lived through religious trauma.

While following these steps will help jumpstart your spiritual healing, it’s important to remember that healing is not a linear process — especially healing from emotional, mental, and spiritual trauma. You may have relapses, you may feel like you’re moving in circles, and you may still have bad days in five or ten years. That’s okay. That’s part of the healing process. Go easy on yourself, and let your journey unfold naturally.

Step One: Cut all ties with the group that caused your trauma

Or, at least, cut as many ties as reasonably possible.

Obviously, if you’re still participating in a religious organization that has caused you pain, the first step is to leave! But before you do, make sure you have an exit plan to help you disengage safely and gracefully.

To make your exit plan, start by asking yourself what the best, worst, and most likely case scenarios are, and be honest in your answers. Obviously, the best case scenario is that you leave, everyone accepts it, and all is well. The worst case scenario is that someone tries to prevent you from leaving — you may be harassed by missionaries or concerned churchgoers, for example. But what is the most likely case scenario? That depends on the religious community, their beliefs, and how involved you were in the first place. When making your exit plan, prepare for the most likely scenario, but have a backup plan in case the worst case scenario happens.

Once you’ve prepared yourself for the best, worst, and most likely outcomes, choose a friend, significant other, or family member who can help you make your exit. Ideally, this person is not a member of the group you are trying to leave. Their role is mainly to provide emotional support, although they may also need to be willing to run off any well-meaning missionaries who come calling. This person can also help you transition after you leave. For example, you might make a plan to get coffee with them every week during the time your old religious community holds worship services.

Finally, make your strategy for leaving. Choose a date and don’t put it off! If you have any responsibilities within the group, send in a letter of resignation. Figure out who you’ll need to have conversations with about your leaving — this will likely include any family members or close friends who are still part of the group. Schedule those conversations. Make sure to have them in public places, where people will be less likely to make a scene.

If you feel it is necessary, you may want to request that your name be removed from the group’s membership records so you don’t get emails, phone calls, or friendly visits from them in the future. You may not feel the need to do this, but if contact with the group triggers a mental health crisis, this extra step will help keep you safe.

Of course, it’s not always possible to completely cut ties with a group after leaving. You may have family members, a significant other, or close friends who are still members. If this is the case, you’ll need to establish some clear boundaries. Politely but firmly tell them that, although you’re glad their faith adds value to their lives, you are not willing to be involved in their religious activities. Let them know that this is what is best for your mental and emotional health and that you still value your relationship with them.

Try to make compromises that allow you to preserve the relationship without exposing you to a traumatic religious environment. For example, if your family is Christian and always spends all day on Christmas at church, offer to celebrate with them the day after, once their religious commitments are over.

Hopefully, your loved ones can respect these boundaries. If not, you may need to distance yourself or walk away altogether. If they are knowingly undermining your attempts to take care of yourself, they don’t deserve to be in your life.

During this time, you may find it helpful to read other people’s exit stories online or in books. One of my personal favorites is the book Girl at the End of the World by Elizabeth Esther. Hearing other people’s stories can help you remember that other people have been through similar situations and made it out on the other side. You will too.

Step Two: Seek professional help

I cannot overstate the importance of professional counseling when dealing with trauma of any kind, including religious trauma. Therapists and counselors have the benefit of professional training. They are able to be objective, since they’re approaching the situation from the outside. They can keep you from getting bogged down in your own thoughts and feelings.

I understand that not everyone has access to therapy. I am very lucky to have insurance that covers mental health counseling, but I know not everyone has that privilege. However, there are some options that make therapy more affordable.

There may be an organization in your area that offers free or low-cost therapy — if you live in the U.S., you can find information about these services by checking the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) HelpLine or visiting mentalhealth.gov. You can also look for therapists who use a sliding scale for payment, which means they determine an hourly rate based on the client’s income. And finally, if you have a little bit of extra cash you may want to look into therapy apps like BetterHelp or Talkspace, which are typically cheaper than in-person therapy.

If none of those options work for you, the next best option is to join a support group. Support groups allow you to connect with other people whose experiences are similar to yours and, unlike therapy, they allow you to get advice and feedback from multiple people. These groups are often free, although some charge a small fee.

Finding the right group for you is important. You’re unlikely to find a group for people recovering from religious trauma but, depending on the nature of your trauma, you may fit right in with a grief and loss group, an addiction recovery group, or a group for adult survivors of child abuse. If you’re a member of the LGBTQ+ community, you may be able to find a queer support group. (The LGBTQ+ club at my college was an invaluable resource in my recovery!) Depending on your area, you may also be able to find groups for specific mental and emotional issues like depression or anxiety.

Make sure to do your research before attending a meeting. Find out what, if anything, the group charges, who can join, and whether they use a curriculum or have unstructured sessions. See if you can find a statement about their values and philosophy. Make a note of where meetings are held and of who is running the group. Some support groups meet in churches and may or may not have a religious element to their curriculum. It’s best to avoid religious groups — the last thing you need right now is to be preached to.

Getting other people involved in your recovery will make you feel less alone and prevent you from getting stuck in your own head. A good therapist, counselor, or support group can help you realize what you need to work on and give you ideas for how to approach it.

Step Three: Deprogramming

“Deprogramming” refers to the practice of undoing brainwashing and reintroducing healthy thought patterns. This term is normally used in the context of cult survivors and their recovery, but deprogramming techniques can also be helpful for people recovering from a lifetime of toxic religious rhetoric.

To begin the process of deprogramming, familiarize yourself with the way organizations use thought control to shape the behavior of their members. I recommend starting with the work of Steven Hassan — his BITE model is a handy way to classify types of thought control.

