The Latter-Day Skeptic

Don't believe everything you learned in Primary.

[latterdayskeptic]

LDSILF

They mean BYU alumni, but that's not what I thought when I first read this headline. Clearly, I have not spent enough time in Utah.

Article at Herald Media: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/community/higher-education/meet-the-cougars-in-meet-the-mormons/article_f8000593-f0e8-528e-8828-0fa120b789ac.html

[latterdayskeptic]

LDS Democrats Are Feeling Blue

Former Democratic Congressman (and Mormon) Richard Stallings is running for office again, and he wants Idaho voters to know that they won’t go to Outer Darkness if they vote for him!

“Every election season, a nasty rumor seems to sweep southeast Idaho. It is whispered, among the Saints, that Mormons should not vote for Democrats. Even though our Church authorities have emphatically stated before each election — and will likely do so again this year — that the Church does not endorse candidates or parties, this destructive rumor persists.”

While the true political neutrality of the LDS Church is debatable at best (AHEM—Prop 8), he does have a point. Mormons are allowed to vote for Democrats—even if it means absolutely nothing.

Presented for your review, here are the 2012 electoral maps for Idaho and Utah!

Idaho is slightly more Democratic than Utah, but still. That's an awful lot of red. So you won't go to Mormon hell for voting Democrat, but your vote also literally won't make a difference in any election ever. The culture of the Church has been too socially conservative for too long to convince people that Democrats are anything but gay-loving, baby-killing, liberal monsters who don't truly understand the Gospel.

Read the full article at The Rexburg Standard Journal: http://www.rexburgstandardjournal.com/opinion/have-you-heard-that-mormons-do-not-vote-for-democrats/article_be660dc2-5647-11e4-91cd-7f170189ffc3.html#axzz3GjJJ7RtW

[latterdayskeptic]

Anarchy in the UT

The Deseret News is reporting that a church building in Duchesne, Utah was vandalized on the night of Tuesday October 14. Police didn't find any signs of forced entry, meaning some idiot probably forgot to lock up after Mutual (or whatever they're calling it these days.)

I have conflicting feelings about this. On one hand, it's a pretty dick move to vandalize a church. These are things that people hold sacred.

Buuuuuut... I simply love the image of an anarchy sign on the Bishop's door way too much. How appropriate.

FIGHT THE POWER! (But you don't necessarily have to be destructive to do so!)

Also, you are missing a great opportunity to give Jesus a speech bubble. Have some fun with your vandalism. Get creative! (Again, I absolutely don't condone this action. But if you're gonna do it, raise the damn bar, just like L. Tom Perry told you to.)

Read the full article: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865613187/LDS-church-vandalized-in-Duchesne.html

[latterdayskeptic]

By Mormons, FOR Mormons!

I feel like this chart gives us a pretty good idea of who’s seeing Meet the Mormons, and it’s exactly what you expected.

This graph shows the film’s box office receipts for its opening weekend, broken down by date. On Friday and Saturday, it did pretty well. On Friday and Saturday, it was the tenth most popular movie in the country. But see that steep drop? That’s Sunday, where the movie saw a 94.6% drop in attendees. It got another boost on Monday, but not quite where it was at over the weekend. Overall, Meet the Mormons ended up as the 11th movie in the U.S., just below another religious propaganda-fest, the studio remake of Left Behind.

If you’re familiar with Mormon cultural norms, these numbers tell a pretty obvious story. People in Mormon-heavy areas went and saw the film on Friday and Saturday to support the movie and what it stands for. On Sunday, they stayed home, because good Mormons don’t go to movies on the Sabbath—even if it’s a glorified Seminary film. And then on Monday, Mormons went to the movie as a ready-made Family Home Evening activity.

I don’t think the LDS leaders expected Meet the Mormons to be the sleeper hit of the fall. The movie is serving its intended purpose: being propaganda to its own members, possibly reaching a few potential converts who were already interested in Mormonism to begin with, and eventually to be used as a teaching tool within the Church.

Chart from Box Office Mojo: http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=meetthemormons.htm

Click here if you'd like to read Deseret News' insanely rosy reporting on the film's release: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865612939/Meet-the-Mormons-No-10-in-box-office-receipts-hits-No-1-in-some-markets.html

[latterdayskeptic]

Lady Problems: Conference 2014 Edition!

There was a bit of drama this past weekend regarding which session LDS Church considers the official start of General Conference. A quick recap of what happened, in order:

At the General Women’s Meeting, Elder Uchtdorf to the meeting as the “opening session” of Conference.

