Thursday, October 22, 2015

Brief History: Concept of the Satan/Devil/Lucifer Character

Did you know that “Satan,” “the Devil,” and “Lucifer” are not the same things? Yet, those are all names used (especially by Christian-based beliefs) to describe the evil demon-like character who’s in charge of Hell and wants all of us to suffer.

Earlier this year I heard this phrase, “Jewish people don’t believe in the devil.” As a person raised in basic Christianity and later a member of the LDS Church, I found this statement perplexing. “Of course they believe in the devil! Satan is in the the Old Testament books, which are Hebrew scriptures. Right?”

About this same time as learning of the above information, my youngest child was a little frightened after watching “Super Natural” with my daughter. It’s a show about a couple of very-cute demon-hunter brothers. My son was worried about Lucifer and his minions and wondering if they can hurt him. I decided to do a little research about this shape-shifting, pitchfork-carrying creature.

{The following are from my personal notes written several months ago. I didn’t save any references. However, it’s easy enough to search terms as well as the basic question, “Do Jews believe in the devil or hell?”}

Satan
-Jewish people do not and never did believe in the Christian concept of the devil/Satan. But, they do believe in “the satan.”
-In Hebrew, the Written Torah and/or the Tanakh (from which Christians take the Old Testament) is “haSatan,” or “the satan.” You can plug in the following words for “satan” to get the meaning: the challenger, the difficulty, the prosecutor, the obstacle, the hinderer, the distraction, the adversary. You get the idea. It is NOT a proper name. The closest haSatan comes to being a proper name is in the story of Job. It’s like saying the painter, the grocer, the lawyer — it’s a position, not a proper name of a person.
-Judaism is STRICTLY monotheistic, meaning NO ONE else has authority but God and that God is the creator of both good and evil. It is up to mankind to choose which path they will follow. Saint Augustine had a huge problem with the Jewish idea that God is the creator of evil (more about that under “Devil”).
-The satan is not God’s opponent nor a disobedient child nor rebellious angel.
-The satan works for God. Its job is to make choosing good over evil enough of a challenge so that it can be a meaningful choice for growth. (“Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory” example: “Slugworth” is Wonka’s employee used to test the integrity of the guests. He’s Wonka’s haSatan).
-It’s an angel who takes on the challenger role and whose mission it is to add difficulty, challenges, and growth experiences to life. In Judaism, angels do not have free will, cannot sin, and cannot “fall.” 
-The serpent in the Garden of Eden was NOT Satan according to Judaism. Christianity “hijacked” the Old Testament. There is no direct link between the serpent that tempts Eve and the references to a Satan in the first book of Chronicles and Job. It’s a Christian invention/interpretation (Book of Revelation). [My ah-hah moment: Jesus -being raised Jewish- was never taught the concept of this Satan/Devil/Evil Lucifer character.]
-An additional explanation: Satan is used as a metaphor for the “Yetzer HaRa” = not a force nor a being, but rather refers to mankind’s innate capacity for doing evil in the world. Opposite: Yetzer HaTov means the good inclination.

Devil
-4th Century CE: Not liking the Jewish belief of God being capable of creating evil, St. Augustine invented the concepts of “the fall” and “original sin” as well as the character of the Devil (referred by Christians as Satan).
-“Devil” is a Modern English word descending from the Middle English “devel,” Old English “deofol,” that in turn represents an early Germanic borrowing of Latin “diabolus, which was borrowed from Ancient Greek “diabolos” which means “slanderer.” Dia = across, bolo/ballein = to hurl.
-In the New Testament, “Satan” occurs more than 30 times in passages alongside “diabolos,” referring to the same character as Satan. (Through time and translations, Satan and the Devil become synonymous).

Lucifer
-Lucifer is Latin and means “Venus as a morning star.” “Lux/lucis” = light/fire, “ferre” = to bear/to bring. 
-Also: Son of the Morning
-The word Lucifer did not always exist and was NOT original to the Hebrew written Torah (Christian Old Testament).
-The very concept of the character or personage “Lucifer” is non-Jewish.
-Isaiah 14:12, (http://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-12.htm) Isaiah was using a metaphor (in Hebrew) of a bright light (“shining one, son of the dawn”), referring to the power of the Babylonian king, which had faded. When the HEBREW scriptures were translated into Latin, the Latin word “lucifer” was used by St. Jerome to convey Isaiah’s metaphor. Saint Jerome (a contemporary of St. Augustine’s) placed the word Lucifer into the Bible originally 3 times during the revision of the Latin translation, completed 5th Century CE. Now, it’s there only one time: the other 2 spots replaces “Lucifer” with “morning star,” thus, showing the original intention.
-Morning star is a term used throughout the New Testament and is in reference to Jesus the Christ. “Lucifer,” when used correctly in the TRUE, ORIGINAL CONTEXT, is Jesus Christ. It’s the perpetuated misinterpretation that has changed lucifer which is something that is supposed to be good into an evil character.

2nd Century Greek sculpture of "Phosphorus"(Latin: "Lucifer") in the front center.
Image Credit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorus_(morning_star)

So, dear son of mine, as you can see, there is no Devil nor demons waiting to hurt you or bargain for your soul. It’s a man-made character formulated over many, many centuries. People have believed the Devil is real for several reasons. One reason is that they hear about it from people they trust or are taught to trust. Another reason people pass on misinformation is because they are afraid to question. Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished. At one time, questioning brought the punishment of death. During modern times, questioners may not be killed, but they can be shunned. Rumors could be spread about the unbelievers like “She doesn’t believe anymore because the Devil got to her!” Well, we know that ain’t true, don’t we! ;)


Knowledge is power...and freedom.
Image Credit: ladycrg9 at deviant art dot com


Wednesday, July 8, 2015

"Religious Freedom" (for Children) Reply

During another online discussion, as a response to the recent marriage equality ruling by SCOTUS , anti-gay religious people were feeling persecuted because they couldn't persecute gay people. They want their religious freedom to discriminate not just in their places of worship (you know, the place that is supposed to teach them to be Christlike) but also places of employment.

The last sacrament meeting talk I heard was over a year ago. Bro. M was teaching from Elder Oaks' sermon about how their religious freedom was being attacked. That was the last time I've been in a meeting house.

Back to the online discussion: Amongst the whining of those who don't know what REAL religious persecution is, I made the following statement.

If we are talking religious freedom, then let's go all the way: let's prohibit indoctrinating children into one, exclusive religion. Objectively present different philosophies to the children, show why you like your particular one, and then let them decide. Let them use their knowledge and intellect to choose to join or not join.

That's religious freedom.