The BITE model lays out four types of control. There’s Behavior Control, which controls what members do and how they spend their free time. (For example, requiring members to attend multiple hours-long meetings each week.) There’s Information Control, which restricts members’ access to information. (For example, denying certain aspects of the group’s history.) There’s Thought Control, which shapes the way members think. (For example, classifying certain thoughts as sinful or dirty.) And finally there’s Emotional Control, which manipulates members’ emotions. (For example, instilling fear of damnation or punishment.)

Here’s a simple exercise to get you started with your deprogramming. Divide a blank sheet of paper into four equal sections. Label one section “Behavior,” one “Information,” one “Thought,” and one “Emotions.” Now, in each section, make a list of the ways your old religious group controlled — and maybe still controls — that area of your life. Once you’ve completed your lists, choose a single item from one of your lists to work on undoing.

For example, let’s say that in your “Information” column, you’ve written that you were discouraged from reading certain books because they contained “evil” ideas. (For a lot of people, this was Harry Potter. For me, it was The Golden Compass.) Pick up one of those books, and read it or listen to it as an audiobook. Once you’ve read it, write down your thoughts. Did you enjoy it? Why or why not? Why do you think your group banned it? What was in this book that they didn’t want you to know about? Write it down.

Once you’ve worked on the first thing, choose something else. Keep going until you’ve undone all the items on your lists.

If you want to go further with deprogramming, I recommend the book Recovering Agency by Luna Lindsey. Although this book is specifically written for former Mormons, I genuinely believe it would be helpful to former members of other controlling religious groups as well. Lindsey does an excellent job of explaining how thought control works and of connecting it to real world examples, as well as deconstructing those ideas. Her book has been a huge help in my recovery process, and I highly recommend it.

Step Four: Replace toxic beliefs and practices with healthy ones

This goes hand-in-hand with step three, and if you’re already working on deprogramming then you’ll already have started replacing your unhealthy beliefs. This is the turning point in the recovery process. You’re no longer just undoing what others have done to you — now you get an opportunity to decide what you want to believe and do going forward. This is the time to let go of things like denial of your desires, fear of divine punishment, and holding yourself to unattainable standards. Get used to living in a way that makes you happy, without guilt.

Notice how each step builds on the previous steps. Therapy and deprogramming can help you identify what beliefs and behaviors need to be adjusted or replaced. Your therapist, support group, and/or emotional support person can help you make these changes and follow through on them.

These new beliefs and practices don’t have to be religious — in fact, it’s better if they aren’t. If you can live a healthy, happy, balanced life without religion, you’ll be in a better position to choose a religion that is the right fit for you, if that is something you want.

Your new healthy, non-religious practices may include: mindfulness meditation, nature walks, journaling, reading, exercise, energy work, learning a hobby or craft, or spending time with loves ones — or it might include none of these things, and that’s okay too. Now is the time to find what brings you joy and start doing it every day.

Step Five: Ritual healing

This is an optional step, but it’s one that has been deeply healing for me. You may find it helpful to design and perform a ritual to mark your recovery.

Note that when I say “ritual,” I don’t necessarily mean magic. Rituals serve a psychological purpose as well as a spiritual one. They can act as powerful symbolic events that mark a turning point in our lives or reinforce what we already know and believe. Even if you don’t believe in magic, even if you’re the least spiritual person you know, you can still benefit from ritual.

You might choose to perform a ritual to finalize your healing, or to symbolically throw off the chains of your old religion. It can be elaborate or simple, long or short, joyful or solemn. It might include lighting a candle and saying a few words. It might include ecstatic dance. It might include drawing or painting a representation of all the negative emotions associated with your old religion, then ritually destroying it. The possibilities are literally endless. (If you’re looking for ritual ideas, I recommend the book Light Magic for Dark Times by Lisa Marie Basile.)

One type of ritual that some people find very empowering is unbaptism. An unbaptism is exactly what it sounds like — the opposite of a baptism. The idea is that, if a baptism makes a Christian, an unbaptism makes someone un-Christian, no longer part of that lineage. It is a ritual rejection of Christianity. (Obviously, this only applies if you’re a former Christian, though some of the following suggestions could be adjusted to fit a rejection of other religions.)

If you’re interested in unbaptism, here are some ideas for how it could be done:

A classic method of unbaptism is to recite the Lord’s Prayer backwards under a full moon. (For a non-Christians version, use a significant prayer from whatever religion you have left.)

Run a bath. Add a tiny pinch of sulfur (a.k.a. brimstone) to the water. Get into the bath and say, “By water I was baptized, and by water my baptism is rejected.” Submerge your entire body under the water for several seconds. When you come back up, your unbaptism is complete. (You may want to shower after this one. Sulfur does not smell good.)

The Detroit Satanic Temple has a delightfully dramatic unbaptism ritual. For a DIY version, you will need holy water or some other relic from the faith you were baptized in, a fireproof dish, a black candle, and an apple or other sweet fruit. Light the candle and place it in your fireproof dish. Toss some holy water onto the flame (not enough to extinguish it) and say, “I cast my chains into the dust of hell.” Take a bite of the apple and say, “I savor the fruit of knowledge and disobedience.” Finally, declare proudly, “I am unbaptized.” You can add “in the name of Satan” at the end or leave it out, depending on your comfort level.

Personally, I’ve never felt the need to unbaptize myself. I’ve ritually rejected my Mormon upbringing in other ways. Maybe someday I’ll decide to go for the unbaptism, but I’ve never really felt like I needed it. Likewise, you’ll need to decide for yourself what ritual(s) will work for you.

