As a once Mormon (kid years) that takes guts. Then he took it to the next level when he continued although the mic was cut. No one in that room made a sound. It was as though they were witnessing a murder, and not one would help, as their fate would be the same as his.

Geez shut those kids up!

balls

*balls

Where is the Octuple upvote option?

To the LDS church, Prop 8 is a moral issue. Which is why they are so against it. Just read the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Whatever happened to "Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged"?

*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by nibiyabi.

He sounded calm and rational. You know what that means...

HE'S A WITCH!!!

Rabble rabble rabble rabble

I've never seen an active Mormon criticize his church. Impressive.

very very amazingly ballsy and brave. but cameras are not allowed in mormon church. i wonder how they pulled that one off. id call fake but everything else is quite convincingly mormon. the walls. the podium. the page numbers on the wall behind him for which hymns theyre going to sing. the dress and the silence of the adults. and the child sounds everywhere.

He will be dead by morning.

I think the skeptics / critical thinkers of the world should contribute to a fund that gives out awards and scholarships for people like this. It can mean all the difference, when a person is unable to break away from that kind of a culture because of their social means are tied into a members-only club where a set of beliefs is your membership card.

An interest-free school loan might mean that person going to a Mmormon school vs. a secular one, where he can continue to think his brazen and unholy thoughts, possibly contributing to the society at large...

"Mormons are people who can't spell "moron" correctly..." -South Park

>> ^peggedbea:
very very amazingly ballsy and brave. but cameras are not allowed in mormon church. i wonder how they pulled that one off.


Higher quality DV cams are very small these days. You could sneak 'em in anywhere you could bring a cell phone.

Pretty sure the old guy was saying "My apologies..." just as the video cut, just in case he didn't undermine the guy enough already.

Seriously, what was that guy thinking having his own opinion in a church?

They cut HIS mic, but not the screaming kid's...?!

^ they never cut the screaming kids.
to me its only the sound of sunday morning at the family ward! its quite a shock when youre old enough to go to the singles ward. so silent....

braindonut:
i know you could use a cell phone or a super small camera, but i just cant imagine a true believing mormon desecrating their chapel like that. its a really big deal actually.

to dft's statement.
one of my very best friends is mormon. hes just now trying to go inactive, but before that he frequently criticized the church. like ive heard it from him every sunday for the last 4 years. even his returned missionary active and faithful brother has his critique. well ok, all the mormons i know with graduate degrees and a visa criticize the church. when i was active for a very brief confused stint, i frequently criticized and mocked the church. its rare. but it happens.

so that said, im technically mormon and can go to church anytime i want, if my friend whos fed up with the churches behavior decided to bare this kind of testimony, i would sneak a camera in film it and not feel any kind of spiritual damnation. but if i were caught my active children and parents and cousins and i (im not active but i do have to deal with mormons daily) would be socially ostracized and humilated. i would have second thoughts about putting that kind of grief on them. and active mormons are actively encouraged to limit socializing with non-members. and disdainful inactive members who are not directly related to them (but they are encouraged to bring them back into the fold). its just really hard for me to imagine anyone affiliated with the church bringing a camera in and secretly filming a testimony of all things. its a bigger deal than youd think.

yeah, but I'd assume making this kind of statement he wouldn't really care that he had a friend record him. in my opinion it's definitely not staged.

I heard they make exceptions to that no-camera policy sometimes, too. So the guy filming wouldn't get kicked out, but maybe would have got some strange looks from the congregation.

heres a story.

ive had a really really awful summer. my mormon mothers answer to this is that its time for me to do some internal searching and its time for me to find a "strong man". her suggestion to how this is to be accomplished is to join one of the online LDS dating services. my mormon friend mentioned above also received the same suggestion from his mother this summer. i would never do that any poor mormon boy of course but i did have to check these sites out for hilarity factor.