Spoon-feeding to them what you've been spoon-fed, instilling fear to question because it was instilled in you, forcing them to be baptized and giving them the illusion it's their choice, whispering "their" testimony in their ear so they can regurgitate it into the microphone, and shaping them to think and act like the group through one-on-one worthiness interviews is not religious freedom. It's called brain-washing.

I know because I was in it. I used to say, "I'm not brain-washed, I'm spirit washed!" Then the bubble popped. All those items I dutifully "put on a shelf" I removed and took them to mormonthink.com and cesletter.com

Ahhhh. Freedom.

Image Credit: easyhealthoptions dot com
Image Credit: deviantart dot com

Monday, July 6, 2015

International Cultic Studies Association - Neutral Site

As a convert and active member in the church I loved, I used to brush off the comments that I belonged to a cult. I figured they just didn't understand, had misinformation from jealous sources, and if they'd only give it a chance, they'd love it, too. "I'm not brain-washed, I'm spirit-washed!" << Yeah, I said that. But that's NOTHING compared to the scary stuff that came out of the mouths of fellow members. {cue Twilight Zone music}

That being said, though, I do think there are many members that are normal, conscientious, and don't buy into "the prophet speaks and the thinking has been done" mentality. But they are still sucked in for various reasons.

When I read this article, I could relate my experience in the LDS Church with it. Knowing the history of the church, there was no doubt it was founded as a cult, with Brigham Young being one of the most gruesome cult leaders (imo).  As the LDS Church strove to be considered more main-stream during the years, it has had to loosen its grip. It still trains its members to look the other way when confronted with truth that is not faith-promoting. This is NOT the church I thought I joined. So, so sad, because there is potentially great good that could come from this organization if they could just get out of their own way.

Link: Characteristics Associated with Cultic Groups

Content:

Characteristics Associated with Cultic Groups - Revised 
Michael D. Langone, Ph.D. 

Concerted efforts at influence and control lie at the core of cultic groups, programs, and relationships. Many members, former members, and supporters of cults are not fully aware of the extent to which members may have been manipulated, exploited, even abused. The following list of social-structural, social-psychological, and interpersonal behavioral patterns commonly found in cultic environments may be helpful in assessing a particular group or relationship. 

Compare these patterns to the situation you were in (or in which you, a family member, or friend is currently involved). This list may help you determine if there is cause for concern. Bear in mind that this list is not meant to be a “cult scale” or a definitive checklist to determine if a specific group is a cult. This is not so much a diagnostic instrument as it is an analytical tool. 

The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt iin order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
The group is preoccupied with making money.
Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.

>>Update - - Additional information to evaluate high-demand/high-control groups:  This is a link to Steve Hassan's B.I.T.E. Model used to evaluate high-demand groups. B.I.T.E. stands for Behavior Control, Information Control, Thought Control, and Emotion Control. https://freedomofmind.com/bite-model/


When the items you have dutifully "put on a shelf" until you can ask about them in the afterlife become too heavy, when the cognitive dissonance causes you to ignore your own intuition and intelligence, and when you realize that your doubts shouldn't be doubted because they are actually forms of personal protection, please give yourself permission to read the objective information at mormonthink.com and cesletter.com  These are sites that will take LDS Church topics (current and past) and objectively look at both sides with verifiable resources (including Church resources).


From mormonthink.com home page:
"MormonThink is concerned with truth. As such, we attempt to correct misinformation about the LDS Church made by critics and defenders of the faith (including the Church itself). We present a range of perspectives and viewpoints, privileging those we believe are the most accurate, consistent and empirically valid."



Sunday, July 5, 2015

"The Bad is So Destructive" Reply

During an online discussion, I had made this comment, "And once my own eyes were opened, I could finally see why the LDS Church is considered a cult. Unfortunate. There are good things to the group, but when the bad is so destructive, it's hard to even want the good of it anymore."

I was then asked, "Will you tell us what you are referring to when you say, the bad is so destructive??"

This was my reply:


Let’s begin with how destructive DISHONESTY is. Without trust, there is no healthy relationship from which to grow including a relationship with a church. Truth can withstand questioning. When leaders say “some truths are not very useful” and are not “faith promoting," “milk before meat,” “never criticize a leader even if the criticism is true," when vaults close, when evidence is hidden, when faithful historians are excommunicated for presenting truth, when organizations like FAIR and FARMS need to be created << those should send up some serious red flags that HQ are not trustworthy. For issue-specific dishonesty, go to these very objective sites: mormonthink.com and cesletter.com

INDOCTRINATING children from infancy that the leaders will never lead them astray, to never say no to a leader, and that the leaders are speaking for God, and therefore, saying no to a leader is like saying no to God are destructive. This teaches children to ignore their own instincts. They become adults who put a lot of things “on the shelf” and suffer with cognitive dissonance in order to remain “worthy” aka “good enough.” This also compels good people to do bad things (like supporting measures that take people’s rights away — blacks, women, LGBTQ+, children).

MISINFORMATION is destructive. Historically, misinformation about origins of dark skin and how to treat those with dark skin were destructive. Currently, misinformation about gay people, what gay is and what gay isn’t, has had grave results: broken families, conversion therapy (including shock treatment), shunning, excommunication, homelessness, mixed-orientation marriage. Which in turn may lead the rejected to unhealthy relationships, drug abuse, homelessness, and desperate measures. The Church finally recognizes that “gay” is neither a choice nor an illness…misinformation they used to teach. 
But the aftermath of those false-teachings continue. As a GSA Mom, I see that first hand as LDS parents today struggle with accepting their gay child. As a Mama Dragon (those who protect their own LGBTQ+ kid or others’ kids—like I do), I see parents of LGBTQ+ kids realize that what they’ve been taught their whole lives about “homosexuality” is NOT the reality before them. I am also very much aware of the lives lost and families broken when LDS members chose loyalty to a leader's misguided ideals (thinking they are God's ideals) over their LGBTQ+ loved one's best interest.


Taking ACTION BASED ON MISINFORMATION is destructive. 

Using GOD AS AN EXCUSE to hurt and manipulate others, suppress civil rights of blacks, women, and LGBTQ+ is destructive.

MANIPULATING others to take action via that misinformation, too, is destructive.

LABELING those with honest questions as "unfaithful" or "apostate" is destructive.

OMITTING important information from missionary discussions to obtain converts like me is destructive. Example of topics omitted: translation method (rock and hat), polygamy (the Church still practices it through sealings and “heaven”), many gods, and how the “First Vision” is really the third version of the evolving vision.  