Step Six: Honor your recovery

Our first reaction to trauma is to hide it away and never speak of it again. When we do this, we do ourselves a disservice. Your recovery is a part of your life story. You had the strength to walk away from a situation that was hurting you, and that deserves to be celebrated! Be proud of yourself for how far you’ve come!

You may choose to honor your recovery by celebrating an important date every year, like the day you decided to leave the group, the date of the last meeting you attended, or the date you were removed from the membership records. Keep this celebration fun and light — get drinks with friends, bake a cake for yourself, or just take a few moments to silently acknowledge your journey.

If you feel like having a party is a bit much, you can also honor your recovery by talking to other people about your experiences. Share your story with others. If you’re feeling shy, try sharing your story anonymously online. (Reddit has several forums specifically for anonymous stories.) You’ll be amazed by how validating it can be to tell people what you’ve been through. `

Another way to honor your recovery is to work for personal and religious freedom for all people. Protest laws with religious motivations. Donate to organizations that campaign for the separation of church and state. Educate people about how to recognize an unhealthy religious organization. Let your own story motivate you to help others who are in similar situations.

And most of all, take joy in your journey. Be proud of yourself for how far you’ve come, but know that your recovery is a lifelong journey. Be gentle and understanding with yourself. You are doing what is right for you, and no god or spirit worthy of worship could ever be upset by that.

303 notes · View notes

fingonvaliant · 3 years ago

Text

An open letter to the Apostles

To the Leadership of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints:

I left because I didn’t believe anymore. There were too many promises that weren’t fulfilled, to many questions I was given false answers to, but more than anything else, I couldn’t take the stress of being a queer person in a space I didn’t feel like I belonged in. I could talk about Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Mountain Meadows, the Kinderhook Plates, the stock portfolio, seer stones, blood atonement, “skins of darkness,” musket fire, “fence-sitters,” and a million things besides, but you know all that already.

I hope that with this letter, I can help the Church improve and change, because I still care about the Church, even though I no longer belong to it; that’s how I know it needs to change. It is still important to me. I am not trying to get people to leave the Church, that is not my goal. I’m not a Korihor trying to cause contention. But I need to tell my story.

While I was growing up, I believed it all. I was baptized at eight, regularly attended, served in quorum leaderships, and planned on going on a mission. Then, about when I was thirteen, I started experiencing what the Church calls “same-gender attraction.” I dislike this term greatly; it sounds like a disease. I prefer to say that I discovered I was bisexual.

I did not know what this was. My sexual education classes never covered it; I was never told what it was when I got “the talk”; my only experience with the word “gay” was in a middle school context, as an insult with no clear meaning. The only thing I did know was that this was not allowed. If marriage was ordained of God between a man and a woman, why did I have these -at the time- confusing feelings? If the only relationships I had any experience with were heterosexual, how was I even to know bisexuality existed?

And I didn’t, for years. As I wrestled with this, not even knowing what exactly I was feeling, I eventually, around age 16, learned the words to fit the feelings, to fit my identity. I knew who I was, what I was. By then, gay marriage had only just been legalized, and I -a couple months late- learned that this was a victory for me also.

This recognition put everything I thought I knew about marriage into a tailspin. I knew, I saw, and I was a part of, the Church’s effort to prevent this legalization. I read in Standards for Youth, (at the time called For the Strength of Youth) a short paragraph that made a huge impact on the rest of my life: “Homosexual and lesbian behavior is a serious sin. If you find yourself struggling with same-gender attraction or you are being persuaded to participate in inappropriate behavior, seek counsel from your parents and bishop. They will help you.” (Standards for Youth, Sexual Purity, emphasis added).

The thorough talking-to’s my closeted teen self received just before and after the legalization of gay marriage involved repetition of this paragraph ad nauseam. Breaking it down, it’s clear the degree to which this passage is shaped by uninformed conservatism. What does “behavior” mean? Since it’s a serious sin, you’d expect there to be clarification, right? Is hand-holding a serious sin? Hugs? An increased heart rate? A peck on the cheek? Or just sex? The way I was taught, it was clear the answer was “all of the above.”

The term “struggling” carries so much weight. The LDS church knew suffering, and still today in many places of in the world, members of the Church face repression. All people struggle with burdens, we struggle with disease, we struggle with sin, we struggle with conflict. Is “same-gender attraction” a burden, a disease, a sin, does it cause conflict? With the use of this word, the values are clear.

But in reality, the most painful part of this paragraph is the conclusion: “your parents and bishop … will help you.” They didn’t. They didn’t know how to, they still don’t. Because of the broad interpretation of unacceptable “behavior” and the belief that “same-gender attraction” is a “struggle,” they had no clue what they were dealing with.

Coming out was a traumatic experience. I was attending an all-boys boarding school at the time and caught feelings for a fellow student. We snuck around, living out a high school romance for a few weeks, until we were caught by the staff. Phone calls home were made, and I had the indescribable experience of having to explain to my parents both who I was, and what I had done, over the phone, one parent at a time, without seeing their faces.

Their immediate reaction was that I was too young to know if I was “really gay,” and that all sorts of strange feelings happen in boys my age. They didn’t really believe my description of myself; they negated my identity -they did not even recognize that this experience and these feelings were part of my identity- and mailed me a copy of The Miracle of Forgiveness. My experience with my bishop was likewise useless. He advised me that -through the atonement of Christ- all things are possible, and with suitable dedication to living the gospel, I could be made pure.