At the Saturday morning session, both Elder Eyring and the Young Women’s President refer to that session as the “first session” of Conference. This has traditionally been seen as the official start of Conference.

But then—there’s a twist! In his prayer at the Priesthood session, a member of the Seventy refers to that particular meeting as the “fourth session” of Conference. If you do the math, these four sessions would include the Women’s Meeting, Saturday morning, Saturday afternoon, and Priesthood.

This prayer has now been edited in the official transcript of the Priesthood session. It no longer has any reference to the meeting as the “fourth” session of Conference. Interestingly, Elder Uchtdorf’s words referring to the Women’s Meeting as the opening session have not been altered.

The official statement from the Church:

"While the women’s meetings have long been an important part of General Conference week, they are not usually referred to as a session of General Conference," LDS Church spokesman Dale Jones said in a statement Friday afternoon. "Edits are routinely made to General Conference proceedings prior to publication of the official record. In this case a simple edit was made by the conference producer to reflect the usual numbering of the sessions."

This has upset some people. While I don’t particularly care which boring session of Conference is considered the FIRST boring session of Conference, the selective editing is noteworthy. If you want to scrub all mention of the idea that the Women’s Meeting might be considered the “opening ceremonies” of General Conference, why wouldn’t you delete that from the transcript of the Women’s Meeting as well? I have two theories:

1. Inconsistent editing, the result of a specific proofreader or transcriber.

2. Keeping the reference in the Women’s Meeting continues the Church’s overall strategy of flattering women with praise and telling them how very special and blessed they are, without having to actually address the issues (and complaints) surrounding the role of women in Mormonism.

I honestly believe each theory is just as likely. It could be a dick move, or it could be something someone just didn’t notice. Either way, it’s worth noting the inconsistencies between the official record of the Church and what happened live at Conference. Especially since most people won’t ever rewatch Conference again, but Ensign articles will be quoted in lessons from the pulpit to members’ homes for decades to come.

Salt Lake Tribune: http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile[phone]/conference-session-women-general.html.csp

[exmormonsunite]

What are critics saying about “Meet the Mormons”? Well… Not much. But there are some gems among the sounds of crickets.

[latterdayskeptic]

Compare and Contrast: Bishops/Chaplains

I have a Google Alert set up for LDS news, and when I saw the headline, “LDS Church Approves Centralized Endorsement of All Chaplains, Including Women,” I was shocked. Wait, did this mean that the Church was going to suddenly switch its position on women holding the priesthood? Why hasn't this been all over the news and my friends' Facebook posts? The answer is, No, nothing has changed. And why would you ask something so dumb? This news story is a lot more complicated than that, and I’m left with a lot of follow-up questions about how the church runs the chaplain programs, and what that means for the regular clergy of the church.

The title of “chaplain” is not actually an LDS calling. This is a career path that anyone can pursue, that operates outside of the Church. It requires religious education, and a familiarity with many different religions and cultures. The LDS Church apparently offers specialized training to chaplains, which makes me question why bishops and other Church leaders aren’t required to go through a similar training. I know we want to believe that these men are led by God, but would there be any harm in giving extra training and education to this “lay clergy?”

“A chaplain is responsible to teach values, to build moral character in individuals and help in broadening personal understanding of integrity, loyalty and honor — those core values that are so critical in life," [Frank Clawson, director of military relations for the LDS Church] said. "A chaplain hopes to instill such values in soldiers, values that will sustain individuals who may come to question circumstances in their lives."

That’s what a bishop is meant to be, right? A spiritual guide for the members.  I’ve heard a lot of “Bad Bishop” stories—mostly about men with good intentions, who just didn’t have the skills to fulfill their calling effectively. Why wouldn’t you want more oversight on how your leaders were running things in their respective wards? After all, the Church is all about correlation and conformity. Why leave any part of the bishop-ward relationship up to chance?  

And here is my favorite quote from the article, still from the Church’s military relations director:

"I think women are a good fit for chaplaincy. They are compassionate and kind," [Clawson] added. "Whatever we do for women chaplains, we know they are in an environment where they can excel. Being a chaplain is challenging and not for the faint of heart."

For now, let’s set aside the fact that women aren’t a monolithic entity who all share the same “female traits” that you think they do. But I do wonder... Can you think of any other jobs within the Mormon Church’s structure that are similar to the responsibilities of a chaplain? Could some women maaaaaybe be good at those jobs, too? Hmmm?

It’s a real puzzle.