[A great book in addition to the sites above is Jim Whitefield’s The Mormon Delusion: The Mormon Missionary Lessons - A Conspiracy to Deceive. If a member’s first reaction to me mentioning that book is, “Oh, that’s anti-mormon material. I must not read it. It may hurt my testimony,” I would reply that that type of reaction is a well-trained reaction, a cult-like behavior. Also I’d say truth can withstand questioning. If a testimony is founded on truth, there is nothing to fear. But, I can understand the fear of discovering a testimony has been built on provable lies. There’s the fear of having to take action or continuing to live in cognitive dissonance. Taking action can be scary].

INAPPROPRIATE WORTHINESS INTERVIEWS with children/youth has many cases of being devastatingly destructive (support groups have been formed). Yes, many members leave interviews unscathed, but so many leave these interviews mortified especially when asked if they masturbate. It’s “bishop roulette.” Leaders should NEVER be alone with someone else’s children. There’s a reason for 2-deep personage in schools, dr.’s ofc, scouts, etc. One-on-one interviews must cease. There are no background checks for leaders. Historically, priesthood holders have been protected when accusations about abuse has been raised.

CHASTISING girls to not be "walking porn" and making them responsible for keeping a priesthood holder's virtue intact is destructive. Modesty is one thing, but giving youth a complex about their body and sexuality is completely another.

Teaching members to DOUBT THEIR DOUBTS is destructive. Doubt is an instinctive mechanism to protect you. Again, truth can withstand questioning.

Worthiness/good-enough mentality is destructive.

Keeping "unworthy" family members from seeing their child/"x" get married is ever so cruelly destructive.

Making the bride and groom feel like they could ONLY have a temple marriage to be considered stalwart members and good enough in the sight of God.

I could go on and on.

Are there members who go their entire life oblivious of any problems? Sure. They are taught that unhappy people bring it upon themselves because of poor choices and “not living the gospel standards,” the Church is just the messenger, and it’s the unworthy people that don’t like the message. They are well-trained to look the other way…and to put things on a shelf if they have to.

Twin Falls Temple Image Credit: holdmanstudios dot com


My Reply to My Bishop's Nice Letter Trying to Get Me to Stay an LDS Member

01-08-15

Dear Bishop [   ],

Hello, Happy New Year. Thank you for your letter. I imagine it must be confusing to issue a temple recommend to me at the beginning of the year only to then have to complete paperwork for my leaving the church altogether nearly a year later. I was your first TR interview, and I imagine I’m your first name removal.

The decision came with great consideration. I really tried to reconcile the cognitive dissonance which was building up the past couple of years. I even gave Joseph Smith the benefit of the doubt that he was at least a fallen prophet, someone who was chosen by God and greatly inspired yet got too big for his britches when he became more powerful.

I was a convert. I loved the church I thought I had joined. I had a testimony of the BofM. I really wanted to raise my kids in the Church. When [    ] was a baby, I was already proudly picturing him as a missionary. I was all in. And, I dutifully avoided any material that would be considered anti-Mormon. Along the way, though, some Church behaviors and teachings began sending up red flags. But, I would “put it on a shelf” and endure.

It may have crossed your mind that I’m leaving because of the way the Church has treated gay people. That’s not the reason, but it is a catalyst along with how the Church treats minorities, women, and others who don’t fit the box as well as the mentality of never questioning a leader or saying no to him. I was also very concerned how the general authority seem to have all this power without any accountability. During the past summer, this thought came into my head, “When people use God as an excuse to hurt/manipulate others and say they have the authority to do so, you need to take a closer look at the foundation of that authority before continuing in any direction.” Truth can withstand questioning. So I questioned. I investigated. The conclusion is that I have been lied to. I no longer trust what comes from headquarters.

As a side story, my first husband had a cocaine habit. I have never seen cocaine in my life, but it certainly explained the disappearance of money, his nose bleeds, and sleepless nights. When I found out about his weakness, I stuck by him. We also went to marriage therapy for nearly a year. Then I began catching him in lies, big and small. Even our therapist was angry with him for wasting everyone’s time and money. I divorced him. There is no future for a relationship when there is deception. Trust is important.

I’m not leaving the Church because I want to start drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, cheat on my husband, begin watching porn, Satan got to me, or any of the other excuses members tell themselves as to why anyone would ever leave. I simply don’t believe in the Church’s version of the gospel anymore. I don’t believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet (not even a fallen one). I don’t believe in the “restoration” of the priesthood. I don’t believe that temple ordinances are necessary to get into heaven. I don’t believe in The Book of Mormon. To keep my integrity in tact, I must resign my membership. Some people have suggested I stay and try to help the Church be better from the inside. Ethically, I can’t do that. I’m not going to pretend.

The LDS Church may benefit from following the footsteps of the Reorganized LDS Church, now the Community of Christ. The CofC have embraced their history and foundation instead of hiding it, whitewashing it, rewriting it, and bullying others from learning about it. They have taken responsibility, and instead of throwing everything away, they have kept the good, emphasizing Jesus instead of man. They have rebuilt on a foundation based on the Bible, the Trinity, love, kindness, and humanity. I would be interested in attending their church if it was more accessible. 

Now, if the LDS Church were to all-of-a-sudden come clean, admit the deceptions, become transparent, apologize for all behaviors past and present, plan restitutions, and make Christ's Biblical examples more important than Church leaders, then I may consider staying a member. 

I have no intention of pulling others away nor sharing what I know (except with my kids). I only touch on it with you because of this situation and your position. I have strictly explained to my children to not tell their friends, either. It’s not our place to do so. I have compassion for the heartache it causes (as I’ve experienced), and don’t want to be the initial source of that heartache. If someone were to ask, I would say the Church just isn’t for me. Let them assume what they want about me. However, I’m the same, kind person (but happier).

I am concerned about how my children will be treated; there’s so much negativity about those who leave the Church. [Your daughter] has been such a nice friend to [my daughter]. [My daughter] even told me last week that [she] is her closest friend. [My daughter] has asked me to take her shopping today for [your daughter's] birthday gift. :) I hope [she] feels the same way and isn’t just being a member-missionary towards [my daughter].

Thank you for extending the invitation that I am more-than-welcome to attend church meetings, etc. I do hope to someday when I’m ready. There is much I miss and people there I love. 

Sincerely,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the items you have dutifully "put on a shelf" until you can ask about them in the afterlife become too heavy, when the cognitive dissonance causes you to ignore your own intuition and intelligence, and when you realize that your doubts shouldn't be doubted because they are actually forms of personal protection, please give yourself permission to read the objective information at mormonthink.com and cesletter.com  These are sites that will take LDS Church topics (current and past) and objectively look at both sides with verifiable resources (including Church resources).