I never changed. I could not. It cannot be done. But I tried. I tried so hard.

Church attendance became more and more anxiety-inducing. I felt more and more guilty blessing the sacrament and giving blessings. I gave up on my childhood dream of being a missionary because I could longer believe the words I would have to say. I took temple preparation classes but could never bring myself to the bishop’s office to do the interview. When I started attending college and going to a YSA ward, I was no longer under my parent’s supervision. I kept going for a few months, until I was called as a ward missionary. I remember the day where I was on splits with the full-time missionaries, and we were going door-to-door in a neighborhood near my home. I just felt like we were harassing people in their homes on a Wednesday evening. It was the most uncomfortable experience of my life. I knew then that I didn’t believe in any of this anymore.

You know as well as I do that tens of thousands of people have had similar experiences that I have. We’ve felt the alienation, the sidelining, the people who don’t understand, the hand-wringing, the statement that all the burden lies on queer people to cure themselves, and it is the Church that must not change or cannot change. We keep being told “wickedness never was happiness,” (Alma 41:10) and that our lives of “unrepentant sin” are responsible for calamities and the disintegration of the family. We are being made into bogeymen in the closet, seeking “that all men might be miserable like unto [ourselves].” Endless inquiries are put forward, seeking to find the “cause of homosexuality” that we know are to find a “cure” for it. We are told we are suffering from these attractions, not that we have a unique identity, and certainly not that we are valuable.

But I know that these practices, and these doctrines, are not at the core of the Church. Members of the Church are commanded to “mourn with those that mourn … and comfort those that stand in need of comfort” (Mosiah 18:9). All Christians are told, that as a mark of their religion, they are to “love one another; as I have loved you” (John 13:34) and that “On [this] hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matthew 22:40). I know the Church can be better than it is right now; it is the Church itself that taught me that.

In nature, there is a direct correlation of both an organism’s and a species’ capacity for survival with its capacity for change. And I know the Church can change, because it has done it before, with interracial marriage, with polygamy, with African-Americans and the priesthood, with the Word of Wisdom, and with many things besides. Society changes all the time, and the Church changes with it.

#this was for an assignment technically #but i thought i'd share it here #queerstake #exmormon

8 notes · View notes

nerdygaymormon · 4 years ago

Link

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints put out a list of examples showing religious freedom is being challenged or curtailed. Each example is losing the freedom to discriminate against LGBTQ people without consequence. Seems this is what the Church has reduced what religious freedom means.

I thought knowing more about each example the Church listed would be useful to understand the multiple kinds of situations the Church thinks queer people should be discriminated against.

The Obama administration issued a policy to forbid federal contractors from refusing to hire homosexuals, the president of Gordon College signed onto a letter seeking a religious exemption and this led to a lot of criticism from alumni and students. As a result, the accrediting agency requested a review of the school’s conduct policy “to ensure that the college’s policies and processes are non-discriminatory and that it ensures its ability to foster an atmosphere that respects and supports people of diverse characteristics and backgrounds, consistent with the commission’s standards for accreditation.” While the accrediting agency said Gordon College’s accreditation wasn’t in danger, the College agreed to launch a campus taskforce on human sexuality to identify protocol improvements in on-campus living, education, and campus to “demonstrate greater pastoral sensitivity on issues surrounding human sexuality.”

The chief of Atlanta’s fire department wrote a book in which he referred to homosexuality as "unclean," "a sexual perversion," "vulgar" and "inappropriate." The mayor fired the chief and the chief took the city to court and lost a half dozen legal arguments, the city only lost on its pre-clearance rules for outside employment. The court said the fire chief’s status made it "not unreasonable for the city to fear" his views might cause "public erosion of trust in the fire department."

The Hastings College of the Law had a nondiscrimination policy that required recognized student organizations to "allow any student to participate, become a member, or seek leadership positions in the organization" regardless of the beliefs or status of that student. The Christian Legal Society (CLS) violated the policy by requiring students who join to “agree with its statement of beliefs about God and adhere to its standards of sexual conduct.” CLS took the school to court, and the US Supreme Court ruled against CLS and said the school was treating all student groups equally.

A lesbian from Oceanside, California was treated for infertility at the only clinic in her area that accepted her insurance. The 2 physicians at the clinic refused to perform artificial insemination because they claimed such treatment to an unmarried person violated their Christian religious beliefs. The lesbian took the clinic to court for violating the state’s Civil Rights law that prohibits businesses from discriminating on the basis of sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, and ethnicity. The state supreme court ruled unanimously in favor of the lesbian.

New York City was worried about violating the US Constitution’s Establishment Clause, and therefore prohibited holding worship services in the City's public schools. The Bronx Household of Faith had been meeting in the pastor’s dining room and was finding it too expensive to lease a space and applied to rent a school building on Sundays. The courts upheld the City’s ban, the US Supreme Court refused to accept the case and let the ruling stand. Since then, the city has decided to allow religious groups to rent school buildings on the weekend.

A graduate student in Eastern Michigan State University’s counseling program was assigned a client who’d previously been counseled about a gay relationship. The grad student notified her supervisor she couldn’t counsel him because of her religious beliefs. EMU’s counseling program adheres to the ACA Code of Ethics, which requires not discriminating against clients on the basis of “age, culture, disability, ethnicity, race, religion/spirituality, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status/partnership, language preference, socioeconomic status or any basis proscribed by law.” The student refused to to work with the university to resolve the issue and was kicked out of the program. Due to the publicity, the state of Michigan passed a bill to let students refuse to counsel or serve a client if it conflicts with heir sincerely held religious belief if the student refers the client to a counselor who will provide the counseling or services.

