Friday, June 15, 2012

Romney Under Investigation for a Felony, Could Disqualify Presidential Hopeful

http://youthrevolutionarycouncil.org/?p=1264





Can Anyone Guess Who is Under Investigation for a Felony? (Hint: It Could Disqualify Him From the Presidency)


Waukesha WI – Waukesha County District Attorney Brad Schimel today opened an investigation into the “Subs-for-Votes” scandal. Yesterday while wrapping up his Wisconsin tour the Romney Campaign bought $500 worth of Cousin’s subs to encourage the crowd to hit the polls and vote for Romney. Unfortunately for Romney there are a few things that you can’t do on election day in Wisconsin, and Rep. Paul Ryan who was arm-in-arm with with Romney throughout the ordeal neglected to tell the presidential candidate that the distribution of goods on election day is illegal.
Wis. Stats. Section 12.11(1m)(a) states, in pertinent part, that any person who offers, gives, lends or promises to give or lend, or endeavors to procure, anything of value, or any office or employment or any privilege or immunity to, or for, any elector, or to or for any other person, in order to induce any elector to:
(1). Go to or refrain from going to the polls;
(2). Vote or refrain from voting;
(3). Vote or refrain from voting for or against a particular person;
(4). Vote or refrain from voting for or against a particular referendum; or on account of any elector having done any of the above.
The State of Wisconsin has the authority to suggest the removal or impeachment of a president elect.
Section 12.60(2)(b), Wis. Stats., further provides that, “If a successful candidate for the legislature or U.S. congress is adjudged guilty in a criminal action of any violation of this chapter under sub. (1) (a) committed during his or her candidacy, the court shall after entering judgment certify its findings to the presiding officer of the legislative body to which the candidate was elected.”
To see whether this has an impact on the presidential election we’ll just have to wait but the video evidence suggests that it will likely play out in a Waukesha County courtroom.
In recent years, both the Obama Campaign and WI Jobs Now has run afoul of the same law, but at no point in recent memory, has the candidate, much less two ranking Republican officials standing hand-in-hand, been caught red handed breaking the law.
The decision made by the Waukesha County District Attorney will be unprecedented and could impose serious consequences on the Romney Campaign.  The DA’s office will be a tense place for a while, Waukesha is typically known as a stronghold for Wisconsin Republicans.  It’s likely that Democrats will have a close eye on the investigation with the assumption that evidence would be suppressed by county officials.  Waukesha County Officials caused outrage last year when County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus was accused of election fraud after it was made public that she had found 14,000 votes lost on her home computer more than a day after a highly contested Wisconsin State Supreme Court election.  Without the additional 14,000 votes Republicans would have lost control of the Supreme Court.
Share

The Stealth Candidate


http://commentariesonthetimes.wordpress.com/2012/06/14/the-stealth-candidate/ 
 A pitchman who aspires to be President

 Notes on the Invisible Man

       In Mitt Romney we have a candidate for the Presidency of the United States, the most powerful office in the world, who refuses to come clean about issues that are critical to our understanding of what he believes, his personal history and his intentions for the nation; the kinds of things that will tell us who the guy really is.  We are not to ask about Mitt’s religious beliefs – especially on questions of race and gender equality – or his wife’s history in the work place, although he tells us she counsels him on women’s aspirations.
We are also not supposed to demand that Mitt tell us just what government programs he would eliminate, although he has promised to cut a trillion dollars or more from the federal budget.  And he has said on the public record that questions about the vast inequity in the distribution of wealth in America should be confined to “quiet conversations in private.” In Mitt’s view, such questions are not fit topics for public discussion.
Mitt’s activities as a corporate raider, which he posits as his main qualification for President, are also off limits. So are his secret accounts in foreign banks which serve as havens for tax avoidance; as well as his tax returns over the period of years set by his father, George Romney, a former Governor of Michigan who also ran for President.   Furthermore  Mitt refuses to disclose the identity of the financial bundlers raising grand theft dough to fund his candidacy.
All most Americans really know about Mitt Romney is that he was born to the purple, got two Harvard degrees, and is worth a quarter of a billion dollars which he accumulated from his raider days kicking workers to the curb with nothing – no benefits or pensions – nothing!  And we know that he and his wife look like an aging Ken and Barbie!  That’s about it.
Mitt is rumored to be a Bishop in the Church of the Latter Day Saints i.e. the Mormons, but nobody seems to know for sure, or what it means if he is.  Yet this would make Mitt the highest ranking religious official ever to occupy the Oval Office should he win the election.  Where I grew up choosing a candidate who has not been fully examined is called “buying a pig in a poke,” and even children had better sense than to do that.
The most pressing question raised by Mitt’s refusal to come clean on all of these questions is: What is he hiding?  Is he afraid that if voters knew that until 1978 he was a leader in a church that taught black people were cursed because we were evil in a former existence?  Or that this racist belief is central to Mormon theology and has never been denounced.   Is he afraid we might find out that he believes in magic underwear that can protect him from harm? Or is he squeamish about the vulgar, male chauvinist, medieval attitude the Mormon Church teaches regarding women.
Perhaps this explains Mitt’s pusillanimous response to Rush Limbaugh’s shameful attack on George town  law student Sandra Fluke, when he called her a whore on a national broadcast and said we should be allowed to watch her having sex, just because she supported insurance coverage for contraceptives.  And maybe it also explains why Mitt thinks he can say the most ridiculous things about President Obama, and get away with it.
Maybe Mitt is scared that we might discover that he has been gaming the tax code by hiding money offshore; or that he has never had to worry about health insurance or missing a meal in his life.  Maybe he’s afraid that if voters knew this, his pledge to repeal the Affordable Health Care Act – although his health care proposal consists of exactly 331 words – and shred the safety net that provides subsistence aid to those in desperate straits, while slashing the taxes of the plutocrats, would go over like a concrete balloon with working and middle class voters – who comprise the majority of the electorate.
It could be that he is terrified of having his former company’s record of closing factories and shipping American jobs overseas seriously examined; or that he has pledged to make massive cuts in federal assistance to vital public services in the nation’s cities.  Maybe Mitt’s scared to death that if they knew his solution to all our economic problems is to reinstate the Bush economic program, except as Bill Clinton observed “this time on steroids,” the American electorate might not prove to be as stupid as he thinks.  That’s the main reason why Mitt is a stealth candidate who remains a mystery man even as he ask us to elect him our next President….But I’ma try my level best to put all the suckas business in the streets!