what i found was not hilarious. it was heart breaking. lonely mormon virgins who do not fit into the uniquely american mormon cultural ideals of how youre supposed to be. noone does of course. but those who can, fake it and end up married in their early 20's and fulfill their eternal obligation to their father in heaven to breed and be the patriarchs over perfect mormon families. those who cant fake it end up lonely 30 year old virgins on religious internet dating sites. watching everyone around them "happily" married and spiritually right with god. an unmarried mormon woman isnt really responsible for this crime. an unmarried mormon man is an abject eternal failure. the pressure from the church to marry in the temple and breed is huge. there is no place in church culture for anyone who doesnt socially or politically match up with the rest of the group. so on this site were talking about uber nerdy dudes who would have a hard time "fitting in" within the confines of normal society. but there are of course other nerds in the world with which they could find satisfying friendships and a home of sorts. but theyre quietly encouraged their whole lives NOT to look for companionship outside of the confines of their religion. to associate with too many non mormons is to tempt the devil and fall prey to damnation. my heart hurts for these men. my search for amusement brought me great sadness and pain.

one of them is one of my best and only friends. he is the male version of myself. i have alot of anger in me right now for what an oppressive religious upbringing can do to someone with a mental illness, an addictive disposition and a natural rebellious streak.

Real courage. Witness.

I like religion. Nice communities. Too bad for all the supernatural hogwash, which is probably the root of why prop 8 was so important to them.

Sure, nice communities when they don't ostracize for dissenting opinions, or perpetuate the subjugation of minorities or women.

That being said, I'm finding myself actively seeking out communities based around other things, like Theatre. I am a bit jealous of the community spirit of some of the more healthy, open minded small churches.

..woh wrong button.. nothing to see...

It's been pretty well documented that "the church" did not spend bazillions of dollars on prop 8 aside from a pittance in travel expenses. Church members donated a lot from their own pockets, but that's cool. I think official church policy states that they don't support political parties or candidates, but encourages all members to be involved politically however their conscience dictates.

So for this guy to be getting all testy over prop 8 is just goofy because he had to have known for years (if he is what he claims) what church policy was. From what I can see, Sunday meetings are not a proper venue for political brouhahas. Pretending this is 'censorship' is baloney. Church is not the time to have a political debate. If he's so outraged, then he should go talk to the Bishop in private. Pulling a grandstand in a church meeting isn't courage. That's just rude. Bishop there was probably not thinking 'gotta censor this guy!'... He was probably thinking, 'not the right time and place'.

And the presence of the camera rolling before he had even started making his point? Come on. No one sits there and records people talking in church. The cameraman knew that this guy was going to be saying something controversial. Mr. Prop 8 had his little 'talk' all written out on paper in advance. Speech in advance. Cameraman in place. Yeah - this is totally a publicity stunt being done by a guy who wants controvery. It wouldn't surprise me if in a few days there was another video from this guy talking about his 'harrowing experience' and the 'agonizing fallout' of his little stunt. Pht - when you plan something you know is going to be controversial in advance fella then you don't get to whine about it.

You guys were all upset at the congressman who shouted out during Obama's speech. Howcome you're all, "This guy has guts to do this..." for the rudeness of Mr. Prop 8, but you're all like, "What a jerk!" for Mr. "Liar!"? Howcome one guy is 'couragous' and the other is 'rude' when they're both doing publically pre-arranged stunts for the purpose of generating controversy?

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

You guys were all upset at the congressman who shouted out during Obama's speech. Howcome you're all, "This guy has guts to do this..." for the rudeness of Mr. Prop 8, but you're all like, "What a jerk!" for Mr. "Liar!"? Howcome one guy is 'couragous' and the other is 'rude' when they're both doing publically pre-arranged stunts for the purpose of generating controversy?


can you honestly not see the difference between someone interrupting someone elses speech with heckling and someone waiting their turn to give their own speech?

whats going on in this video is something that happens the first sunday of every month. its fast and testimony sunday. members fast and then those who feel compelled take turns and bare their testimonies to the congregation. he waited his turn, felt compelled and bared his testimony.

and of course the camera was present because he knew what he was saying was going to get him kicked out. but he had the courage and strength and felt strongly enough to say it.

and the mormon church was VERY ACTIVELY INVOLVED in a perpetuating a fear and smear propaganda campaign to its members during church services. across the nation. what kind of church finances were spent i have no idea, but i do know for a fact that church officials intentionally sent down memos full of lies and hate and political opinions to be shared with the priesthood and relief society. to scare them into to supporting prop 8 initiatives nationwide. one of those lies was that legalized gay marriage would threaten and abolish their ability to get married in the temple. (which is EXTREMELY important) they told members all across the country that if gays were allowed to get married, if the church refused to marry a gay couple in the temple then the law would take away their ability to marry ANYONE in the temple. sounds ridiculous to me. but it sounds terrifying to millions of people who think that god himself guides church appointments and would never ever ever allow someone who would lead his people astray to be appointed into a position of authority.

how do i know this? I WAS FUCKING THERE.