Herald Extra: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/lds-church-approves-centralized-endorsement-of-all-chaplains-including-women/article_6fb35da1-7128-5b06-971d-c4ffcf48ee83.html

[latterdayskeptic]

Love Is Spoken Here

"In yet another example of the gradual eroding of the divinely inspired language that made this great country of ours what it is today, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has inexplicably allowed the impurity of foreign speech to pollute its churchwide proceedings."

Read the full article at the Standard Examiner: http://www.standard.net/Standard-Deviations/2014/10/06/English-takes-a-beating-at-LDS-general-conference.html

I legitimately can’t tell if this is supposed to be funny or not. If it’s satire, it doesn’t quite go big enough to be effective. If it’s serious, it’s in shockingly bad taste.

[latterdayskeptic]

CNN is blowing the lid off of prescription drug abuse in Utah, which is a huge problem. How huge? Apparently Utah has the highest number of deaths via prescription drug overdose in the US. Which is… well, not extremely shocking, really. I figured it was high up on the list, but I really didn’t think it would be in the top spot.

It’s almost like people in Utah are looking for a way to escape, and they’re turning to totally legal drugs that don’t break the Word of Wisdom to do it.

Now, what could be making people in Utah so unhappy? I’m stumped.

Salt Lake Tribune: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/entertainment2/58478090-223/ling-church-addiction-lds.html.csp

[latterdayskeptic]

No Homo, No Logo

A gay Mormon who planned to hand out informational cards outside Temple Square during LDS General Conference this weekend has been served with a cease-and-desist order by church attorneys.

[...] But what spawned the objection was that the card also contained the official logo of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said spokesman Dale Jones.

"When an individual or group adds the church’s logo to a promotional item, it implies that the item has the church’s official stamp of approval," Jones said. "That is not honest. Irrespective of the message contained in the promotional product, all organizations are obligated to protect their state and federally registered trademarks and logos."

General Conference starts tomorrow, and the Church is in a "love the sinner, hate the copyright infringement" kind of mood. Michael Ferguson was planning to hand out cards outside of Temple Square during Conference weekend, with the Church's official policy on gays and lesbians. But the Powers That Be stopped him on a legal technicality. Their main objection is that using the Church's logo implies that the content is sanctioned by church leaders. Which it is. Because it is their OFFICIAL POLICY.

They're claiming that it doesn't matter what the cards actually say, (i.e., their own carefully-chosen words), since they need to protect their brand. But I don't hold any doubt that they would find a way to shut this guy down, even if he wasn't using their logo. The Church can afford very good, very expensive lawyers. If someone was handing out bootleg pass-along cards that used the Church's logo, do you think they'd also get served with a cease-and-desist?

Somehow, I doubt it. But then, I've already branded myself a skeptic, so you knew that was coming.

Read the full article at: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/58480887-90/church-mormon-gay-lds.html.csp

[latterdayskeptic]

General Conference: Snacks on Snacks on Snacks

 http://www.standard.net/Outtakes/2014/09/30/DVR-remote-snacks-action-How-to-watch-LDS-Conference.html

General Conference is this weekend! To celebrate, a very nice Mormon dude named Don Porter has written a hilariously oblivious article about why Conference is, like, OMG THE BEST. Except he seems to actually be making a pretty solid argument for why church is boring. Let's walk down the list, shall we?

1. Not having to feel guilty about spending the whole weekend watching TV on the couch.

"Television has always been a wellspring of guilt for subpar Mormons like yours truly... The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints confirms my faith in televised holiness twice each year via two days of what we in the Porter household lovingly call “Church on TV.”

How very Mormon Corridor of him. Most church members don't have the option of watching Conference on TV. But he's not wrong--it's pretty great to sit on the couch for two days and watch TV/Internet while consuming brand-new spiritual truths.

2. You get to hear the same talks on the exact same topics as always!

"First and foremost, I think, it is an opportunity for Mormons to hear sermons from our most senior leaders — a few women; lots of men – and receive spiritual nourishment on topics we’ve all heard discussed before but never seem to get right and so we have to be told again."

Well, not *new* spiritual truths, exactly. More like the same thing you hear every year, from the same old (very old) faces. But obviously we need to hear it. Otherwise, why would they keep repeating themselves?

3. Sitting on fancy beanbags in pajamas.

“In addition, for me, this spiritual buffet’s dessert items include the chance to do the church thing whilst buried in the family room Lovesac. Or while sitting on the recliner. Or reclining on the sitter. Whichever. In my jammies.”

Mormons are big fans of Lovesac, which is ironic, given how brazenly filthy that name is. My best guess is that the vast majority of them don’t actually understand the double entendre. Plus, when you have a ton of kids, buying a Lovesac must be cheaper than buying real furniture.