********************
Playthell G. Benjamin
Harlem, New York
June 14, 2012
********************

Thursday, June 14, 2012

Jesse Ventura: Mitt Romney's Mormon Underwear "Ridiculous"

Ventura doesn't want a president who believes his underwear is magical.

Magic Mormon Underwear - FAIL!

Mitt The Mormon's bankroller: “All we care about is being good Zionists, being good citizens of Israel,


Billionaire Gingrich backer Adelson regrets he served in US instead of Israeli military

Billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who along with his wife, has donated $10 million dollars in recent weeks to Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich, has said that he wishes he had served in the Israeli army instead of the US military and that he wants his son to grow up to “be a sniper for the IDF.”
Gingrich himself has also doubled down on anti-Palestinian comments, asserting during a CNN debate last night that they were “invented” in the 1970s.
Adelson owns a newspaper in Israel, ‘Israel HaYom,’ that backs conservative Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and adamantly opposes any peace settlement with the Palestinians.
But while Adelson and Gingrich have bonded on the issue of a hawkish Mideast policy, especially over the threat of a nuclear Iran, some of the casino mogul’s comments could prove embarrassing.
In a talk to an Israeli group in July, 2010, Adelson said he wished he had served in the Israeli Army rather the U.S. military–and that he hoped his young son will come back to Israel and “be a sniper for the IDF,” a reference to the Israel Defense Forces. (YouTube video of speech)
I am not Israeli. The uniform that I wore in the military, unfortunately, was not an Israeli uniform. It was an American uniform, although my wife was in the IDF and one of my daughters was in the IDF … our two little boys, one of whom will be bar mitzvahed tomorrow, hopefully he’ll come back– his hobby is shooting – and he’ll come back and be a sniper for the IDF,” Adelson said at the event.
All we care about is being good Zionists, being good citizens of Israel, because even though I am not Israeli born, Israel is in my heart,” he said toward the end of his talk.
Adelson is a major backer of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and has been a major factor in pushing for confrontation with Iran. His support for Gingrich has given rise to speculation that the latter’s ever more strident anti-Palestinian positions including that Palestinians are an “invented people” are inspired by that support.
The revelations also come amid a fierce debate in Washington about whether some supporters of Israel can be described as “Israel Firsters.”
In addition to calling Palestinians “invented people,” Gingrich has vowed to send the CIA to “hunt down” Palestinian prisoners freed by Israel.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Mitt Romney's Mormon Problem - And Ours


The Mormon Church- America's last major racist institution.



Why Mitt Romney Needs To Apologize to Barack Obama and To All Of Us.


Mormon Prophet:Blacks Represent Satan On Earth


This doddering fool Gordon Hinckley, supposed Prophet of the Mormon god couldn't explain why the Mormons would not allow Black people equality within their Church. Their racist practices were policy and not "scripture" based. 




LDS Mormon PROPHET John Taylor Stated:


Why is it, in fact, that we should have a devil? Why did not the Lord kill him long ago? . . . He needed the devil and great many of those who do his bidding just to keep . . . our dependence upon God, . . . When he destroyed the inhabitants of the antediluvian world, he suffered a descendant of Cain to come through the flood in order that he [the devil] might be properly represented upon the earth (Journal of Discourses, vol. 23, p. 336).


LDS PROPHET JOHN TAYLOR:"...after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Ham's wife,as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that the DEVIL should have a representation a upon a the earth..."Journal of Discourses, Volume 22, page 304.


This teaches LDS Mormons that the king of Egypt (a Black African) is of the seed of CAIN and HAM by birth


21 Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.


This teaches LDS Mormons that the king of Egypt (a Black African) can't have the priesthood because he is of the seed of CAIN and HAM


27 Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood
(Pearl of Great Price Abraham1:21-27)






LDS Mormons Believe The seed of Cain and Ham are the Africans who where Cursed Black in the LDS Mormon Pearl of great Price Scriptures (This is not in the HOLY BIBLE)


". . . there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people . . . (Pearl of Great Price Moses 7:8)."


"And . . . they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them (Pearl of Great Price Moses 7:22)."








This teaches all LDS Mormons that Black skin is a CURSE FROM the Mormon GOD (THIS IS NOT IN THE HOLY BIBLE)


"...cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing...the Lord God did cause a skin of BLACKNESS to come upon them (Book of Mormon 2 Nephi5:21)"


"And the skins..were DARK,according to the MARK which was set upon their fathers..which WAS A CURSE upon them...(Book of Mormon,Alma 3:6)"


"and the CURSING which hath come upon their skins...(Book of Mormon, Jacob 3:5)"








This teaches Mormons that Cain (Who Mormons Believe is the BLACK AFRICAN MAN) Loved Satan more then God and made oaths and covenants with Satan (This is not in the Holy Bible)


Moses 5:28-31 pearl of great price OFFICIAL LDS Mormon scriptures


28...they loved Satan more than God.29 And Satan said unto Cain: Swear unto me by thy throat,30 And Satan sware unto Cain that he would do according to his commands.31 And Cain said:Truly I am Mahan,the master of this great secret...


1947 the First Presidency (supreme council) of the Church issued an Official Statement: "From the days of the Prophet Joseph Smith even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel." (Statement of The First Presidency on the Negro Question, July 17 1947, quoted in Mormonism and the Negro, pp.46-7)


In 1949, The First Presidency issued the following statement: "The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time." (The First Presidency on the Negro Question, 17 Aug. 1949)




Official Statement of First Presidency issued on August 17, 1951, reads: "The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the pre-mortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality, and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the principle itself indicates that the coming to this earth and taking on mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintained their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes...

Category:


Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Mormonism Is A Cult-- And Cults Will Rewire your Brain



Easy answers to complex problems - us and them.