From mormonthink.com home page:
"MormonThink is concerned with truth. As such, we attempt to correct misinformation about the LDS Church made by critics and defenders of the faith (including the Church itself). We present a range of perspectives and viewpoints, privileging those we believe are the most accurate, consistent and empirically valid."


Image Credit: 123f dot com

Saturday, July 4, 2015

My Letter of Resignation from the LDS Church and Worthiness Interviews with Children

October 28, 2014

Member Records Division, LDS Church
50 E North Temple, Room 1372
SLC UT 84150-5310 

This letter is my formal resignation from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and it is effective immediately. Please remove the following name permanently and completely from the membership rolls of the church: 

[my name]
DOB: [   ]
Record Number [   ]
Also, waive the 30-day waiting/holding period. I am aware that the Church handbook says that resignations cancel the effects of baptism and suspends temple sealings and blessings. I continue to hold my baptism dear and reverently, but that is between God and me. I do not need the LDS Church’s recognition of it.

The LDS Church, as an entity, is neither kind nor honest.

There is to be no formal church contact/“fellowshipping”/missionary work with me. I still care for my LDS neighbors and hope to socialize and contribute in real service projects together.

The following isn’t the reason for leaving, but in case I have an audience, please, if you care at all about children and respect them, stop the one-on-one “worthiness” interviews with them. It is inappropriate for adults to be alone with other people’s children behind closed doors. And it’s even more inappropriate for those adults to ask personal questions to the children/youth (children often leave mortified). There is a reason why there is mandatory two-deep personages in the BSA, doctor’s offices, and schools, etc.: there are predators everywhere who take advantage of children. The LDS Church is no exception. One-on-one interviews give opportunity for ecclesiastical abuses, intimidation, and manipulation (whether intentional or unintentional) especially in the LDS church where children are indoctrinated to never say no to a leader, that he is the mouth-piece for God, and will never lead anyone astray. The church protects priesthood leaders more than they protect children.

I look forward to the final termination/confirmation letter from your offices.
Please send to:  [my address]

Most seriously,


________________________________

As of October 31, 2014, I legally was no longer a member of the LDS Church. It took a little longer for the Church to complete their own paperwork, but once they receive my letter in the mail, it was final. This website for the name removal process was very helpful: Mormon No More

When the items you have dutifully "put on a shelf" until you can ask about them in the afterlife become too heavy, when the cognitive dissonance causes you to ignore your own intuition and intelligence, and when you realize that your doubts shouldn't be doubted because they are actually forms of personal protection, please give yourself permission to read the objective information at mormonthink.com and cesletter.com  These are sites that will take LDS Church topics (current and past) and objectively look at both sides with verifiable resources (including Church resources).

From mormonthink.com home page:
"MormonThink is concerned with truth. As such, we attempt to correct misinformation about the LDS Church made by critics and defenders of the faith (including the Church itself). We present a range of perspectives and viewpoints, privileging those we believe are the most accurate, consistent and empirically valid."

The Community of Christ (formerly the Reformed LDS Church) shares the same founding history as the mainstream LDS Church, but their approach to the information found on these websites is vastly different. They embrace their history instead of trying to hide it or whitewash it or bully those who question it. They feel no need to dissolve their church. Rather, they take the good of it and make it better through their honesty.


Photo Credit: edenwithin.wordpress.com



Friday, July 3, 2015

My Reply to My Stake President, 1:1 Worthiness Interviews with Children Inappropriate, Modesty

Out of concern, my stake president wrote a letter inviting me back to church, strengthening my testimony, and a couple of other items involving the LGBTQ+ community. This was my reply:


April 1, 2014

Dear Pres. Jones,

Thank you for your thoughtful letter of concern. I want to reassure you that my faith in Christ is intact. I do continue to go to church; when it's not at my ward, it’s the Community Presbyterian Church where my parents attend. [They] have what I need at this time and those are peace and the simplicity of Jesus’s example, teachings, and God’s message of love. I also enjoy sitting in church with my parents and listening to them sing. I still love the people in my ward and enjoy their company. 

Am I carrying heavy burdens? Yes, you are correct, but it’s not for the reasons you listed. (I wish it was that simple). I don’t struggle with any of the questions except for number four.

Although I support the Church’s right to not perform same-gender marriages, I was very disappointed that they filed a friend-of-the-court-brief against the rights of gay couples. I believe gay couples and their children are human beings, too, and deserve respect and protection. Keeping them from marrying will not make them straight (it’s not a choice) and suddenly single. And, I don’t believe any church should force their religion onto others. Gay people have a civil right to choose to not spend a lifetime alone. I’m pro-commitment, pro-monogamy, pro-chastity, pro-dignity. I am sad about alarmist groups such as Utah Eagle Forum and Sutherland Institute who claim to be LDS members but use misinformation and fear to persuade.

More areas of concern other than LGBT+ issues have manifested themselves to me, and I'm still processing them in my head. I wasn’t going to bring them up because I feel like I’ve used all my “please hear me” cards. Plus, I’ve lost hope that anything will change. But I’ll mention them now as a response to your invitational letter.

I didn’t give this next topic much thought at all until last December when my oldest son (14) had his interview. [My husband] and I had always agreed it would be our personal policy to never allow our kids to be alone with leaders. We decided this before having children while listening to the news about the rampant molestations by Catholic priests. Our decision was never a reflection of our distrust of any leader in particular; it was just our policy.

After my son’s interview where [husband] attended also, it came to my attention that one of the questions routinely asked is some sort of version of (excuse me for saying this), “Do you self-gratify/M[masturbate]/self-abuse?” I was floored that such a question would be asked. Let me say though as a support to [our bishop], if he felt he had to ask, he did it in one of the more respectful ways. He asked [my son], “Do you have a problem touching yourself inappropriately?” I appreciate his discretion. I'm not complaining about Bishop [   ] at all (he was just doing what he thought he was supposed to do).

So two questions arose from this: 1, Is it okay for church leaders to be alone behind closed doors with other people’s children? and 2, Should leaders be allowed to ask personal questions to children?

Unless the child requests on his or her own to have a 1:1 meeting with a leader, a leader should never, ever be alone with someone else’s child. That is inappropriate. There are reasons why rules exist about doctors and school faculty not being alone with others' children. Even the Boy Scouts of America has a two-deep policy. For the sake of the children, the Church needs to implement a policy that parents attend during these meetings.
If the 1:1 policy is to facilitate privacy for a child’s confession or repentance, I say, again, that should only happen if the child him or herself requests the meeting. 