Kentucky Baptist Homes for Children is the state’s largest provider of services to children in crisis, which includes providing homes to abused, abandoned, or neglected children. An employee was fired when her coworkers discovered photos of her with her lesbian partner at the Kentucky State Fair. In response to the firing, 5 employees resigned, and the social work programs from Spalding University and University of Louisville withdrew their students from working with them. The fired employee sued but lost, however, the lawsuit has led to the state requiring faith-based groups that contract with the state to not pressure children in their care to participate in religious services and to give religious materials only to those who want them.

Yeshiva University is a private Jewish university in New York City, about 80% of the undergraduate student populations live on campus. Two lesbian students sued the university for barring same-sex couples from living in its subsidized, on-campus married-student housing. New York City’s civil-rights law prohibits discrimination based on personal characteristics, such as race, age, gender and sexual orientation. Yeshiva required a marriage certificate and at the time New York State didn’t legally recognize gay marriage. However, the state supreme court ruled that Yeshiva violated New York City's ban on sexual orientation discrimination. Yeshiva now allows all couples in the dorm.

#religious freedom #gay discrimination #homophobia

21 notes · View notes

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

Why Do Republicans Hate Gay People

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/why-do-republicans-hate-gay-people/

Why Do Republicans Hate Gay People

Presidency Of George W Bush

George W. Bush did not repeal President Clinton’s Executive Order banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the federal civilian government, but Bush’s critics felt as if he failed to enforce the executive order. He retained Clinton’s Office of National AIDS Policy and was the first Republican president to appoint an openly man to serve in his administration, Scott Evertz as director of the Office of National AIDS Policy. Bush also became the second President, after President Clinton, to select openly gay appointees to his administration. Bush’s nominee as ambassador to Romania, Michael E. Guest, became the second openly gay man U.S. Ambassador and the first to be confirmed by the Senate. He did not repeal any of the spousal benefits that Clinton had introduced for same-sex federal employees. He did not attempt to repeal Don’t ask, don’t tell, nor make an effort to change it.

In April 2002, White House officials held an unannounced briefing in April for the Log Cabin Republicans. On June 27, 2002, President Bush has signed a bill allowing death benefits to be paid to domestic partners of firefighters and police officers who die in the line of duty, permanently extending a federal death benefit to same-sex couples for the first time.

The 2004 Republican Party platform removed both parts of that language from the platform and stated that the party supports anti-discrimination legislation.

Two Reasons Why The Bathroom Bill Targeting Trans People Is Flawed

We believe this bill is flawed for two reasons. First, as conservatives who believe in liberty and in supporting small businesses, we do not think that government should single out businesses for special public censure if they do not enforce the governments current social views.

Americans are still sorting out how they feel about trans people and how they can be tolerant or hospitable neighbors even if they disagree. Government should not use private businesses as pawns in an ongoing culture war, especially with something as private as their customers genitalia.

Second, the bill is counterproductive. We understand that the legislature wants to give parents peace of mind that their daughters will not use the same restroom as biological males. Parents want to make sure their kids are safe this is a completely reasonable concern. But forcing trans women to use the same restroom as young boys can be more disturbing and disruptive to businesses.

Hear more Tennessee Voices:

Dads: imagine walking into the mens room with your son and seeing Caitlyn Jenner, in a dress, fixing her makeup.

More disturbing still is when trans men who are far along in their transition people who look, act, and identify as male must use the same restroom as young girls.

More:Tennessee Voices, Episode 118: Chris Sanders, Tennessee Equality Project

The Fairness For All Act Is A Republican Response To The Equality Act

In March, House Democrats introduced the Equality Act, the first comprehensive LGBTQ civil rights bill to pass the House. While it has been stalled in the GOP-controlled Senate, it would provide sweeping non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people in the US in housing, employment, public accommodations, education, and health care for the first time under federal law.

At the time, there were that some conservative groups were working on a compromise bill, and it appears the Fairness For All Act is that compromise.

A small coalition of religious conservative groups led by the American Unity Fund and including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Seventh-day Adventist Church, 1st Amendment Partnership, Center for Public Justice, and Council for Christian Colleges and Universities have rallied behind the bill.

Im excited about the solutions that are embodied in the legislation, because I think that those are the exact ideas that were going to need to pass federal civil rights for LGBTQ people, said Tyler Deaton, senior adviser at the American Unity Fund.

The Fairness For All Act would provide many of the same protections for LGBTQ Americans, but it also provides ample exceptions for churches and religious organizations to continue to discriminate against queer people.

What we like about it is the stated intentional desire for fairness and a proposed process that will encourage collaboration because weve seen that work in our state, he said.

Republicans May Begin To Embrace Gay Rights

As Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus pointed out, gay marriage and gay rights are platforms that a higher and higher percentage of Americans support. Priebus warns Republicans to be more open to other views on the issue, and less set in their ways. However, Republican strategist Ed Rogers points out the catch-22 in this situation. Most current Republicans still oppose gay marriage. Where 58 percent of Americans now support gay marriage, only 39 percent of Republicans support it, with 59 percent of Republicans opposing it. This leaves the Republican Party in a tough spot. They must either reform their views to bring in new members and gain support in coming elections, which would risk pushing away those that have stuck with the Party through the years, or stand by their age-old platform, and risk continuing to lose support throughout the nation.