And the thing is, though, if you looked at my brain during those years in the Moonies -- neuroscience is expanding exponentially, as Ray Kurzweil said yesterday. Science is expanding. We're beginning to look inside the brain.And so if you looked at my brain, or any brain that's infected with a viral memetic infection like this, and compared it to anyone in this room, or anyone who uses critical thinking on a regular basis, I am convinced it would look very, very different.



Subject: "We are NOT a cult"... some observations on this Mormon statement
Date: Jan 19 13:37
Author: Noggin

Recently, I finished Steve Hassan's book "Combating cult mind control". I mentioned earlier how I was looking for the Mormon church to be brought up as an example of a cult and it was not. The book focused on destructive cults like the Moonies, The Way, The people's temple (Jim Jones) etc. Hassan was a top Moonie recruiter for 2 or 3 years and after an accident was wrenched out of the Moonie cult and deprogrammed successfully.

Throughout the book I drew parallel after parallel. Until I read this book, I never considered the church as a cult. I concluded that the church takes on many prevalent cult characteristics. The last chapter in particular hit me that my mission experience in Spain was the biggest parallel to Hassan's Moonie cult experience. The temple experience also takes on significant cult characteristics.

Here is my list.. in progress of course:

1. In Temple recommend interviews, members are told that the interviewer represents Jesus and should answer all questions as if they were talking to Jesus. This is a break down of barriers designed to condition the member to completely submit to church�s authority

2. Naked touching in the temple washing and anointing ritual also breaks down barriers, creates submission to church authority [This eternal ordinance was changed in Jan 2005 see mormon366.htm ]  

3. New name, suggests reassignment of identity

4. Temple endowment experience is hypnotic, produces a relaxed, even sleepy alpha like state for receptivity to church indoctrination, oaths, instruction, commitment. Similar to Moonie repetitive indoctrination sessions where chanting, singing, and long periods of lecturing happen.

5. Secret signs, tokens, passwords to get into Mormon heaven. If one does not have this exclusive information, they will be denied access past certain angels along the way back to God's presence. This is an element of control designed to produce exclusivity

6. Requirement to wear church approved underwear night and day, conditioned to believe they possess special protections. Another design to control via exclusivity

7. Strict tithing requirements. Yearly face to face confrontation with a high church authority to declare to him (as the lord�s representative) how much money the member was able to give to the church. Encouraged to give everything that the lord blesses you with even ones time, talents to the building up of the LDS church. In addition to tithes, generous fast offerings are encouraged. Giving to other charities or worthy causes outside the church is heavily discouraged. The member intuitively knows that the tithing, fast offering, missionary funds and perpetual education funds must be donated to first... and only THEN should outside charities be considered. This cult characteristic, to me, falls under extreme duress to give only to the church organization. The member is even told that if the tithing is not "honest" they will literally burn up at the Lord's 2nd coming.

8. Outsiders not permitted to enter the temple. Exclusivity.

9. Members believe Jesus literally walks the halls of the temples and no other buildings on earth receive this privilege. There is only Faith promoting rumors to back this up of course. Yet it is a very strong and widely held belief in the church that this is so.

10. There is a blatant Us vs. Them mentality. The LDS testimony conditions members to �know� based on feelings that they are the only ones on earth with the Truth or approved plan of God. Everyone else is wrong and must be saved or baptized into the LDS church. This doctrine goes as far as to maintain that every living human who has ever lived in this earth must be baptized. While logically impossible, the doctrine is widely believed. God will figure it out. This rationality is supposed to support this impossibility

11. LDS church has more evidence to prove it false than it does to prove it true, yet members see this as a test of faith and God�s way of strengthening his "Elect". Or members have been conditioned to never look at this material. Very similar to the Moonie approach that outside information was evil and falls under satanic origins. Anything that could potentially deprogram a Moonie was satanic. Family members, spouses, newspaper articles, radio... you get the idea.

12. Members are encouraged strongly to never look at �anti� literature. Yet early apostles encouraged the discovery of truth and preached openly that truth would stand up to highest degree of scrutiny. This was before damning evidences to the church's platform of ideology was widely known or even challenged. During this era, the church had a sense of infallibility as the saints were securely sequestered in the desert of Utah. Completely isolated from the outside world.

13. Bishop interviews are obsessed with sexual purity for youth & missionaries. Adults have been told which sexual acts are permissible and which are not. Though, this is not consistent throughout the church. Young people must disclose any sexual acts, even minor ones. This young person (male or female) believes they are talking to Jesus Christ's representative in these interviews. Lying to the bishop is equated to lying to Jesus.

14. Missions are extreme examples of Cult experience.

A. 80 hrs a week free labor (Missionary makes no money) in fact the missionary pays largely for his own meals, lodging, transportation and clothing out of his own pocket. The missionary is told that the 2 years in service is a "tithing" of the first 19 years of his life that God gave him/her.
B. When not working in field one is encouraged to read scripture & pray constantly
C. High amounts of self-indoctrination and mass indoctrination at zone, district meetings. Guilt tactics are used. If low recruit numbers are happening, the missionary is frequently blamed. Reasons for low recruit numbers are tied to unlikely reasons such as a lack of dedication or commitment to mission rules or even a suggestion that too many missionaries were masturbating too frequently in the past month. This is a gross abuse of mind control.
D. Encouraged to frequently recite scripture and hymns, carry a prayer in ones heart at all times so as to fortify ones efforts to keep rules, remain "sanctified to the cause" and not have impure thoughts or masturbate.
E. No outside influences, no TV, no radio
F. Must always be with companion except for showers and toilet
G. Confined to one area, not permitted to go outside geographic boundaries
H. Extreme limited contact with family, letters once a week, no phone call home but twice a year
I. Primary job is to recruit new members, give the prospect milk and NO meat doctrine. Deception (by only telling the rewritten version of the church's history and doctrine) is encouraged most often without the missionary NOT knowing he is testifying to untruths.
J. Every person met is sized up as potential recruit,
K. Current members are badgered for referrals for new recruits, friends and neighbors
L. Loaded language, acronyms. Outsiders cannot follow many regular LDS conversations

15. If one ever leaves the church, they are told and conditioned to think they will be sent to outer darkness in the afterlife. There is a fear of imminent damnation if they leave the group.