Which brings me to my next question about leaders asking personal questions:
No, they should not. Leaders may teach about the positives of chastity and morality and then leave it to the child to govern themselves and trust the parents to instill these values. It is none of the leader’s business to ask if the child/youth has done this or that. How will a leader know if the child is good enough to go to the temple? They’ll have to give that one to God. Asking such personal questions is ensnaring a confession. Confessions and repentances are more valuable when freely given.

There is something very, very wrong with an “old dude” being behind closed doors and asking a child/youth if he or she self-gratifies, makes out, etc. I discovered there’s actually a support group for adults who had devastating experiences with their LDS leaders during these interviews. Even if their answers had been, “No,” just the fact that they were being asked was creepy and mortifying. And for those who happened to say yes to self-gratification (not knowing it was discouraged), the results were that of shame and humiliation. Sometimes the questions would continue with, “What were you wearing? What were you thinking about?” etc.

Many people have never had a problem during their interviews, and that’s great. But we must ere on the side of caution. Would Christ approve of putting children/youth in vulnerable, intimidating situations which could potentially shame and humiliate them, thus possibly turning them away from His church as a result? He would not approve. I’ve learned from a bishop-friend that those questions are not required. He also agrees that leaders need to stop being alone with others’ children; it’s potential for disaster. Having a parent there not only protects the kids but also protects the leaders. 

I don’t have it in me right now to take this issue on and raise awareness. It hurts to not do anything about it, though, and think how kids around the world will have to endure this because of my silence. (Am I Jonah sitting inside the big fish while saying, "No! I don't want to be the messenger!) 

Next topic I'm processing in my head: Last month I read Elder Callister’s BYU-I devotional printed in March’s Ensign. There’s a paragraph targeted at girls and women. I’m not even going to get into it right now, but it illustrates a common, damaging message I hear being taught: If a boy is unchaste, it must be the girl’s fault and that it’s okay to judge and be disrespectful to females you don’t think are modest-enough.  I added this to my kids’ Gospel Standards poster after the “I will dress modestly” part, “and I will not judge others who don’t dress modestly and will still show them respect.” There are valid reasons to support morality without shaming nor blaming. I need to figure out how to teach my daughter to navigate through these [negative] messages so she is raised with confidence.

Oh, my, this letter is becoming way too long. I’m so tired of talking about things. I’ve even pulled away from Facebook (Mormons Building Bridges, support groups including one I started for LDS moms of LGBT+ kids) because I’ve reached my max of heartache right now. I’m not having a faith-crisis, Pres. Jones, I’m having a what-the-heck-is-wrong-with-people crisis. 

I’ve put other people first for so long without attaching my "oxygen mask," am overwhelmed, and now need to focus on my own mental and physical health.  I do hope to be a positive example to my children. I hope they learn from me to stand up for what’s right even when scary and unpopular. I want them to learn that there is a time to say, “No,” and that they have a voice and a choice. I want them to learn to trust the Spirit above man. I want them to learn to not let go of Christ when times are tough and that He’s everywhere. I want them to know that Jesus knows them and their heart and that they are doing their best.

Thank you, again, for reaching out.



Thursday, July 2, 2015

Interview: Mama Dragon Council History

Here is another interview (a short one this time!). A speaker for this year's Sunstone Symposium asked for a history of a support group I started on Facebook called the Mama Dragon Council. This was my very-informal reply:

June 2015
Hi, I am so sorry for the delay. We've been out of town for over a week, but I did start taking some notes before leaving that I can pass on now. I was hoping to have it nicely typed out for you, but for time's sake, I'll give you what I have then you can ask for something I may have overlooked.

MDC history


-May 8, 2013: Meg Abhau coined the term "mama dragon" on her blog http://theabhaus.blogspot.com/2013/05/closets-are-for-clothes.html
-Meg's blog post was shared on FB groups like MBB, LDSFF, etc. Other women with LGBTQ+ children identified with Meg's term, "I'm SO a mama dragon, too!"
-In the mean time and slightly earlier that year, I had begun the process of beginning a GSA (began blogging about it 4/13 http://myeagleprojectjourney.blogspot.com). The GSA was approved and began for the 2013/2014 school year.

-Dec-ish '2013 One of the GSA members sought my help. Not having my own gay child I thought I would seek the advice from some of the "mamas" I've come to know through Mormons Building Bridges and LDS Family Fellowship. The initial ones were [list of four names]. I simultaneously instant-messaged them on FB. It was one little feed.
-We quickly added a few more Mamas as the conversation warranted: [list of five more names].(I may have left someone out. At the time, I didn't know many of them, so it's hard for me to say each one. A name will probably come to me later, and I'll smack myself in the head and say, "How could I have forgotten her?!")
-They rallied around my GSA student on his FB page and gave me good advice. The IM feed became a place, too, where we began opening up to each other and getting raw and real. Sometimes laughing. Sometimes crying.
-Several conversations topics would be discussed at the same time on this tiny IM feed, which makes for hilarious and confusing conversations. They didn't mind the cramped quarters because it was filled with unconditional love and safety. No lurking ward members. No tattletales. No judgement for unsanitized expressions of feelings.

- (Either end of Dec. '13 or beginning of Jan. '14) I saw a need for this to continue, so I set up a FB group for them and set the privacy setting to "Secret" -- not because we didn't want anyone to know about us but because we needed an emotionally safe place to share. Now several conversations could go on simultaneously without the mishmash of of intertwined commentary.
-New potential members were brought in by existing MDs in order to keep it safe.
-At first I didn't know what to name the group, but it quickly became clear that Mama Dragon had to somehow be part of the title. I thought about Mama Dragon Quorum or Quorum of the Mama Dragons and other "LDS" lingo. Then "council" came to me. Mama Dragon Council was born...each woman no longer alone and at the mercy of the whims of misguided leaders but now able to stand tall with her chin in the air and banded with her sisters to right the wrongs and protect LGBTQ+ kids, young and old.

The media and blogs...




Interview: How I Became an Allie and Marriage Equality

I've been interviewed three times: one recording in person and two via email. Here is one where Greg Prince asked how I became involved and my opinions about the LDS Church's influence towards marriage equality for gay couples.

January 20, 2015
1. What brought you into the debate, within Mormon circles, concerning homosexuality and, more specifically, marriage equality?

Background info:
My husband and I joined the LDS Church Jan. '99, Northern Virginia. (I'm from AZ; he's from France).
As far as I know, I have no gay relatives. If any of my friends were gay, I had no idea. I had a gay teacher in high school (AZ), and I didn't understand why classmates made fun of him. The concept of homosexuality, good or bad, was never on my radar. I was also oblivious to how the LDS Church felt about gay people. I had no idea about Prop 8. I was a new Church member, busy having babies, living away from familial help, and having a pilot hubby who was away a lot. I didn't watch the news, either. (I could sing PBS's kids' show theme songs for you, though. -Ha!) At church, I was usually nursing a baby or walking the halls; anti-gay messages would have missed me.