The Disney Vault Is Annoying

Disney has drawn the ire of many adoring fans because it only releases its movies to the public for home consumption for a limited amount of time. They even coined a term for this tactic, The Disney Vault. Audiences think this is corporate greed at its ugliest. Disney has a commodity, and they try to build fervor and revenue by only letting the consumer have access to it for a short period. Its basically the same business model McDonalds uses with the McRib and we all know how much everyone hates that. Can you imagine if the Star Wars movies were only sold periodically? Thatd be an outrage, right? Well, you can expect it to happen since Disney bought the rights in 2012 to all things Star Wars, from George Lucas for over $4 billion. Its no wonder why Disney movies have been pirated since VCRs came on the scene in the 1980s.

American Views Of Transgender People: The Impact Of Politics Personal Contact And Religion

As the Supreme Court examines cases it has already heard this term about the rights of gay and transgender people, the American public in the latest Economist/YouGov poll are for the most part tolerant and supportive of transgender employment rights. However, Republicans take different positions.

The overall public supports laws prohibiting discrimination in hiring and employment on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, with Republicans closely divided.

More than one in three people know someone who is transgender, and the probability of this is even higher among Democrats and younger adults. Those with personal contact are more likely to believe there is a great deal or a fair amount of discrimination against transgender people. Half of Republicans and 88 percent of Democrats say there is a fair amount or a great deal of discrimination against transgender people.

One in five adults believes employers should be able to fire transgender workers who wear work clothes that match their gender identity. About three times that percentage disagree. Republicans are more closely divided on this question: a third say employers should be able to fire those employees, while 44 percent say that should not be allowed.

There appears to be greater acceptance of female to male transitions than male to female ones. Men generally accept a female to male as male , but also believe that someone transitioning male to female is still male .

Image: Getty

Here’s Where We Stand On Different Lgbt Issues

LGBT leftists tend to hate us because we put our principles first. We believe in religious liberty, free speech, God-given human dignity, limited government, and economic opportunity.

For that reason we frequently oppose radical gender theory and leftist policies like the Equality Act. We support a nuanced, science-based approach to transgender policy issues.

We recently spoke out in support of the legislature’s initiative to keep youth sports organized according to biological sex we find the effort to let biological males play girls’ sports anti-science and offensive.

As a result of stances like these, LGBT leftists regularly picket us, ban us, destroy our property, and call us ugly names.

Recently, our entire leadership team was kicked out of Nashvilles primary LGBT networking Facebook group, in contravention of that groups written rules, because the admins hated us.

We hope this background demonstrates our conservative bona fides. If we oppose a Republican LGBT bill, it is out of principle, not identity politics or blind devotion to those in the LGBT community who reject us. We were not asked to comment on the bill before it was passed, but we feel we would be remiss not to offer our perspective.

More:Tennessee’s anti-LGBTQ bills target vulnerable citizens who are worthy of dignity | Plazas

Views On Religion Its Role In Policy

When it comes to religion and morality, most Americans say that belief in God is not necessary in order to be moral and have good values; 42% say it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values.

The share of the public that says belief in God is not morally necessary has edged higher over the past six years. In 2011, about as many said it was necessary to believe in God to be a moral person as said it was not . This shift in attitudes has been accompanied by a rise in the share of Americans who do not identify with any organized religion.

Republicans are roughly divided over whether belief in God is necessary to be moral , little changed over the 15 years since the Center first asked the question. But the share of Democrats who say belief in God is not a condition for morality has increased over this period.

About two-thirds of Democrats and Democratic leaners say it is not necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values, up from 51% who said this in 2011.

The growing partisan divide on this question parallels the widening partisan gap in religious affiliation.

About six-in-ten whites think belief in God is not necessary in order to be a moral person. By contrast, roughly six-in-ten blacks and 55% of Hispanics say believing in God is a necessary part of being a moral person with good values.

International AffairsEconomic ConditionsTrust, Facts & DemocracyClimate, Energy & EnvironmentRace & EthnicitySame-Sex Marriage

Lgbt Conservatism In The United States

Jump to navigationJump to search

LGBT conservatism in the United States is a social and political ideology within the community that largely aligns with the American conservative movement. LGBT conservatism is generally more moderate on social issues from social conservatism, instead emphasizing values associated with fiscal conservatism, libertarian conservatism, and .

Changing Views On Acceptance Of Homosexuality

Seven-in-ten now say homosexuality should be accepted by society, compared with just 24% who say it should be discouraged by society. The share saying homosexuality should be accepted by society is up 7 percentage points in the past year and up 19 points from 11 years ago.

Growing acceptance of homosexuality has paralleled an increase in public support for same-sex marriage. About six-in-ten Americans now say they favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally.

While there has been an increase in acceptance of homosexuality across all partisan and demographic groups, Democrats remain more likely than Republicans to say homosexuality should be accepted by society.

Overall, 83% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say homosexuality should be accepted by society, while only 13% say it should be discouraged. The share of Democrats who say homosexuality should be accepted by society is up 20 points since 2006 and up from 54% who held this view in 1994.

Among Republicans and Republican leaners, more say homosexuality should be accepted than discouraged by society. This is the first time a majority of Republicans have said homosexuality should be accepted by society in Pew Research Center surveys dating to 1994. Ten years ago, just 35% of Republicans held this view, little different than the 38% who said this in 1994.

Acceptance is greater among those with postgraduate and bachelors degrees than among those with some or no college experience .

Reasons Why Conservatives Hate Democrats

November 5, 2014 by Samuel WardeNo Comments

20 Reasons Why Conservatives Hate Democrats

1. Democrats believe in higher education.2. Democrats believe in preserving the environment.3. Democrats believe in science.4. Democrats believe that carbon dioxide is dangerous.5. Democrats do not believe that minimum wage created our nations unemployment.