16. One man (the prophet figure) speaks for God. Members see this as extremely positive as they believe the prophet will never lead them astray. When confronted that prior prophets in history have been wrong or even preached harmful doctrine that was widely held up as God's word (racial discrimination) the member quickly dismisses this. This is supported by the perceived good works the church produces and the notion that Mormonism produces good people and strong families.

Well, there is my list. I was hoping to come up with 17 items as an attempt to parallel the faith promoting rumor about the 17 points of the true church. I am one short... mainly because I am out of time.

Interested in comments and additions.

Noggin

Subject: Re: "We are NOT a cult"... some observations on this TBM statement
Date: Jan 19 14:48
Author: exmoinoakland

IMHO I did not consider the Church a cult. But I also hadn't realized how indoctrinated I was. About five years ago I still thought that I might end up in "outer darkness", I was actually afraid to admit that I did not believe that JS was a "true prophet"

It has taken me thirteen years to actually feel completely like a non-Mormon.

Subject: Re: I have been out for over 10 years and can't get past those feelings. I'm happy for you! nt
Date: Jan 19 17:36
Author: exmoinoakland

I started questioning the church when I was 16, I left it when I was nineteen.

I reexamined LDS teachings through the filter of Zen Buddhist and Taoist philosophies when I was Twenty-Two.

Then finally at the age of twenty-seven I let go.

Now at 33 I am free. More or less.

Subject: You have made some excellent points...
Date: Jan 19 15:11
Author: Molly Morgie

I will have to read Steve Hassan's book. I have done a small amount of research on this and found a website with an interesting "Cult Checklist".
http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/checklis.htm
It was after reading this, I began to truly see what the LDS church is. I was actually very surprised at the similarities. It's frightening to think that many of our family members and friends believe moism to be true.

Subject: I'd like to hear....
Date: Jan 19 15:29
Author: visitor

...some members describe what they think a cult is and/or the details of HOW their church isn't one, differences, etc. Is it just because Jesus and Joseph Smith say so or something?

Subject: Mormons are not allowed to research and produce their own curriculum to teach in a Mormon church.
Date: Jan 19 15:51
Author: Infy (in hiding)

Mormons are not allowed to research and produce their own curriculum to teach in a Mormon church. All lessons are pre-planned by the LDS Corporation and sent out to all Ward Houses. All Ward Members are taught the same thing in every class including Priesthood, Sunday School and Sacrament.

Subject: They can't even quote non-members in "lessons"
Date: Jan 19 17:04
Author: Fedelm

There have been stories here of people being chewed out because they chose to include quotes from people like Ghandi, Mother Theresa, MLK, and others who weren't Mormon. Only cult leaders are allowed to be quoted.

Subject: Re: They can't even quote non-members in "lessons"
Date: Jan 19 18:09
Author: spintobear

Long gone are the days when my Sunday School teacher culled his lessons from the Readers Digest. Better yet, we had a husband/wife team that listened to a non-member radio broadcast every Sunday morning, and that would usually be part of the lesson in Sunday school that day.
The church sure is a different one than what I knew in the 50s through the 70s.

Subject: Loved the book, and the excellent points you drew from it! Also:
Date: Jan 19 17:55
Author: Cheryl

I'll tell you my favorite part of the book. I had never stopped to compare brainwashing and mind control.

Brainwashing is blatantly and obviously abusive.

Cult mind control is subtle. Victims cooperate because they don't realize they're being manipulated. Mormons and other cultists can't know they're under mind control simply because they give up control of their own minds whenever they're doing the bidding of their cult.

You can't know you're under mind control if you're not fully utilizing your own mind enough to clearly see the situation. That's why Mormons aren't lying when they incorrectly say they're not in a cult. People in cults can't know that they're in them until they leave.

Subject: Additional thoughts, Why LDS church not considered a "destructive" cult...
Date: Jan 19 18:11
Author: Noggin

After posting my thoughts, I have been thinking as to why the LDS church is not considered a destructive cult. I can only come up with this:

It must be the family aspect of the church. Destructive cults like the Moonies, The Way, People's temple recruit individuals and isolate them from family, friends etc. The LDS church is not like this per se. I can see the reaction from nonmember families who have a child join the LDS church. They would likely see their child joining a Moonie type cult. There is no getting around that.

But for the multi generational Mormon family, the destructive cult personality is merely a "way of life". Uncle Larry and Aunt Millie are all Mormon. Everyone is also Mormon in this familial environment...

The church does promote family values and unity. No one can deny that the family is paramount within the church. I know, there are many here that would dispute the church's fame for family values... for some of the following reasons:

1. The parents are kept busy all week with various callings and assignments (home/visiting teaching, callings, service assignments, Cannery, sugar beet farm, chicken farm or any other LDS owned business service, cleaning the chapel, moving entire households w/ furniture in and out of the ward, visiting the sick). Some of these items are not in and of themselves bad things. I believe in serving outside of ones self. But the implication that these items are required and the guilt associated with NOT doing them or turning down an opportunity to do them is what I consider cult like. There should be no guilt. Anyhow. Guilt does abound in the church in excessive amounts. Hence the stats for Prozac type drugs in Utah are excessively high. Bottom line if the parents are busy being bishops and relief society presidents the kids get left on the back burner. This is most unfortunate. This was my experience growing up.

2. Sexual abuse has happened in the church, and in LDS families. Thus a black mark could be assigned to the church on this alone. I am not sure how far above average occurrence this abuse is happening. I don't deny it happens but the question could be is the LDS church more guilty than normal. Caveat. I am not saying sex abuse is normal. I abhor sex abuse. I think I am clear as to what I am saying. Definitely, sex abuse negates the family values.

3. Families are Forever yet if one of your family members leaves the church or becomes wayward, there is a definite tendency for the TBM portion of the family to shun the "straying" family member. This is hypocritical even though article of faith #10 says [Mormons] believe that all can worship however they please. Such intolerance and hypocrisy puts into question the true groupthink of Mormon family values.

There are many more reasons I am sure. I am just trying to display an open approach to this.

So I guess while not necessarily a destructive cult, what I am concluding is that it is a Cult... for the entire family.