^if the church refused to marry a gay couple in the temple then the law would take away their ability to marry ANYONE in the temple.

However, it is their fear. They are afraid of discrimination laws. Men's clubs were forced to accept women under federal law. Why wouldn't the church be forced to marry gays?

One of the gay marriage laws that passed -- I can't remember which state it was -- added a clause that said that churches were free to NOT marry gays. That they would never be forced to do so.

I thought that was a brilliant move.

Take away their main fear, and would Mormons have been so monetarily willing to overturn the law? They would still be against gay marriage, but they wouldn't be so invested in protecting their turf.

Let their president get the word from God eventually, just like he did when blacks were no longer barred from being priests -- well after civil rights legislation and after they realized that the priest ban was preventing their growth into black-skinned neighborhoods and nations. I have no doubt -- and have predicted to my very conservative Mormon brother and his son, that the President will do so. Maybe not in the next decade, but it is coming.

As for the "hate filled" memos -- my nephew shared with me what was sent to him. He thought it would change my mind. The memos weren't hate-filled. Misguided, certainly. A complete lack of understanding of the biology of being gay. A complete lack of understanding that when they equate being gay with being immoral that that feels like an assault against a gay person's humanity. But not hate filled. Not like that crazy guy who pickets outside military funerals with signs that say "God Hates Fags."

Anyway. I repeat what a smart move it was on the part of that one state that protected a church's right to be stupid. There are plenty of churches who embrace gay people as fully human, expressing their full selves as God (if you go in for that) made them.

If gays walk away from the Mormon church, bringing their families with them, that is the quickest way to get the President to suddenly hear from God that it is okay to be gay.

(Does everyone know what I mean by the President talking to God? It's true. The head of the church is a committee of 12? 13?, the President of which talks to God. Or rather, God talks to him. Always him, of course. So this guy has the ability to change core documents and doctrines of the church.

Every man in the Mormon church is a priest, through whom the Holy Spirit flows.

However, until God told the President differently, black men were barred from being priests. They could be members of the church, but not priests. The original documents said that their black skin was the mark of Cain, they are descendents of Cain. So they couldn't be priests. But then -- after the civil rights movement -- God decided to finally forgive Cain once and for all.

The timing is just coincidence, of course.

The Mormon religion has, overall, been a great blessing to my brother, giving him a structure within which to raise his family and re-define himself outside his dysfunctional family of origin. Not my choice, but his and it works for him.

The Mormon religion is also one crazy ass thing. I swear.)

I had a short stint in Utah when I was growing up. During this time my mother became friends with some members of the LDS church and converted to Mormonism while me and my father did not.
My mom fell ill and the visits from her Mormon friends became less frequent until one day my father got a phone call that said something to the effect of: "We don't feel comfortable coming to visit your wife unless you and your son come see what our church is about."
At nine years old I saw the hypocrisy of this church, and it's stayed with me since.

Man, I loved this submission.

^ yes. also the mormon church already descriminates when it comes to temple marriage. you cant get married in the temple if youre not a member, you cant get married in the temple if you smoke,if you have premarital sex, drink alcohol, drink coffee... you cant get married in the temple you havent gone through the year long classes to get your temple recommend and blah blah blah on and on.
so no openly homosexual person is ever going to get a temple recommend, so they will never get into the temple anyway. it seems pretty open and shut.

and youre right, "hate-filled" was probably a harsh term i dont know any "hate-filled" mormons. and the mormons in my own family would never support any kind of discriminatory political initiative against any group, especially not gay, if they didnt feel that they were personally being threatened.