6. Democrats do not believe armed rebellion is a viable alternative to elections.7. Democrats do not believe that corporations are people too.8. Democrats do not believe that the sexual revolution created AIDS.9. Democrats do not know the proper height for trees.10. Democrats do not understand decent God-fearing Americans need missile launchers at home.

11. Democrats do not understand that banning abortions for high risk pregnancies can be a positive experience for women.12. Democrats do not understand that intelligent design is a proven scientific theory.13. Democrats do not understand that marriage is related to national security.14. Democrats do not understand that the media is a threat to national security.15. Democrats forgot that Hitler coined the phrase separation of church and state.

16. Democrats seem oblivious to the fact that most good Americans oppose gay marriage.17. Democrats seldom bring guns to crowded public events.18. Democrats want to force innocent multi-millionaires to pay taxes.19. Democrats want to let gays vote.20. Democrats want to let immigrants vote.

Log Cabins Better Record On Gay Issues

While Stonewall was cheerleading Obamas do-nothing Democrats, Log Cabin sued the government to kill DADT. In 2010, Log Cabin won an injunction preventing the administration from enforcing DADT. Only after fighting that injunction, and losing, did Obama finally repeal the law.

Log Cabin has also withheld its endorsement from high-profile Republican candidates who opposed marriage equality unlike Stonewall, we resist partisan groupthink, even when it costs us. We wouldnt be endorsing President Trump in 2020 if he werent truly an ally.

Trump openly supported LGBT equality before any of Stonewalls endorsees did. In 1999, while Democrats defended DADT, Trump opined that gays and lesbians serving openly was not something that would disturb me. In 2000, Trump proposed an amendment of civil rights law to ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, which would have rendered moot the employment discrimination case currently before the Supreme Court.

In 2015, though Trump needed religious conservative votes to win the Republican primary, he nevertheless stated publicly that religious freedom and LGBT rights are not mutually exclusive. He even rebuked his running mate-to-be, Mike Pence, for initially undervaluing LGBT interests in Indianas Religious Freedom Restoration Act, on which Pence ultimately reversed. Today, President Trump still has our back.

Stonewall Incorrectly Attacks President Trump

Stonewalls article censures Russia for orchestrating an industrial-scale genocide of gay men in Chechnya. Russias behavior is indeed alarming. So President Trump, collaborating with his Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell, has launched a historic initiative to decriminalize homosexuality worldwide. Basham conveniently omits this fact.

Stonewall calls Trumps plan to reduce HIV/AIDS transmission by 90 percent within 10 years lip service because HIV+ immigrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border are separated from other immigrants. But this policy is intended to provide HIV+ immigrants, some of whom face untreated AIDS, with needed medical care. Stonewall also neglects to mention that Trumps budget included $291 million to fight HIV in 2020 alone. Trump also convinced the antiviral research group Gilead to donate billions of dollars of HIV prevention medication for 200,000 people. That is hardly lip service.

Stonewall further insinuates, ludicrously, that Trump is bigoted for halting Obama-era attempts to tell public schools which bathroom transgender students can use. We say, good: The well-being of children who do not identify with their biological sex is vitally important, but it does not fall under the originally intended purview of Title IX and would thus be better explored at the state and local level without federal intervention. Executive overreach in the name of LGBT rights does nothing to recommend our cause.

Relies On Star Power Not Plotlines

Back in the day, Disney movies sold themselves because their plots were incredible. They showcased fairytales and chronicled the rise of the underdog. This worked in Disneys animated and live-action movies, and the company was untouchable for decades. Then, they had a string of flops like Mulan, Pocahontas and Hercules. Suddenly, Disney was fallible. So, instead of hiring better writers, they took the easy way out they started to hire big name talent to headline its projects. And they havent looked back. Disney has hired giants in the film industry to voice its characters, like Miley Cyrus and . And of course, Disney puts the most popular celebs in its live action movies, like Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie.

Disney even has upcoming projects with Emma Stone, Reese Witherspoon and Emma Watson. But what good is it to have a big star in a movie if the plot is weak? The only good thing about this change in direction is that it finally steered Disney away from cramming cultural sensitivity down everyones throats. There was a period of time when it made sure to give every minority group its own movie, from Hawaiians in Lilo and Stitch to African Americans in The Princess and the Frog. Audiences perceived this to be the pandering that it was.

How Out Of Step Is The Republican Party On Gay Rights

The wedding wasnt the only reason conservatives targeted Rep. Denver Riggleman in a party convention , but it was the driving one. Which raises the question: How out of step with the nation is the Republican Party on same-sex rights?

Its an especially pertinent question on Monday, now that the Supreme Court, with the support of one of President Trumps nominees, just voted 6-3 that existing federal law protects gay and transgender workers from discrimination based on sex.

Thats a sea change in the legal landscape of protections for LGBTQ Americans. Before this ruling, in about half of the states, you could be legally fired for being gay or transgender. Now, you cant under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which the court ruled extends to LGBTQ Americans because it prevents discrimination on the basis of sex.

But like the Republican voters in Virginia who ousted Riggleman in favor of social conservative Bob Good, there is an active wing of the Republican Party seeking to push back on the march toward expanding legal protections for gay and transgender Americans. And they have powerful allies.