Thoughts and comments appreciated

Noggin

Subject: A few things to chew on...
Date: Feb 03 13:36 2005
Author: Grape Nephi

George Swope, a psychologist, concluded in a study (1980) that the following types of people are taken in by cults:


1. Idealists who want to know God better.
2. The innocent who naively believe that a cult messiah is God's divine representative.
3. Inquisitive young college or high school students who suffer from severe and demoralizing family and personal problems.
4. Independent young people who run away from home seeking freedom from parental restrictions and authority.
5. Identity seekers having trouble believing in themselves.
6. Insecure youth looking for new experiences and a clarification of their own identity.



I think items 1 & 2 apply most to the Mormon Cult. Part of the draw of the Mormon Cult is the answer to the questions revolving around where we came from before birth and where we go after we die. Most people love their families and the claim that we'll be together after death is comforting. And so once you have a person involved and have only given them the outer shell of belief, once hooked, it is then easier to start to feed them the "deeper doctrines". Pavlos stated (1982, p 27) "A gradual conversion may take place over several months or years. However, it must entail an emerging strong commitment to religious values and beliefs and it must encompass evidence of behavioral commitment to the religious group's dogma and its practices. This is why a member is pressured by the group to act on his or her religious values and beliefs. Duane a Windemiller (1960) finds striking similarities between brainwashing, as practiced by the Chinese Communists, and techniques applied in religious conversion."

Think about some of the practices in the Mormon Cult. Once a month testimony meeting that is taken part in while fasting, thus weakening the mind. The droning temple endowment ceremonies where over and over you commit yourself to the Church and not to God. Primary, where the children are heavily indoctrinated and hear the same things over and over again. Everyone here can probably add to the list.

Commitment and "conversion" happens on three levels in my estimation. You have the convert level where the newly converted believes they are in Christ's church and that a special leader speaks for Christ and God. The second level I call the church Mormon level and that is where the person has committed enough to accept callings in the church and begins to pay tithing and live the church commandments. The last level is temple Mormonism and that is like becoming "clear" in Scientology. Once a person has started regular attendance at the temple they are fully drawn into the Cult and have committed to give everything to the Mormon Cult. The last covenant made in the temple is not to God but to the Mormon Cult. The following is from the 1990 version of the endowment and is the same as in earlier versions that I remember taking part in:

"You and each of you covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar, that you do accept the Law of Consecration as contained in the Doctrine and Covenants, in that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and everything with which the Lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion."

Once you've put on the garment and made this covenant you are now enthralled fully by the Cult.

I hope this helps.


Subject: "WE ARE NOT A CULT!" is ALWAYS the 'battle cry' of anyone IN a cult!


Romney Lies -- Religiously


Mitt Romney denied the First Vision?

This newscast from 2008 has Romney admitting that as far as he knows God hasn't spoken to anyone since Moses. He seems somewhat embarrassed to mention the First Vision. Former Stake President Romney is obviously aware that the entire LDS Church is based on the First Vision which has God speaking to the founder of Mormonism Joseph Smith. In short, Romney is a typical politician by not wanting to alienate voters by not appearing to believe in things most Christians would be very uncomfortable with.
Youtube video: Mitt Romney denies key tenet of his own faith!




One Mormon blogger writes, "When I was a missionary, the church’s official Missionary Guide instructed missionaries to avoid providing direct answers or solutions to investigators' questions or concerns.” On his mission, he "fell back on rhetorical tricks or even outright denials."


"What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers. I labored with these apostates myself until I was out of all manner of patience." - Joseph Smith [1]
"A half-truth presented as the whole truth is a complete untruth." - J.I. Packer[2]
"Even sharing the truth can have the effect of lying when we tell only half-truths that do not give the full picture. We can also be guilty of bearing false witness and lying if we say nothing, particularly if we allow another to reach a wrong conclusion while we hold back information that would have led to a more accurate perception. In this case it is as though an actual lie were uttered." - Robert J. Matthews[3]
"In matters of honesty, there are no shortcuts; no little white lies, or big black lies, only the simple, honest truth spoken in total candor... Being true is different than being honest.” - Gordon B. Hinckley[4]
Lying for the Lord refers to the practice of lying to protect the image of and belief in the Mormon religion, a practice which Mormonism itself fosters in various ways. From Joseph Smith's denial of having more than one wife, to polygamous Mormon missionaries telling European investigators that reports about polygamy in Utah were lies put out by "anti-Mormons" and disgruntled ex-members, to Gordon B. Hinckley's dishonest equivocation on national television over Mormon doctrine, Mormonism's history seems replete with examples of lying. Common members see such examples as situations where lying is justified. For the Mormon, loyalty and the welfare of the church are more important than the principle of honesty, and plausible denials and deception by omission are warranted by an opportunity to have the Mormon organization seen in the best possible light. This is part of the larger package of things that lead many to describe Mormonism as a cult. "Lying for the lord" is part of Mormonism's larger deceptive mainstreaming tactics, and conversion numbers would drastically lower if important Mormon beliefs were fully disclosed to investigators.


A Devoted Mormon Explains Why He Left the Mormon Cult (Mormonism Is Full Of Crap)





http://www.exmormon.org/whyileft.htm


Why I left Mormonism



Documentation on my reasons for leaving Mormonism is listed at the beginning of my story. These links are here so that it is clear I left Mormonism because Mormonism is not what it claims to be. I did not leave due to hurt feelings or "sin".

Documentation for those investigating MormonismDocumentation in a format for Mormons

The reasons are numerous and difficult to confine to a few words in a post on this web site. This was originally written as a letter to a friend, a Mormon, who wanted to know why I left Mormonism. She too later left Mormonism.This is a listing of what is in this post:
  • Brief Background of My Life as a Mormon
  • Leaving Mormonism and Some Experiences as a Mormon
  • History of Joseph Smith
  • Book of Mormon
  • Book of Abraham
  • The Temple
  • Church Members
  • Glad to be Out


A Brief Background of My Years as a Mormon

I joined the Mormon Church when I was 20 years old and living in Upper Michigan. I was a college student and was introduced to the church by a roommate. I graduated with a BS degree in metallurgical engineering and I went on to graduate school at the University of Utah. At the UofU I was asked to go on a mission for the church. I served a 2 year mission in Finland from 1974-1976, which I fully paid for myself. On return from my mission, I went back to graduate school and received an MS in engineering at Michigan Technological University. One month later I was married in the temple in Washington D.C. I served for the next 18 years in numerous callings such as the Elders' Quorum President, Young Mens' President, clerk etc. I was fully committed to the church and believed in it with all my heart, mind and money.