The difference? Both Mr. Liar and Mr. Prop 8 were rudely hijacking venues that were not theirs to hijack. No real difference.

As far as 'hypocrisy' in churches go... You know - there isn't a single organizations of human beings on the planet that doesn't have this problem because they're filled with - you know - human beings. Humans are imperfect, selfish, hypocritical, and generally selfish, unthinking goobers. You run across a few now and then who let thier bad habits spill over into what should be their better nature. I think it's more healthy to be patient with them rather than to hold it against them.

Certainly I do not blame the organizations they happen to belong to - many of which are designed to improve them and make them better people. There are always 'stories' about people in churches, political movements, and so forth about how awful they are. There are a billion other unheard stories where people do good things which get ignored in favor of the salacious tales that drip with shadenfrued.

Such as this story...

My mom fell ill and the visits from her Mormon friends became less frequent until one day my father got a phone call that said something to the effect of: "We don't feel comfortable coming to visit your wife unless you and your son come see what our church is about."

Maybe this happened. Maybe it's exaggerated bunk. All I know is that the LDS people I have met would never do such things. In fact, they regularly visit the sick, needy, widowed, and elderly on a regular basis with no expectation of recompense of any kind. To say that this anecdotal story of "convert your son or die!" is in any way representative of the total population is complete hogwash.

^pennypecker, I know I shouldn't encourage your verbose brand of fringe-right madness by responding, but I'm feeling sporting tonight, so here are a couple of pointers.

1) No offense, but you are absolutely terrible at analogies. I see you fail at it time and time again. If you'd like to stop having your ass handed to you as bea has done above, I'd kindly suggest you work harder at finding analogies that evoke at least some vague semblance of parity. This current analogy is going to continue to fail for you no matter how many times you repeat it. Let it go.

2) Unlike you, Bea is (was) actually a Mormon herself. The Mormon Church is famous for encouraging members to cut off communication with family members who have either left the church, been excommunicated or are of different religious beliefs. I've known enough Mormons and ex-Mormons to confirm this is not even controversial within the community, although individual Mormons may choose to frame it in less damning terms. One of my very close friends was disowned by his Mormon father after coming out of the closet in his teens. Luckily, his mother was smart enough to divorce dad and leave the deranged home wrecking fanaticism of the Mormon church far behind in the Utah dust.

1) No offense, but you are absolutely terrible at analogies.

I create perfect analogies that biased people reject. Mr. Prop 8 horned into a meeting set aside for worship with a political diatribe. Wilson interrupted a national address with his political opinion. Neither was done in the right time or place. The only difference that exists is the bias in the mind of the observer. I have no party affiliation, so I have no problem calling out both for being rude and out of line. Others perhaps are tainted with political bias, and are therefore put in a position where they have to be an apologist for one side or the other. I imagine it's a hard life to be a shill.

The Mormon Church is famous for encouraging members to cut off communication with family members who have either left the church, been excommunicated or are of different religious beliefs.

I lived in Utah for years and had a number of LDS friends, neighbors and acquaintances. One story... An older couple on my street was in a house that was a total dump. The family didn't lift a finger. The guy was a vet, and sick all the time. LDS people frequently worked on the house make thier situation better. The bishop donated a window from his own house so they could knock a hole in the wall, install an insulated window, and another guy gave them a window AC unit so they didn't have to keep using a leaky swamp cooler which aggravated the guy's lungs (he got flu all the time). Their back yard was a literal jungle, and a bunch of LDS guys and their kids came in and hauled off two whole dump-trucks full of trees & junk one weekend. That's one story, and I personally witnessed many more. When people were in need, these folks came and helped out and never asked for a dime or expected jack in return either in the form of church attendance or recompense. It was service in its purest form.

Now - as I said - I'm sure there are exceptions. There are always a few bad apples in the bunch. But I know for a fact that the official CHURCH position is that it bad to alienate family or friends. I've seen their manuals, and thier documents. Family is everything to them. They don't as a matter of policy 'cut off' anyone. Anyone 'cutting off' someone is not following the LDS church's official positions, doctrines, or Christ's example. It sounds to me more like you're fixating on a few people that are breaking step with church doctrine.