Once in a while over casual conversation, I would hear a member say he "hated" gay people. Once was in Virginia, and then another member in our Illinois ward. I thought it was strong language (Hate? Really?), didn't understand why, but brushed it off as their unique weakness. Then, while also in Illinois, a member and friend came to my door with a petition. She said it was Prop 8 related. I asked what that meant. She said it was a petition to keep gay people from marrying. I kindly told her I was sorry but that I just didn't feel the spirit about that petition, and I won't sign it.

At that time, I thought it was her petition. A month later, I asked her how her petition went. She answered, "Oh, it wasn't my petition. I didn't like doing it." Puzzled, I asked her why she did it. "I was called by the Stake to do it. It was a calling."

My stomach felt sick. Thoughts in my head: My church was interfering with the lives of others? Why? Why would they do something so mean? I thought they weren't political? 

I didn't understand. I also didn't make any effort to go to church for about 2 months (hubby had to work, church was 30 miles away, and toddlers-in-tow aided the decision, also). Eventually I started going back after a member friend told me the prophet knows best and that sometimes what he has to say can be hard to hear but necessary. I wasn't completely convinced, but since I didn't know anything about homosexuality, I thought maybe they knew something I didn't know.

Now to directly answer your question:
(At the time - active Mormon living in American Fork, UT, as of 12/08. TR [temple recommend]-holder. Sunday school teacher for 14-15 y.o. group. Hubby EQ [Elders Quorum] 1st Counselor).
Two years ago, my 13 y.o. son and I were brain-storming Eagle Scout projects he could do. It was late, and I jokingly remarked before retiring to bed, "You should do something to help gay people. I'm SURE the BSA [Boy Scouts of America] would LOVE that!" During this time, the BSA was debating about allowing gay scouts or not. This joke, this idea, stuck. The next day, we discussed it and both thought it was a good idea. But oh-my-goodness, where to start? I began with Mormons Building Bridges and Utah Pride Center. We discovered there was NOTHING in Utah County for gay people...no support groups, anything. Long story short: We decided to begin a Gay Straight Alliance club at American Fork High School. My 13 y.o. was dragging his feet. In the mean time, I was learning about the plight of LDS gay members.  I began meeting and speaking with gay people. I read blog posts, coming out videos, went to a workshop introducing OUTreach Resource Center's Safe and Sound project to help homeless youth (most kicked out of their "loving" LDS homes for being LGBTQ+ --"Wait! What??"), attending workshops about suicide prevention. The more I learned, the more I was pulled in. My.Heart.Broke. Within a couple of weeks of that spring's General Conference session as I was learning about all of this, two local LDS youth died by suicide. One was an AFHS student, and another was an openly gay LDS member (young adult). 

Urgency set in. I took my son's project from him (another reason is the SLTrib was interested in possibly running a story about his ironic project, and my husband and I didn't want him in the media). You can read about our journey here in this relatively short blog: http://myeagleprojectjourney.blogspot.com It has become a "how-to" blog for other schools to start a GSA. It helped Lone Peak HS begin one. I don't know if Timpanogos HS used my blog, but both the Alpine District schools started GSAs a year after ours.

Supporting marriage equality for gay couples followed naturally. I began wearing a rainbow-striped heart-shaped pin to church each week. I bore my testimony of God's and Christ's love for all of his children including his gay children and that we have to be careful what we say from the pulpit because 5-10% of the kids sitting here may be gay. Nobody "chooses" to be gay. What if it's your kid?  -- (You get the picture... I heard I made some people mad that day).

When asked by my bishop and Stake president my position about marriage equality, I told them, "I support the Church's legal right to not have to perform the ceremony but that two consenting, non-related adults (gay or straight) should have the legal right to marry each other, and I should have the right to vote my conscience without fear of losing my temple recommend. If I don't vote my conscience out of fear from the church leaders, then I am in a cult and behaving as a cult member."

2. What have you observed, first-hand, of the Church’s rationale and tactics for justifying and advancing its actions?

I have observed the Church use misinformation about gay people, "The Family: A Proclamation to the World," and the guise of protecting the children/family as their rationale and tactics. I need to add cultish mentality to this, too.

It took me several conversations with members before realizing they have a completely different definition for "gay" than what the actual definition is. I've learned that they think "gay" means having an insatiable appetite for sodomy, and they equate "gay" as being the same thing as pedophilia and bestiality. They lump all those things into the same category. As just one example, when one of my LDS gay friends realized he was gay and sought "help," he was put into a support group of sex addicts and child molesters. He hadn't even held hands with another guy! But the Church mentality is that they are all the same and choose to be so. They also seem to think it's choice made as an adult and that there's no such thing as a gay youth.
-A ward friend was confused when I corrected him to use the term gay instead of SSA. He thought the term gay was considered an insult, that it meant the stereotype (as described above), and that he was just trying to be polite by saying SSA.
-During a Relief Society workshop, a woman stood up and spoke about her husband who was 'suffering' from SSA, "My husband is NOT gay. He just has SSA, and we're going to Northstar to work on it."
-Even when I spoke with Elder Ballard, it appeared that he did not have a clear understanding of what gay meant, either.

When I first read "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" as a new convert, I thought it was beautiful. To me, it was emphasizing the importance of taking conception of children seriously and that they deserve to be cared for. I guess I naively thought it was supporting all kinds of families -- making sure the families have the resources to help raise their children. Just because it spoke about "mother and father," I didn't initially think it was a rejection of gay parents; I thought "mother and father" was a generic term, and my brain substituted "parents," thus, completely overlooking the exclusivity. I have since seen The Proc as an excuse for the Church and loyal members to support only certain families (mother, father, children) and condemn other families (single parents, LGBTQ+ parents) and take political action to do so. That's abusive and sad, IMO. What a waste of resources.

I don't understand how gay couples marrying will destroy others' "traditional" marriage, but that's what I've heard from Church members.
-I've listened to Oaks' talk being quoted over my ward's pulpit about our religious freedoms being under attack (because we can't take away others' freedom?? Boo hoo). 
-I was so disappointed when I saw a picture in the newspaper of a rally held at the Capitol last summer fighting against gay parents ("Every child deserves a mother and a father!": there in the picture were several of my ward members and neighbors, people who I cared for hurting other people I cared for.
-My neighbor behind me posted on Facebook that she had started to understand the rationale of why people would support marriage equality. She had been hired to do some typing for a publication which supported it. While transcribing/typing the pro-agruments, the reasons made sense to her. Then she said, "BUT! I remembered I made a covenant to follow the prophet, and that's what I'm going to do." << So there it is. She trades logic, reasoning, and decency with following a prophet. That's cult behavior. 