Leaving Mormonism

Leaving Mormonism was not a step I took lightly. It is extremely painful finding out that Mormonism is a fraud. I was a member for over 20 years. The realization that we (my whole family) had been deceived also made me angrier than I had ever experienced.

When I studied my way out of Mormonism it occurred in distinct layers or stages. The first stage was the Book of Abraham. This has the only physical evidence (the papyri) that can be studied of the unique LDS scriptures. I read everything I could find both pro and con. The LDS position was clearly unsustainable and absurd. Next was studying LDS history. I even used the official LDS materials and then acquired the pre-edited source materials the official LDS history has been based on. I got the Journal of Discourses on CD-ROM. What is amazing is the wealth of documents. There perhaps is no other religion that can have its official history be refuted so thoroughly. Next was the Book of Mormon. I kept wanting to cling to that for some reason. The archaeological evidence, materials readily available in Joseph Smith's time (which I had not known before) and on and on had the BofM crashing to the floor too. The last and most puzzling stage was the general authorities. Are these men liars or dupes? It appears they are a mixture of both.

President Kimball and his wife toured Finland in 1975 when I was a missionary and spoke to small groups of us. What really struck me were two observations that I never acted on until I began seriously questioning the church. The first was of Pres. Kimball. He was clearly a humble man, but of very limited intelligence, at least when he was 80 some years old. I was a little disturbed, but trusted everything was in the Lord's hands. He spoke on how we will become gods and the normal missionary motivational stuff. What was really striking was when Sister Kimball spoke to us. In part of her talk she digressed from an apparently memorized (from being given so many times) speech and talked about an experience at the University of Utah. She took an institute class there while her husband was an apostle and was troubled by what the instructor (an LDS liberal evidently) was presenting to the class. She expressed her troubles with her husband who lightly dismissed them. The casual dismissal was a problem for her. What is fascinating now is that she would have expressed any doubt at all to us and it was clearly out of context with the talk she was giving. This digression occurred in mid-thought on another subject. When we got our transcripts of the talk, I noticed that this was not included. Here was history being rewritten right before my eyes. I did not act on it nor express to anyone my concern. I let it go.
Another disturbing item was the Hofmann forgeries in the 1980s. In the Ensign there was a picture showing the Prophet President Kimball with, if I remember right, President Hinkley and other General Authorities looking at the Anton manuscript, which was a forgery. They believed it to be legitimate. The lack of revelation was clearly shown by these same men who are trying to tell us they have a testimony of the Book of Mormon or of Joseph Smith. They could not detect a bogus document of great importance. Again, I let it go.


The fact that the general authorities go to great pains to cover embarrassing historical events shows to me they know what is going on. There are perhaps a few sincere ones who dismiss the evidence of its origins by not looking at or thinking about it. This appears to have been the case with President Kimball.
We officially left the church in March of 1994 through a letter requesting our names be removed from the church records. Since that time, in all too typical mind control like fashion, members of the church have avoided us. The Regional Representative even came up from Alabama and spoke out against us in a Sacrament meeting three weeks after we left and told the members that if they ever talk to us or if we give them materials, they are to contact their Bishop. Only an organization that had something to hide would be paranoid about the truth being revealed about itself. It is interesting that we would be considered such a threat. We had done nothing except request our names be removed from the records of the church. That was all. We learned that we really had few friends within Mormonism.



LDS History

The visitation of 1820 of God and Jesus to Joseph Smith has been shown by the mass of information on the supposed event, to have never occurred. The date conflicts with other recorded historical events and even with Joseph Smith's mother's account of her son's history! No one ever mentioned this revelation until Smith dictated it 18 years later! It plays no role at all in Mormon history until the 1860s. His early hand written account (1831-1832 diary) does not even mention God the father visiting. He forgot that God visited him? That is absurd. As Smith got older, he got bolder in his claims of power and visitations and the creating of an imaginary history is just part of that. He did this when there were fewer eyewitnesses around who could claim such events never happened or did not happen the way he testified to. When a Mormon reads the official history today it appears everything occurred in a certain order when in reality most items were back dated and created out of thin air to lend credibility to the ever increasing stories.

The official Mormon history has been heavily rewritten. This is one of the most disturbing things I discovered in our research of the church. Even the official History of the Church is only 40% Joseph Smith's writings when it is still claimed to be 100%. The 40% has been rewritten so as to be "faith promoting" and the 60%, which was not his writing at all, was selectively chosen from other people's writings and rewritten to make him out to be something he was not.

Here is a simple example of how Joseph Smith was a fraud. You can read this in the official Mormon History, but few Mormons ever bother to read it. Some farmers in Kinderhook devised a hoax in 1843 and made up some copper plates which they claimed contained ancient writings. They planted them in an Indian burial mound and later dug them up again. When Smith saw the plates, he immediately "translated" part of them, which (he claimed in his diary) identified the writings as from "a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh...". Here is the exact quote from the Documentary History of the Church:
"I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters."
"I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth. "

For many years, the church claimed that these plates were authentic ancient writings, in spite of the fact that the farmers later admitted the hoax - evidently the fact that Smith had translated part of them made it too embarrassing to accept the hoax. After resorting to more and more implausible and desperate arguments, the church flip-flopped about 10 years ago, and now admits that the plates are phony. The 1981 August Ensign has the statement where the church admits that the plates were a hoax. Of course, this leaves them with the embarrassing quote from Smith's diary.... In spite of the fact that this quote is confirmed by contemporary newspaper reports, they conclude that THIS has to be a false report (indeed, many supposed entries in Smith's diary are generally regarded as fraudulent -- something that church historians don't like to emphasize).