So - not to put too fine a point on it - but your claim that it is official church position to cut off communication with family members is complete and utter shash. I suggest you supply some sort of documentation for your claim, or your argument has to be relegated into the "unsupported rumors" pile where most crap arguments belong.

They didn't have to be Mormons to do that, just good people. I don't see how that story is relevant?

Relevant because the old couple's needs were relayed to the local church bishop by a concerned LDS neighbor. The old couple were members, but weren't regularly attending. I got this as I helped them haul off the trash. A need was seen and they stepped up. The couple was not 'alienated', and the service was not held over thier heads as a carrot.

Guys like dystopian are claiming that the official church position is to 'cut them off'. "OK now be good and come to church or NO AC UNIT FOR YOU...!" I relate this story (and I've got a ton more) to point out that the image of horrible LDS people cutting off family & friends as a matter of official church policy is baloney. When it happens, then it's an isolated case of individuals who are NOT following church doctrine. If such behavior was brought to the attention of an LDS bishop, they'd call such persons to repent.

I've seen LDS communities in Virginia, Illinois, Utah, Michigan, California, Missouri, and Texas. It's pretty much the same wherever you go. They are generally honest, hard working, family oriented, service minded people. I reject the erroneous, misleading claim that it is official church position to be isolationist and cruel. Bad experiences are not the result of official church doctrine. Like most cases where people slam religion - it is a matter where bad people are doing bad things and the "Church" gets blamed for it. Blame the individuals for being jackasses, and quit trying to say that they represent the entire population and organization.

Rick Riordan had a great comment in one of his Olympian books... The god Posiedon was explaining to the main character (his son) why Anteus had killed so many people in Posidon's name. "Just because people do things in my name does not mean that I approve of their actions. When people do terrible things in the name of a God, it usually says more about them than about us."

That nails it 100%. These people who are 'cutting off' thier family members are not doing it because Church told them to, or because "God" told them too. They're doing it because they're jerks, and they'd do the same thing no matter what religion (or non-religion) they belonged to. They're just using the church as an excuse to justify what they're doing when the church would tell them to do the opposite.

Right on brother. I grew up Mormon, and it was the polite intolerance and dogmatic hypocrisy that drove me out.

Example:
Me: "If Heavenly Father says not to kill, how come you're in the army?"
Dad: "The Book of Mormon teaches us to obey the Law of The Land."
Me: <HEADASPLODE>

More recently, the fact that they use their money and influence to further oppressive political goals is what really gets my undies in a twist.

More recently, the fact that they use their money and influence to further oppressive political goals is what really gets my undies in a twist.

Gay people use thier money and influence to further political goals that other people would find oppressive. I see no difference except whatever bias in the eye of the beholder. What you call an 'oppressive political goal' someone else would call a 'defense of thier civil rights'.

I don't have a problem with gays spending their money and time to advance a cause they believe in. I also don't have a problem with LDS people spending thier time and money to advance a cause they believe in. That's the political process - and everyone is welcome to participate in whatever way they please. It's all good.

Prop 8 didn't go the way the gay lobby wanted because it was bad policy with enough elements to make voters inclined to vote against them. You can call it 'lies' or 'propoganda' if you want, but the fact remains there was enough meat on the bones to motivate the votes. The gay lobby needs to learn a lesson from that, drop back, remove the controversy, and try again. That's how things work.

Yeah... I have nothing to add to the discussion because I'm bored with discussing religion. It never leads anywhere, no one ever changes opinions, and no religion or their followers are ever wrong because god told them so, it's the holy word, blah blah blah.

I will just say that I only have ONE problem with religion: it's existence.

By the way, I like Neil deGrasse Tyson and his lectures/talks on science, my "religion"
http://www.videosift.com/video/Neil-deGrasse-Tyson-responds-to-Intelligent-Design

In the absence of facts that support your argument, just make shit up. It's depressingly effective.

And seriously, Pennypacker, I've seen your posts elsewhere, and they are always lengthy and difficult to understand the point. And you actually try to drown out the person who was present at the recording, who appears to have valid/interesting information. You offer anecdotal evidence to counter other peoples anecdotal evidence, and then denounce the use of anecdotal evidence. I struggle to see the value in your arguments; it seems like you just prefer to be as contrary as possible, but emotionally neutral, which is really boring to read through.