Regardless, he is absolutely correct in saying that for some people, Conference is a great opportunity to “do the church thing” without *really* doing the church thing. You don’t have to dress up or sit up, and you still get points for participation.

4. Putting church on pause.

5. Junk food.

6. Instant replay.

“I find myself frequently freezing the action — although ‘action’ is probably not an accurate word to describe any component of a conference session — to refill my half-gallon insulated Maverik mug with delicious iced soda pop, to make a kitchen run for a new supply of snack chips/Buffalo wings/chocolate candies, or to hit the rewind button in order to listen again to a part of a leader’s talk about that thing I always do but shouldn’t be doing if I want to, you know, wind up with a better deal when it comes to my Great Reward.”

At this point, I realized that General Conference is really just the Mormon Super Bowl. He’s eating hot wings, drinking “iced soda pop,” and all the junk food his body can handle. Through the magic of his DVR, he can even pause and rewind the talks, giving himself an instant replay of these great revelations (that he admits that he won’t follow up on.) Gee, Church is so great when it’s exactly like a football game. Can we let Salt Lake know about this? I would love to see some post-church analysis and play-by-play commentary between Conference sessions. Maybe that would get some of the speakers to give us something new and interesting, instead of just, “go to church, say your prayers, read your scriptures.”

7. Multitasking during church, while still technically keeping the Sabbath day holy.

“Indeed, I like to multi-task while conference is being broadcast. Maybe I’m the only member of my church in the world to do this, but I suspect not. If I’m not into the TV worship that day, I’ll flip my dial to The Only True Radio Station – KSL – and listen to the conference audio while checking Facebook, repainting a room, driving a load of garbage to the landfill or anything else I wouldn’t be able to do while wearing a suit and tie and sitting on a hard folding chair at the back of my neighborhood chapel.”

You can get shit DONE during Conference. Regular church is a huge time-suck: you’re held hostage for a minimum of three hours, and if you have a calling, it can easily turn into an all-day affair. But during Conference, you can get to all those big projects you’ve been putting off, like checking Facebook and finally beating the next Candy Crush level. It’s almost like he’s blaming Church for the fact that he hasn’t painted that room or taken the trash to the dump. In fact, it’s almost like he doesn’t even like the entire experience of going to church, instead only focusing on how great it is to not have to go to the standard Mormon sacrament meeting, which is long, tedious, and boring.

8. You don’t even have to watch Conference at all.

“And if you thought taking your twice-per-year-general-conference dose of churchly instruction via TV, radio or the Internet was a pretty good deal, the Mormon Church even goes so far as to give total slackers among us — if we miss parts of the conference or even the whole thing — an actual get-out-of-conference-free card: transcriptions of all the conference addresses in the next month’s Ensign magazine.”

And here is the truly great part about Conference: you don’t actually have to spend time listening to the Literal Words of God As Spoken By His Holy Prophets—you can just wait for the print version. This is obviously the next evolution in Church. God just needs a blog. Or maybe some meme-friendly gifs.

So what have we learned from this article? That Don Porter is in serious denial about his faith, and that church would be so much better if they handed out snacks instead of sacrament.

I'm not trying to pick on this one random article. Rather, I want to examine what it says about the culture of Mormonism as a whole. This is an entrenched feeling in the Church: Conference is a break, a respite, a day off from the normal Sunday routine. And people love it because of that. That speaks to how over-churched Mormons are in the first place. Between regular meetings, callings, correlation meetings, mid-week activities, and lesson planning, Mormons spend a LOT of time on Church. But on Conference weekend, everyone gets a little break, and they can absorb the messages while relaxing at home. Even if you have to watch the satellite feed at a Church building, you aren't expected to prepare anything else. You can just have a peaceful Sunday, vaguely listening to the Church leaders, and not even worry about how embarrassed you'll be if you fall asleep in the middle of it.

If only regular Church was more like Conference weekend (i.e., totally optional.)

[latterdayskeptic]

“Sister Knight is a powerful voice for sharing the restored Gospel and breaking down some of the misconceptions about the Mormon Church. Her very presence dispels the myth that we are a white church and gives us an opportunity to share that we are a diverse worldwide church,” said Douglas L. Talley, president of the Akron Stake. “She’s a tremendous ambassador and she has created an opportunity to further enlighten people about what we believe during these firesides.”

http://www.ohio.com/news/local/gladys-knight-uses-her-voice-to-evangelize-for-the-mormon-church-1.526635

The Church treats Gladys Knight, who was baptized in 1997, like its one black friend that it can point to in order to prove how obviously not racist it is. Mormonism doesn't have many famous members (who aren't Osmonds), and they are always desperate to show mainstream Christianity how cool and normal they are. So Gladys goes on a stake center tour across the country, singing to packed church buildings, and doesn't even sing "Midnight Train to Georgia."