The essential problem here is not the Kinderhook plates themselves, of course. The problem is that since Smith is revealed as credulous or deceitful in cases where he CAN be checked, the Book of Mormon translation, where he cannot be checked, is rendered highly suspicious.

The church has been deceitful in its creating the image of Joseph Smith as an unlearned country boy. He was very intelligent and capable of reading at a high level and memorizing enormous materials. The primary source for the Book of Mormon was a book written by a man named Ethan Smith (no relation) who lived a short distance from Joseph and was a minister to a family none other than Oliver Cowdery's. This book is called the View of the Hebrews and was written in 1823 and republished in 1825. This book contained everything Joseph Smith needed to create the Book of Mormon.



The Book of Mormon

The "keystone" of the church is unquestionably the Book of Mormon. If the book can be shown to be a product of the 19th century, the church is then not what it claims to be. Archaeology in the old world continues to uncover physical evidence of biblical history. This is not the case with new world archaeology and the Book of Mormon. In fact, archeologists have stated that the last 2 decades have been devastating to Book of Mormon archeology. Mormon apologists are now resorting to "internal evidences" which are addressed elsewhere on this site since they realize there is no hard evidence at all for the Book of Mormon.

The most compelling evidence of the fictional nature of the Book of Mormon, from an archaeological view, is the things which have not been found. This part of my post is liberally copied from some documents on Mormon archeology.

Cities
Numerous books and papers, of which I have many, describe proposed Book of Mormon locations for cities and for the "narrow neck of land". All of them differ significantly. No city has yet been identified as being Nephite or Lamanite. This is significant in that Zarahemla was occupied for hundreds of years. Almost all geography mentioned in the Book of Mormon is in Mormon's abridgment of the plates. He would have known which locations would have been destroyed by the crucifixion. Therefore, the weak LDS apologist stance that the cities were destroyed is not valid. Remember we are talking about a time period from 2000 BC to 400 AD and millions of people and these cities they occupied have yet to be found.

A curious note is that when the Nephites landed in the Americas there were already millions of inhabitants in the land with large cities and infrastructure. Why are these peoples not mentioned?

Plant and Animal Life
There are four major crops mentioned in the Nephite records. These are:
  • Barley (Mos 7:22, 9:9, Alma 11:7, 15)
  • Figs (3 Ne 14:16)
  • Grapes (2 Ne 15:2, 4, 3 Ne 14:16)
  • Wheat (Mos 9:9, 3 Ne 18:18)
Archeological findings for the time period of the Book of Mormon:
  • Barley NONE {an new world variety was found in Arizona and totally unrelated}
  • Figs NONE
  • Grapes NONE
  • Wheat NONE
This negative score on the plant-life test should not be treated too lightly. An abundance of evidence supporting the existence of these plants has been found in other parts of the world of antiquity. The existence of numerous non-Book-of-Mormon plants (maize, lima beans, tomatoes, squash, etc.) has been supported by abundant archeological findings. Quoting from Tom Ferguson: "I (Tom Ferguson) participated in excavating a trench a the edge of the Grijalva river in which we found a ceramic vessel is a stratum dating to about 200 BC. The vessel contained lima beans that had been burned anciently and discarded--pot and beans--as too badly burned to be edible. And yet they were still in their pristine and perfect form. The beans were carbon-14 dated helping to place the whole stratum on a true time scale. Art portrayals in ceramics, murals, and sculptured works--of ancient plant life--are fairly commonplace. Thousands of archeological holes in the area proposed have given us not a fragment of evidence of the presence of the plants mentioned in the Book of Mormon. The holes include the great one dug by Edwin Shook at Tehuacan, Puebla, Mexico. He excavated a cave -- going back to 5000 BC., finding most of the major plants of the area. But no wheat, barley, figs or grapes."

I would like to note that wheat is very durable. Wheat in near perfect condition has been frequently found in the Egyptian pyramids dating back thousands of years. There is absolutely no evidence from any source that wheat was ever used in the ancient Americas. This alone brings the Book of Mormon into serious doubt.

Animal Life
This section is fun and Mormons are derided here for claiming horses and elephants were used by the ancients in America. This derision is for good reason, for they have never been found! There are more animals mentioned which reinforces the fictional nature of the Book of Mormon.There are many animals mentioned in the Nephite records. These are:
  • Ass
  • Bull
  • Calf
  • Cattle
  • Cow
  • Butter
  • Milk
  • Flocks
  • Goat {the Nephites claimed to have found the domestic goat no less!}
  • Herds
  • Horse {the horse plays a major role in the Nephite and Lamanite societies}
  • Ox
  • Sheep {this was a major animal in the Book of Mormon}
  • Sow
  • Swine
  • Elephants
Archeological findings for the time period of the Book of Mormon:
  • Ass..... NONE
  • Bull.... NONE
  • Calf.... NONE
  • Cattle.. NONE
  • Cow..... NONE
  • Butter.. NONE
  • Milk.... NONE
  • Flocks.. NONE
  • Goat.... NONE
  • Herds... NONE
  • Horse... NONE
  • Ox...... NONE
  • Sheep... NONE
  • Sow..... NONE
  • Swine... NONE
  • Elephants (NONE contemporary with the Book of Mormon)
Again from Tom Ferguson: "Evidence of the foregoing animals has not appeared in any form -- ceramic representations, bones or skeletal remains, mural art, sculptured art or any other form. However... evidence has been found in several forms of the presence in the Book-of-Mormon times of other animals--deer, jaguars, dogs, turkeys etc. The zero score presents a problem that will not go away with the ignoring of it. Non-LDS scholars of first magnitude, some who want to be our friends, think we have real trouble here. That evidence of the ancient existence of these animals is not elusive is found in the fact that proof of their existence in the ancient old-world is abundant. The absence of such evidence...is distressing and significant, in my view."

