Surprised at my emotion about Sam Young

[Hagoth]

Today I'm really feeling worked up about Sam Young and I am having trouble processing the level of emotion I'm feeling. We have spent a lot of time on NOM discussing Sam and whether he has made the right decisions in his approach, but what it comes down to is this:

If they REALLY BELIEVE what they teach, The Brethren are about to do the most cruel, brutal, and vengeful thing that they can imagine: the are going to delete a man's baptism of Jesus and eradicate his ability to make the atonement effective in his live via the sacrament, they are going to remove his priesthood and his chance of exaltation, they are going to take his children away from him for eternity and give his wife to another man as part of his harem. For eternity. This is far worse, if they REALLY BELIEVE what they preach, than publicly beheading him or having him torn into pieces in the street. Because it's for freakin' ETERNITY.

Now weigh that against his crime (I know I'm overstating the obvious for the thousandth time but today it's really working me up for some reason and I need to vent). You would think church leaders would love to have members who have enough devotion to fast for more than 20 days about anything, even if they did start acting bizarrely humble halfway through, and start doing crazy stuff like washing the feet of strangers. What kind of self-respecting prophet-loving Mormon would stoop to that kind of crazy sh!t?

The sad thing is that not a single damn one of them was humble enough to read and comment on the thousands of testimonies Sam assembled and to ride the elevator down, walk across the street and have a loving conversation with him. Because they're too busy and important. I mean, what if other members got the zany idea that they might be able to have access to God's servants. Naw, let's make an example of him and symbolically tear him apart in the street, over and over again for eternity. That'll make people think twice before second guessing us.

You know, sometimes I really wish Jesus was coming back again. And right now I wish he would make his appearance at Sam's Court O' Luv, surrounded by an army of angels - all of the Mormon LGBT kids who have killed themselves because they could not be loved and love themselves. All in white robes and wielding swords.

[jfro18]

I'm with you... and I think your overall point is what bothers me: They are going to take away his 'eternal salvation' because they it's easier than just talking to him and trying to work towards a solution.

I talked with my wife about this yesterday, and she almost repeated word for word the Deseret News article about him. She asked what other choice they had but to ex him... and I just think the church could've just left it alone personally. If they aren't willing to work towards a solution, they could just leave him be and the attention had died anyway.

But the DN article apparently said that Sam was actively telling people not to join the church which I had not heard before, so my wife pointed to that as a reason that he had to know it was coming.

It's just another example of how this church values obedience above all else, and that they have no idea what to do because none of them have the prophetic ability to ask God and they're all old white dudes with no idea what everyday people experience.

[wtfluff]

If they REALLY BELIEVE what they teach

Well... One problem is: They REALLY BELIEVE that they have to protect themselves, the corporation that pays them, their "reputation," and the fake bubble they live in.

The eternal salvation of one of their fold who won't just sit down, and shut up is nowhere near as important as their made-up important-ness.

I've felt a lot of emotion the last few weeks of Sam's campaign also. Mostly disappointment I think. I spent most of my life looking up to these men, yet the are too cowardly to simply visit with Sam.

[Dravin]

But the DN article apparently said that Sam was actively telling people not to join the church which I had not heard before, so my wife pointed to that as a reason that he had to know it was coming.

He warned people that joining while Bishop's interviews can include inappropriate sexual interrigation of your children is ill advised. It wasn't "Don't join the church." it was "Don't join the church until they fix this." The distinction is of course going to be lost on any TBM.

[Emower]

I'm having some trouble processing this as well. I have found some modicum of peace in my disengagement, I dont go anymore, I dont mind that my wife does. But all the while through my transition I found myself trying to make a decision about whether the church as bad or not. We have had some discussion on this board about that, and there continues to be this discussion. For me, whether the church was bad or not was really going to dictate my response to it as I went forward in my disaffection. Ultimately, I decided that it was not clear, it could be bad for some, good for others, and I should leave people (my wife specifically) alone about it and live/let live. My disengagement was enough for me.

Now however, after reading more about the sexual abuse with Denson, Young, all the stories that have come out, all the stories that continue to come out, I have decided that it is a bad organization. Full stop. They will not change or even act (something guys, C'mon!) in the face of pressure because presumably it would make them look weak and not led by God. That is a despicable and wicked position. I dont want to think about it in any other ways, and I have thought of some other ways to think about it, but all of those ways involve throwing victims under the bus.

[Not Buying It]

If they really believed excommunication does what they claim it does, it would be incredibly cruel of them to use it on someone who was just doing what he believed was right. It would be vile. Inhuman. Heartless. That they feel they can wield such a damnable weapon in Sam’s case makes me wonder how much they really believe it does what they claim it does. Or maybe they are just cruel, vile, inhuman, and heartless.

[Sheamus Moore]

Excommunication, in this case, just feels vindictive. And I've never quite understood the notion that excommunication (stripping someone of all their 'blessings' and privileges) is somehow a necessary step to allow an individual to repent - all in the name of love.