The Trump administration opposed interpreting the Civil Rights Act to encompass LGBTQ workers. The leader of the conservative Judicial Crisis Network called the six justices who supported this ruling, one of whom was Trump appointee Neil M. Gorsuch, activists, implying the court got ahead of where the public is on the issue.

Emily Guskin contributed to this report.

Mike Pence Accidentally Admits The Real Reason Republicans Hate Democrats So Much

Common Dreams

The grassroots organization People for Bernie on Tuesday advised the Democratic Party to take a page from an unlikely sourceright-wing Vice President Mike Penceafter Pence told a rally crowd in Florida that progressives and Democrats “want to make rich people poorer, and poor people more comfortable.”

“Good message,” tweeted the group, alerting the Democratic National Committee to adopt the vice president’s simple, straightforward description of how the party can prioritize working people over corporations and the rich.

Suggesting that a progressive approach to the economy will harm the countrydespite the fact that other wealthy nations already invest heavily in making low- and middle-income “more comfortable” by taxing corporations and very high earnersPence touted the Republicans’ aim to “cut taxes” and “roll back regulations.”

The vice president didn’t mention how the Trump administration’s 2017 tax cuts overwhelmingly benefited wealthy households and powerful corporations, with corporate income tax rates slashed from 35% to 21%, corporate tax revenues plummeting, and a surge in stock buybacks while workers saw “no discernible wage increase” according to a report released last year by the Economic Policy Institute and the Center for Popular Democracy.

Pence’s description of progressive goals was “exactly” correct, author and commentator Anand Giridharadas tweeted.

“Yes, and what’s wrong with making poor people more comfortable?” asked Rep. Ilhan Omar .

Gw College Republicans Invite Log Cabin Republicans And Lgbt Conservatives To Talk About What It Means To Be Gay And Conservative

Kicking off a discussion on the inclusion of LGBT people in the Republican Party, Charles Moran, the managing director of the conservative gay group the Log Cabin Republicans, told George Washington University students that they dont have to be a Democrat because youre gay.

The forum at the Marvin Center Amphitheater Tuesday night, hosted by GW College Republicans, brought together what Josh Kutner, director of political affairs for the group, described as an all-star panel of Republican and conservative political and media consultants: Dave McCulloch, managing partner at Capitol Media Partners; Brad Polumbo, an editor and columnist at The Washington Examiner; and Edith Jorge-Tunon, political director for the Republican State Leadership Committee.

Mr. Moran, who has 14 years of experience managing local and national Republican political races, started the discussion by asking panelists to explain how they came out as conservative and where they fit on the conservative spectrum.

Mr. Polumbo said he realized he was a conservative when he was dropped into the liberal bastion of the University of Massachusetts and wound up persona non grata in the gay community.

A Rand Paul libertarian and technically not a Republican, he said, I definitely have a very right-wing philosophy. I am more than willing to punch at both sides.

Live your life honestly, Mr. Moran advised. Be present. Share and be aware. Accept them for who they are and who they are not.

We’re Portrayed As A Perversion

From the left, right, and even a few biased researchers, people accuse transgender people of being perverts, fetishists, and likely rapists. This is in great part why the right-wing tactics against non-discrimination ordinances have been so successful: the right wing tells people that it’s a choice between protecting their wives and daughters or a tiny group of perverts.

Many Trump Supporters Are Lgbt

So Stonewall is wrong. But something more important is going on here. What really infuriates Basham is that Log Cabin has given cover for the presidents claim that some of biggest supporters are LGBT. As if saying so were a crime Trump commits in secrecy while his fabulous gay accomplices at Log Cabin run interference. But its just a fact: Many of Trumps most fervent supporters are LGBT people.

Left-wing gay activists, however, depend on creating the impression that all LGBT people are Democrats. Democrats then use this false narrative to consolidate unearned moral authority. That is why, when the prominent gay billionaire Peter Thiel expressed support for Trump, The Advocate promptly ran a piece arguing he isnt actually gay he just has sex with men.

The point of such chicanery is to insinuate that all Republicans are homophobes, and all homophobes are Republicans. That only works if Democrats speak for all gays. So just one prominent gay or trans Republican punctures the lie that the left has a monopoly on gay rights.

Log Cabin Republicans stand to disabuse the public of that lie. The Stonewall Democrats dont want you to know we exist. But we do, our ideas are better than theirs, and were not going anywhere.

Trans Rights: A Perplexing Issue

Like many other gay conservatives, however, he seems to disconnect gay rights and transgender rights. Kabel recalled a recent article with a quotation from the conservative activist Tony Perkins that contrasted the Democratic and Republican platforms in 2016.

“The only issue Perkins raised was the transgender bathroom issue,” Kabel said. “And I thought, ‘That means we won.'”

Kabel called transgender equality “one of the most perplexing issues going.”

“Transgender people deserve support and protection just like anybody else, but it’s a very complex issue,” he said. “It’s remarkable when you hear their stories, but it’s just a very perplexing issue about how to really address it and do it so that they’re protected but other people aren’t hurt, so that people’s religious views are actually taken into consideration.”

Transgender visibility is all but absent in the Log Cabin Republicans, from their leadership to their messaging.

An OUTSpoken Instagram post compares the LGBT left to the LGBT right by putting an image of a person who appears to be transgender or gender-nonconforming next to a shirtless picture of former U.S. Rep. Aaron Schock, while the campaigns store sells T-shirts bearing slogans like “gay for Tucker” “gay for Melania” and “gay not stupid.

OUTspoken sent Brokeback Patriot, who has stated trans women are not women, to New Orleans Southern Decadence party to ask passersby if they think Trump is pro-gay.

2 notes · View notes