Ultimately, the Church is using God as an excuse to further their agenda. Leaders of this church as well as other misinformed churches are products of ill-informed religious up-bringing where ideas about gay people are from a narrow interpretation of ancient scripture taken out of context, twisted to be more condemning during the Middle Ages, and passed down generation after generation with a threat of "don't ever question ecclesiastical authority or else you'll be in trouble with God" mentality.

3. What have you observed, first-hand, of the consequences of the Church’s actions, particularly in the political arena (e.g., Prop 22 and Prop 8 in California, and Amendment 3 in Utah) on individuals and families, whether positive or negative?

I've seen division and all types of relationships destroyed (family, peers, professional, political). I've also seen people leave the Church over this issue.
-Personally, I've lost TBM [true blue Mormon] friends after I became an advocate (BUT I've gained even better, genuine friends!). What I've gone through is mild compared to what others have experienced.
-A BYU-Idaho religion professor taught a friend's son and his class last year that anyone who supported marriage equality was a Satan figure. (Very divisive language and manipulation of young minds).
-I have an LDS friend who didn't know she had a gay son (13) while she and her husband obediently posted Prop 8 signs in their California yard and simultaneously announced how disgusting gay people were; he nearly took his own life to protect his parents from the shame of knowing they have a gay child.
-I have neighbors whose family members rejected them when they were supportive of their son who came out.
-It's not just TBMs becoming suspicious of advocates, but it's also advocates losing respect for those who fight against LGBTQ+ people's rights. (I have lost so much respect for many of my ward members, especially those who actively and blindly fight against equality without even getting to know the people they are hurting personally first).

The positive things I've observed from the LDS Church's involvement are awareness of the problems of discrimination, open dialogue to correct the problems, education, and progress. Seriously, if the LDS Church and its members hadn't been such ... such... I'm gonna say it: assholes, then I would have continued to be oblivious to the silent anguish the gay community has had to endure from prejudice, bigotry, discrimination, etc. The LDS Church's actions have brought the inhumane problems to the forefront so those of us with a conscience could do something about it. In my opinion, Props 22 and 8 as well as Amendment 3 made marriage equality a reality.

4. Tom mentioned your attempt to have The Miracle of Forgiveness removed from print.  Can you describe your attempts and any responses from Deseret Book or church leaders?

As I listened to the LGBTQ community (particularly the LDS LGBTQ community), a certain book title was commonly mentioned, President (apostle at the time) Spencer W. Kimball's The Miracle of Forgiveness as a source of much pain. One gay BYU student told me directly during a suicide awareness workshop that his first suicide attempt was about a month after reading The MofF. I was later told that this book was a standard in Mormon homes and that it's common for local leaders to keep copies in their office and hand them out to members who have morality issues. {Jump to a few months ago, 2014: an LDS friend of mine here in AF who had been pretending to be straight and in a traditional marriage came out to her bishop. He gave her a copy of The MofF. So, this practice is still being done.}

I purchased my own used copy for a dollar via Amazon to see what people were talking about. I was floored. In my opinion, that book has a lot of blood on its pages and is responsible for destroying families and lives. Of course, it's just a reflection of Church attitudes, but the fact that it's in a condemning book form solidifies the ignorance, making it that much more dangerous. I also noticed that the book contradicted the current Church teachings found in mormonsandgays.org. I thought that if I pointed it out to our leaders then they would take the reasonable and logical steps in correcting the problem. I had faith that the leaders would do the right thing ("Choose the right!"), apologize, and make amends. So, I did my research and formulated a long letter, personalizing each one in the greetings and intro. During the summer months of 2013, I sent out approximately 100 hard-copy letters to most of the Church presidency, apostles, and the Seventy. I also sent out a few to DeseretBook including Sheri Dew.

I had an inside friend give me the home addresses of some of the GA presidency members. Those were returned...opened.

Pres. Erying's (via his secretary) replied saying they are making note of my letter but that they have no jurisdiction over changing the book.

I never heard back from Dew, however, a Mormons Building Bridges leader had an appointment with her to discuss my letter and what steps can be taken to rectify the problem. Dew ended up canceling the appointment. It's my understanding that DB knows The MofF is a problem.

Here is a link to the letter in open-letter form posted on No More Strangers: http://www.nomorestrangers.org/the-miracle-of-forgiveness-an-open-letter-requesting-removal-or-an-update-to-reflect-current-knowledge/  This post also includes a comment section with some interesting feedback and dialogue.

I did hear back from Elder Ballard. He emailed August 21, 2013, asking me to call him. During the call (I would have to look up the exact date), I took notes then wrote the following down immediately after the call:

Well. It wasn't disastrous. I stayed calm and peaceful, not argumentative (I don't think I was). Focused. (Didn't ramble) I sense he isn't for Mormonsandgays.org (merely speculation -- he never came right out and said it). He kept steering me towards lds.org and the articles there {-- at that time, there was no link to M&G dot org from lds.org. I am told that there is a link now although I have not confirmed that}. At one point I said, "I'm sorry, isn't M&G an official Church website?" He confirmed it was.

He started off by saying the Church is not in a position to make changes to the book. And they aren't going to make any statements that would tarnish SWK's name. I followed up that I understood and that I would like to see the members to at least learn of what is said on M&G (that "SSA" is not a choice nor an illness).  "Oh, careful there. There is a lot of choice."

And this is when I realized I wasn't going to be heard. It appears he still thinks being gay is a choice. I listened and interjected. When he said we can't change doctrine, I asked if MofF was doctrine. Long pause. He answered yes and followed it with the parts that were (but I don't think he would say the "strong" words would be doctrine, that the way it was presented was Kimball's).

He seemed to avoid the idea of promoting what's in M&G. He has the stereotype in his head about what gay people are (called them "butterflies") and is convinced that "100's have been able to change their lifestyle."

This is the sad (sadder?) part. I brought up how our 13-14-15  year old gay youth and young adults feel unwelcome and are killing themselves. In my opinion, Ballard didn't validate their lives. "Oh, I don't know that there's that many." I said to him one is too many. He went on that there are other reasons for suicide: mental illness, drugs, and he listed more. (Complete denial, imo).