"When members need to have certain blessings withheld, the Lord’s object is to teach as well as to discipline." M. R. Ballard

Is it the Lords object or the Churches to 'teach 'em a lesson'? If remorse is required for true repentance is it the Churches responsibility to Induce an adequate amount of shame, guilt, anguish, grief, pain, and sorrow? Does the Lord really champion a painful nose-in-corner, dunce-cap-on-head, spiritual time-out to aide the "cleansing and healing process?"

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1990/09/a-ch ... s?lang=eng
(This whole talk is disturbing on some level).

[Red Ryder]

They are the masters. We are the slaves.

Once we understand that dynamic then nothing should surprise us.

Honestly, every year I keep thinking it can't get worse. They can't possible do something even more stupid than the last. Yet they do.

I honestly have nothing more to give towards the church to hope for change. Nothing. I've lost all trust. I've lost all hope. I've lost all ability to even be surprised anymore. I'm now about to lose everything else of the little that's left when I seriously consider completely walking away. I can't be a part of Mormonism any longer.

Chapel Mormonism stole my youth.
Internet Mormonism is stealing my mind.

It's insanity to continue to think about and discuss Mormonism.

[IT_Veteran]

But the DN article apparently said that Sam was actively telling people not to join the church which I had not heard before, so my wife pointed to that as a reason that he had to know it was coming.

He warned people that joining while Bishop's interviews can include inappropriate sexual interrigation of your children is ill advised. It wasn't "Don't join the church." it was "Don't join the church until they fix this." The distinction is of course going to be lost on any TBM.

If I remember correctly, it wasn't even that strong. Seems like he said "don't join until you've thoughtfully considered if you want your children to participate in this practice. If you learn about it and you still want to join, I'm happy for you."

Excommunication, in this case, just feels vindictive. And I've never quite understood the notion that excommunication (stripping someone of all their 'blessings' and privileges) is somehow a necessary step to allow an individual to repent - all in the name of love.

"When members need to have certain blessings withheld, the Lord’s object is to teach as well as to discipline." M. R. Ballard

This goes back to the whole push for absolute obedience. Obedience has somehow become more important for individual salvation than an actual relationship with the God they believe in. Obedience has become the only way to have the relationship with God.

[rockslider]

The needs of the many chapel mormons outweigh the needs of the one

It's just logical, Sam has to burn.

[GoodBoy]

If they REALLY BELIEVE what they teach, The Brethren are about to do the most cruel, brutal, and vengeful thing that they can imagine: the are going to delete a man's baptism of Jesus and eradicate his ability to make the atonement effective in his live via the sacrament, they are going to remove his priesthood and his chance of exaltation, they are going to take his children away from him for eternity and give his wife to another man as part of his harem. For eternity. This is far worse, if they REALLY BELIEVE what they preach, than publicly beheading him or having him torn into pieces in the street. Because it's for freakin' ETERNITY.

This puts it into much clearer perspective. Now you are getting me worked up too!

[Hagoth]

Excommunication, in this case, just feels vindictive. And I've never quite understood the notion that excommunication (stripping someone of all their 'blessings' and privileges) is somehow a necessary step to allow an individual to repent - all in the name of love.

Yeah, like denying someone the sacrament because they need to repent (i.e. make Jesus' love effective in their life). That's like not letting a kid practice piano because she's not a good enough piano player.

[deacon blues]

For me, this goes back to a dispute that Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith had back in August-September 1830. Oliver had a revelation back in June 1829 that never made it into the D&C. It was copied into Manuscript Book #1 around 1832, and later (mostly) torn out. This revelation was "from God unto Oliver" and said "whosoever repenteth & humbleth himself before me & desireth to be baptized in my name shall ye baptize them...."
This was followed in April 1830 by Joseph Smith who was told in D&C 20 "All those who humble themselves before God, and desire to be baptized, and come forth with broken hearts and contrite spirits, and witness before the church that they have truly repented of all their sins and are willing to take upon themselves the name of Jesus Christ, having a determination to serve him to the end, and truly manifest by their works that they have received the Spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins, shall be received by baptism into his church. D&C 20:37.
So it seems that Joseph's revelation added some requirements to a potential member- it made the gate more narrow. It gave church leaders more license to say, "you haven't witnessed before the church or manifest real repentance by your works." Joseph and Oliver had a disagreement in August and September of 1830 about this. Joseph pulled rank and said he was the only one who got to receive revelations for the church.

[deacon blues]

I felt strong negative emotions when I read the letter (Non-disclosure) that Sam's stake president sent.


These folks are pretty brazen about their 'Courts.'

https://invisiblescubit.wordpress.com/2 ... -response/

[Hagoth]

Excommunication for apostasy is the result of "clear, open and deliberate public opposition to the church or its leaders." Is Sam in opposition to the leaders? Have they actually spoken to him to clarify their stance? Sam's says, "My contention is I'm not opposed to the church or its leaders, I'm opposed to a policy."

Is that the same thing? The church changes policies all the time. The big difference seems to be how much the leaders are made to look like ass-hats in to their adoring public. This is something over which they could actually have some control, but at the expense of showing kindness and behaving less ass-hatishly.

But you can't have your sacrament bread and eat it too.