I've been to one of these firesides, and it was a really fun time. She sings with a joy and enthusiasm about her faith that is simply lacking in most Mormon music. But it's downright embarrassing how people seem to think that just because they have one famous black lady who joined up, somehow Mormonism is post-racial.

[latterdayskeptic]

“I was not aware the Mormons were building this temple on the outskirts of Rome, but I do know that the Mormon Church is very rich, endowed with enormous resources coming from the United States,” says Cardinal Elio Sgreccia, former president of the Pontifical Academy for Life and a celebrated bioethicist.

“It’s no sin to have economic means, but this new Mormon center, the biggest in Europe, will certainly pose a problem for ecumenism,” he said.

“On the one hand, the construction of this new temple has created jobs, and this is a good thing,” the cardinal continued, “but for ecumenism, that is, dialog and a search for the unity of all Christians, their presence in Rome is definitely not constructive.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/09/29/New-Mormon-Temple-in-Rome-Fuels-Polemics

"It's no sin to have economic means." Beautiful. Catholics are all about that bling.

I can't wait for the Catholic/Mormon conflict to get real. But my money's on the Italians--Mormons are too gosh darn nice to fight an actual turf war. Plus, they lack the aptitude for organized crime.

[latterdayskeptic]

We Are Africa

Saturday night’s meeting also featured the first-ever prayer at a session of General Conference by a black woman, offered by South African Dorah Mkhabela, a member of the LDS Young Women’s General Board.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58462897-78/women-general-lds-meeting.html.csp

The date of this meeting? September 27, 2014. TWO THOUSAND FOURTEEN.

This is one of those facts that even though it makes sense, in a logical way, still kind of seems impossible. A black woman had never given a prayer at any Conference session, ever, until last Saturday.

And this wasn't even a real session of Conference, either--this was at the women's meeting. Lord knows that it will be awhile before a black woman gives a prayer at the Sunday morning session. Don't they have Gladys Knight on speed dial over at Church Headquarters?

[latterdayskeptic]

In the church's April general conference, Elder Quentin L. Cook of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles said 85 percent of Latter-day Saints live within 200 miles of a temple.

Most of the 14 temples under construction won't make a major impact on that percentage for several reasons, both religious and statistical.

First, bringing temples closer to all members isn't the purpose of every temple announcement. Some areas have high concentrations of members who max out a temple's capacity.

"A lot of these (temples under construction) are not reaching out to new areas much," Plewe said.

Temples in Payson and Provo, for example, serve areas where temples are in heavy use and will operate at or near full capacity once they open.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865612022/Temples-grow-ever-closer-to-members.html

NO SHIT that a lot of the new temples aren't about reaching new areas. They're building a SECOND temple in Provo, which really tells you all you need to know. This bar graph from the article (above) is particularly revealing.

[latterdayskeptic]

The articles simply appeared on the church’s site under the heading "Gospel Topics," with no news releases and no fanfare. Many of them were reported in The Salt Lake Tribune and other news outlets, but they were not read over the pulpit in Mormon congregations, nor mentioned in the faith’s semiannual General Conferences. Now the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints is at least making its male leaders aware of the essays. A memo dated Sept. 9 from the church’s "Priesthood Department" to "General Authorities; Area Seventies; Stake, Mission, and District Presidents; Bishops and Branch Presidents" explains the purpose of — and audience for — the controversial articles. "The purpose of the Gospel Topics section is to provide accurate and transparent information on church history and doctrine within the framework of faith," the memo said. "When church members have questions regarding [LDS] history and doctrine, possibly arising when detractors spread misinformation and doubt, you may want to direct their attention to these resources." The Church wants to talk honestly and openly about its controversial history, but only if you're already having doubts. They don't want to bring up their dirty laundry themselves. This way, the faithful remain unexposed to ugly truths, and the doubters can get the official, least damaging version of reality. They are giving you the appearance of transparency, but these Gospel Topics articles are only for "break glass in case of emergency" types of situations. Which is a shame, because until the Church can embrace its origins, they are going to have to keep contorting their version of history to better align with changing attitudes. http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile[phone]/church-essays-faith-tribune.html.csp

[latterdayskeptic]

SASSY-ASS PROPHET http://blingee.com/blingee/view/130932540-Sassy-Joseph-Smith