As a born and raised Mormon, now atheist, I can say this is appears pretty accurate for a fast and testimony, and the whole point of the meeting (since the church's early days) is to allow the congregation their opportunity to be heard. There is a distinct desire in the church to have it appear 'democratic', when it's really just a token gesture ("All who approve say 'aye'" to confirm member positions; in my 15 years no dissenters). While it is uncommon to see someone comment politically, it's a perfectly valid platform for addressing his concerns to his fellow congregants. He was respectful and spoke of his personal feelings towards the actions of the church as an organization.

That said, the bishop for the congregation is 'elected' on a volunteer basis, and it's an unpaid position. The church documents on their responsibilities are pretty bland, and essentially are concerned chiefly with getting tithing and making sure the money is accounted for. It's entirely possible the bishop is just a douche and non-representative, but that really comes down to where you church is. Mormon churches in California are a whole different animal than churches in Utah, and I'm sure that's true elsewhere.

The best I can surmise it, the altruism and goodwill of church members as more to do with the local community and individuals than the actual church itself. The church only provides a venue and a general structure. My impression of the church after leaving was that it would be great if it wasn't for all the mystical Jesus/Joseph Smith nonsense. But alas, that's the one crazy thread that binds it all together.

I can't believe this I'm saying this.... but I found myself nodding in agreement with some of the stuff that Pennypacker wrote. I usually have the same experience of him (him? maybe her, but I doubt it) as asynchronice, but this time, I thought he actually sounded.... reasonable. At times.

I'm only posting this comment because I feel like Pennypacker is getting piled on to, without any recognition that he isn't being his usual (from my experience) inflammatory self. Well, I think everyone is correct that his analogy doesn't work very well, but other than that, he is speaking from his experience and I believe that should be respected.

Nothing is perfect in this world. I believe as soon as we can truly accept that, we can begin to listen to each other and work towards some solutions to grievous problems. And the problems will never all be gone.

Because nothing is perfect in this world.

I'm never 'inflammatory'. I'm always reasonable. The only thing I ever do is calmly and rationally make a point which other people choose to be inflammatory against. I myself rarely (if ever) make an argument personal. I'll strongly make my case, and I'm not afraid to point out hypocrisy and bigotry when I see it.

In this case, we have a bunch of people in this thread that are Mormon bashing. They claim it is 'official church policy' to cut off family members. All I have done is clearly state the facts. It is not official church policy to do anything of the sort, and anyone who IS doing such things is either (A) not LDS at all or (B) not a very good practicioner of thier faith. I fail to see how such an argument could possibly be 'inflammatory' except to a person who is bigoted and has an axe to grind.

seen your posts elsewhere

M'eh - if you find the prolix nature of my text to cumbersome or weighty to digest then feel free to move on. Addressing an issue requires thought. I am not a flippant, unthinking debator who is satisfied with simply making unsupported, profane accusations and calling it an 'argument'.

the whole point of the meeting (since the church's early days) is to allow the congregation their opportunity to be heard

From my understanding, it is also not considered a place for free-wheeling political arguments or discourse. Sunday worship services are places where people come to be uplifted, share faith building experiences, or otherwise console & strengthen each other. It is not the place to get up and tell everyone how much you think everyone sucks, or how great your new car is, or whatever crap you have dribbling out your mind. People going 'off topic' like that shouldn't be surprised to have the mic cut & the bishop tug at their sleeve to take it off-line.

Their website says that LDS meetings have 3 divisions of an hour each. The meeting he got up in looks like their first one where they take their sacraments. That's not the spot for his little stunt. There's Sunday School meeting where church doctrines get discussed, and another one they call 'priesthood' or 'relief society' where men & women get split up. If he had something to get off his chest, then Sunday School or Priesthood was the place for it. Not a meeting with children and youth. Ideally, this kind of discussion is more logically done with a Bishop in private. The fact that he lined up a cameraman and had his whole speech written out proves he wasn't making a heart-felt confession. He was out for attention.