Metals
I will be briefer on the metals, but this is fascinating to me as I have both a BS and MS in metallurgical engineering.Evidence supporting the existence of these metals, skills and products...at this time as follows:
  • Bellows....... NONE
  • Brass......... NONE
  • Breast Plates. NONE
  • Chains........ NONE
  • Copper........ NONE
  • Iron.......... NONE
  • Ore (mining).. NONE (this is very significant, no evidence of mining activities)
  • Plows......... NONE
  • Silver........ NONE
  • Swords........ NONE (none that are metal)
  • Steel......... NONE
Again from Tom Ferguson: "Metallurgy does not appear in the region until about the 9th century A.D. ...I regard this as a major weakness in the armor of our proponents and friends". ...Art does not portray the existence of metallurgical products or metallurgical activity. Again, the score is zero.
There are so many items archeologically, historically and using textual criticism to show the Book of Mormon to be fictional, that anyone willing to do a little study will reach the same conclusion.
There is a lot of Mormon mythology that states that the Book of Mormon has been "proven" by such and such a find or the uncovering of a city. When investigated ALL of these claims have been shown to be false. The myths are circulated in the Mormon culture by Sacrament meeting talks, Priesthood meeting discussions and in LDS social circles so much, that Mormons who do not investigate the source of the information, believe the stories to be true. They use these false stories to "strengthen their testimonies". Please see section on Problems with believing in Mormonism / Mormon Apologetics on this site for a letter from the Smithsonian which verifies these statements.

Book of Abraham
The Book of Abraham is another document where Smith is a perpetrator of a fraud. This is the translation of an Egyptian papyrus which came into Smith's possession, and which he claimed to have been written by Abraham in Abraham's own handwriting and with his signature!. Note, that these papyri were too new to be Abraham's by almost 1500 years!! There was no one in Joseph Smith's time who could refute the "translation" as can be done today. So he was able to take advantage of people's ignorance of Egyptian. Smith charged admission to see the papyrus. Smith even prepared an Egyptian Grammar based on this papyrus. Smith's Egyptian Grammar was not published until the 1960's, and needless to say, it bears no resemblance to what we now know of actual Egyptian grammar.

The papyrus disappeared and was believed to be lost, but it turned up again in the Metropolitan Museum in NY, in 1967. Alas, the papyrus, which can be easily read by Egyptologists, is an ordinary Egyptian funerary papyrus from the 1st century A.D. and the text has absolutely nothing to do with the Book of Abraham! The attempts by the church to rescue this book are not much more plausible than the arguments used to support the Kinderhook Plates. Some Mormon scholars claim, for example, that the text of the Book of Abraham was somehow secretly encoded into this Egyptian papyrus or that the text somehow "inspired" Smith, in spite of the fact that there is no resemblance in content. Again, in a case where Smith can be checked, he comes up wanting.

THE TEMPLE
The temple ceremony or the endowment is nothing less or more than Joseph Smith's copying of Masonic rituals. Joseph Smith received the first three degrees of Masonry on March 15th and 16th of 1842. Less than two months later (May 4, 1842) he gave the endowment ceremonies. (see History of the Church, vol. 5 pp. 1-2).

The three bloody oaths that Mormons used to make in the temple and changed in 1990 (the two oaths that go with the two tokens of the Aaronic priesthood and the oath that goes with the first token of the Melchizedek priesthood) appeared in the temple ceremony in the same order as in Masonry. In both cases (temple and Masonry) the first oath mentioned the slitting of the throat. The second spoke of the cutting open of the breast so that the heart and vitals could be removed and the third mentioned disembowelment. In all three cases the same penalties were demonstrated. This all appears to be too similar to be a coincidence.

I met Reed Durham, who was president of the Mormon History Association, when I was at the University of Utah in 1973-1974 working on my masters degree in engineering. He wrote the following. "...I am convinced that in the study of Masonry lies a pivotal key to further understanding Joseph Smith and the Church... The many parallels found between early Mormonism and the Masonry of that day..." Joseph Smith was adept at copying and using other materials to create what he needed. The temple ceremony is just Masonry modified. It is copied from the book "Freemasonry Exposed" by William Morgan who published it in 1827. The wording in the Mormon temple ceremony, in many cases, is exactly the same as from this book. I will quote from Morgan's book page 84. "He (the candidate) is raised on what is called the five points of fellowship.... This is done by putting the inside of your right foot to the inside of the right foot of the person to whom you are going to give the word, the inside of your knee to his, your left hands on the back of each other..." Mormons who went to the temple before 1990 will find this quite striking. There are many more examples, but this one will do to make the point. The 1990 version of the temple ceremony removed this section since it was an obvious copy from Morgan's book and women objected to being held so closely by a stranger while at the veil.

CHURCH MEMBERS

I believe deceit goes on at all levels of the church by seasoned members, with much of it well intended, but done with incredible ignorance. The degree of deceit varies with the intelligence, knowledge and church position of the seasoned members involved. When a member of the church brings up a historical or doctrinal problem, a seasoned member has learned how to give pat answers which give a superficially satisfactory resolution. For example, the question of why is the temple so similar to Masonry may get asked. The standard answer is that Masonry goes back to Solomon's temple. Any reasonable inquiry into that myth will show it to be absurd historically. This does seem however to satisfy one who does not dig any deeper and does not want to be troubled. Senior members of the church dole out such dribble all the time. In many cases they do not know themselves and give such a response because it was satisfactory to them. More intelligent individuals, such as Hugh Nibley, use their prolific creation of unrelated materials to confuse the question and the normal church member then concludes all must be well because someone wrote so much about it and the member is too overwhelmed to be troubled anymore. Is this deceit? I think it is. A seasoned member usually wants to give the impression of having superior knowledge and spirituality with no doubts expressed verbally about his or her faith. This facade is required in leadership positions and is also required in most Mormon social circles. The senior levels of the church are composed of individuals who hide behind their positions of trust and are experts at giving great impressions. This is subtle and powerful deception.

Glad to be Out

Mormons have a lot of fear when thinking about leaving the church. All authoritarian organizations put fear into its members teaching that terrible things will happen to you if you ever leave. The Jehovah's Witnesses and other groups are actually worse than Mormonism in creating fear. Actually life outside of Mormonism is much better than I could have imagined. I wish I would have done this years ago when I first began to realize there were problems with Mormonism. I would have been better yet, to have never joined.References for all these comments are found in the books and links listed on this web site


Documentation in a format for non-Mormons
Documentation in a format for Mormons

Return to Recovery from Mormonism Web Site

E-Mail to Webmaster: Eric Kettunen