Regarding members' attitudes and hurtful speech towards "SSA" (I tried to speak his language). He agreed that members can get carried away and think they know what is taught and what isn't. I said that this book contributes to the hurtful talk towards our SSA brothers and sisters. He told me to keep doing the best that I can but to "be wise in my crusade." I said I am trying to support the official Church website and the kinder words there as apposed to MofF. He said stirring people up leads to bigger issues. (I don't know what he meant by that).

I bore my testimony and love for Christ, and that I am doing my best to follow him and his example and that this is why I wrote the letter and that I love my gay brothers and sisters.  I said it is never my intent to mislead or embarrass anyone (I didn't feel I did). That's when he warmed up (he was polite before, but not really warm). He was supportive of my character and said something like there's no doubt. He said, "We must love them the best we can." (Is it difficult? -- rolling eyes)

That's pretty much it. The conversation was filled in with the same type of preaching we hear at GC. I listened. I thanked him for his time. He asked about my family. I asked him about the water damage in his office (his secretary told me). He said my most important mission is my children, to raise them right. I agreed and said I am hoping for a kinder world for them to live in.

The last I saw, the book was still on DB's shelves. There was talk last year about beginning a letter campaign to remove the book from Church bookstores, but it was agreed that advocacy resources were needed for Utah's SB 100 and marriage equality debates.

{2015 Update: The Miracle of Forgiveness has been removed from DeseretBook bookshelves, although I can't vouch for each and every one across the country. Hopefully, they all complied}.

5. Have you had any comments from non-LDS friends relating to the LDS Church position on marriage equality?

Not too much. I've been pretty much in an LDS-world. I have a Baptist friend (attends weekly) in Oklahoma tell me she's fine with gay people marrying each other and that her church hasn't been condemning as far as she remembers (NOT the Westboro variety). She says her focus is more on the loving kindness of Christ's behavior and example and to treat others the way she thinks Christ would treat them (which is lovingly and respectfully).

6. Have you seen any changes in the way the Church deals with homosexuality as a topic, and with homosexuals as individuals?

Not really. I used to think that the Church's official website, mormonsandgays.org was a positive step in the right direction because it recognized that being gay (oops! "SSA") was not a choice, illness, nor something to be fixed. It also acknowledged that mixed-orientation marriages weren't typically a healthy choice. And it promoted kindness and respectful behavior towards our gay brothers and sisters. This is a huge improvement from The Miracle of Forgiveness rhetoric. But the Church has done very little to even promote its website. I believe some of the top 15 wish it didn't exist (Ballard being one of them). My Stake President was NOT aware that the website said right on top of its page that being gay was neither a choice, illness, nor something to be fixed. I had to point it out to him. (You should have seen the look on his face!) He's a good man, though. {The website, btw, needs to emphasize teens can be gay, too, and often know at young ages their orientation, whether or not they "act" on it. I also wish it didn't push celibacy for gay members who want to be active members. For a church to raise people to be family-oriented and say how great spouses and children are to then sentence a gay member to a lifetime of solitude if that member wants to be considered "worthy" aka "good-enough" is inhumane and imo, not something MY heavenly father would endorse.} The Church, as an entity, doesn't seem seriously interested in welcoming gay members. If they were, something positive (and direct) would be said during General Conference, like promoting their mormonsandgays.org website, for instance. Or denouncing the demeaning language in The Miracle of Forgiveness and apologizing* for it. 
{*Update: Elder Oaks has made it clear the Church doesn't apologize (link), which is counter to every lesson about repentance/restitution ever given. "Do as we say and not as we do."  See meme at bottom of this page}.

There's also no consistent counsel from the top about how to handle members who support marriage equality, gay members, trans* members, their families, etc. The member's outcome depends on bishop roulette. I've had fellow advocates lose their TRs, callings, and VT/HT assignments for doing less advocacy work than I have, yet I was still able to renew my TR, etc. all because I happen to have leaders that understand (after lonnnngggg discussions) that I have a right to vote my conscience. (Thank goodness that BYU-I professor wasn't my bishop -- he would have put a scarlet letter on me and label me a Satan figure!) Why do we (as a church) think it's okay for bishops and other leaders who have had NO legitimate psychology training to then counsel members about such personal issues? It's so destructive. 

{Update: 3 months after this interview, the Church finally counsels leaders that it's ok to publicly support gay marriage without fear of punishment from leaders. Link HERE}.

7. How have you seen church actions affect the national debate on marriage equality?


Oh, my goodness, their actions have helped marriage equality. Their whining about Shelby, Amendment 3, and religious liberty brought the debate out in the open. The public could see that the best arguments the Church (and Utah's Right Wing politicians) had to offer were weak and unkind.

Closing thoughts that may or may not pertain or interest you:
After beginning the GSA, I also saw a need for LDS moms with LGBTQ kids to have a safe place to find support and know they are not alone. I began the Facebook group Mama Dragon Council (Mama Dragon was coined by my friend Meg Abhau who said her protection for her gay son was stronger than a mama bear's and that she could breathe fire on anyone who dared hurt him). Here's a link to a story about the Mamas. http://www.nomorestrangers.org/when-religion-creates-dragons/

This last little bit is very personal. Only a handful a people know, and I hesitate to share it (especially if you are a Church member), but it's all part of the journey. This last summer I closed my FB account (found another AMAZING Mama Dragon to be the moderator) and had to take other steps to recoup. I felt like I was blind-sided during these past couple of years. The cognitive dissonance was heavy. Trying to "reason" and be "logical" with the Church was very disappointing. They aren't interested in reason and logic...nor truth. 

After some self-reflection this summer, a thought came to me, "When people use God as an excuse to hurt and manipulate others and claim they have the authority to do so, you better look at the foundation of that authority closer before going on in any direction." I did some research and investigating and discovered cesletter.com (which does a great job presenting both sides) and through that, mormonthink.com (another site that does a great job showing both sides). The conclusion for me is that the "authority" was built on sand, and I've been lied to. Although mad about the deception, I felt light and lifted. I officially cancelled my membership/removed my name from the Church. I was legally no longer a member by the end of October, and the Church finally confirmed it last week. Had Christ-like behavior (love, kindness, respect) been the Church's mission as well as accountability and transparency, had they apologized for destructive policies and made amends/restitution, then I may still be a member. I admire how the RLDS/Community of Christ owned their history and made the best of it. They embraced their history and foundation instead of hiding it, whitewashing it, rewriting it, and bullying others from learning about it.


I would be very interested in learning about your project and seeing it when you are finished. If any of my replies have prompted more questions, feel free to ask. Good luck!

Except for the mocking "Poison Oaks" part, this meme sends a very serious message.
A sincere apology needs to be given. The Church must set aside its pride.

Photo Credit: quotesfrenzy.com