Living With Mormons

The LDS Baptism has to be one of the best arguments for Joseph Smith being a true prophet of God, but it seems the Church has overlooked this ever so ingenious of rituals.

Allow me to explain:
One of the biggest claims by apologists for the validity of the Book of Mormon is that one Joseph Smith could not possibly have written such a complicated and descriptive narrative, full of details and intricate language, at the young age of 25 without divine assistance.
But Mormon history (the real history… not the stuff the Church pieced together over the years) clearly shows that it was not only possible, but a person of Smith’s character was actually required to pull off such an immoral stunt.

However, when ol’ Joe claimed he received a revelation that all children “shall be baptized for the remission of their sins when eight years old,” he hit one out of the ball park, in my opinion.
According to Smith’s revelation, we are all born innocent and children younger than 8 years of age cannot be held accountable for their sins since they do not possess the ability to discern right from wrong.

Children turning 8 are then, allegedly, given the choice to be baptized into the LDS Church and continue their spiritual journey as an official member.

At this age, children are also beginning to develop an understanding of their own self, analyzing relationships in terms of acceptance and seeking to gain confidence in all areas of their lives.
Peer pressure and parental expectations play a large role in this child’s search for their place in society and their own importance.

In most cases, the LDS baptism is viewed by these youngsters (both boys and girls) in the same light little girls dream of one day getting married.
The child is primed from a young age to look forward to the day they will officially be accepted into the fold, albeit under the deception of it being a choice they must make.

The appearance of free will, in this case, could not be further from the truth: for most LDS children, their baptism day comes as a highly expected and anticipated event in their lives; it is a bragging right, so to speak. A rite of passage which comes wrapped in gifts and flattery. It will be viewed by their younger peer as an achievement for which one cannot wait their own, and by their elders as a responsible and mature decision.

On the other hand, a child who is not much older than 8 may begin to see past the glimmering lights of childhood fantasy and instead be compelled to rebel against the establishment (a.k.a. the teens).

So 8 is indeed the perfect age. Whether Smith realized this or not, he created the perfect precedence for LDS baptisms. If he really gave the matter this much thought and research, he’s not all bad in my book, but chances are he stuck his head inside his… hat… and pulled out the first number that came to his mind.
Either way, LDS baptisms are unique in their significance and the lack of recognition of other Christian faith’s baptisms. Mormons don’t believe in original sin, so LDS baptisms play a big role in giving the person a new identity in the Church… a fresh start.

Now, I’ll leave you all with a question (especially those of you who have children):

If you love your children… truly love your children… and you fully believe in the Gospel and doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, then you must believe that your young, non-baptized, children are pure and innocent and free from sin.

As a loving parent myself, I know I would sacrifice anything for the sake of my own children, even my own life.
So I ask: why not kill your children before they reach the age of accountability?
Of course you would be doomed for eternity to never see them again (apparently), but would you not guarantee them their eternal glory, yea, even their exaltation?

(the above question is meant as a rhetorical question and is in no way a suggestion on how to save your children’s souls. I do not believe in souls or the afterlife, so the above has really no affect whatsoever in any eternal afterlife experience fantasy)

My wife and I had a quick discussion once about whether our boys should participate in the Boys Scouts of America program.
Although we didn’t quite come to any conclusions, the topic has got me thinking more and more about what it means to be a Boy Scout (especially in Utah) and how I feel about the whole thing.

My oldest boy is turning 6 at the end of the Month and all of his friends are active church-goers (notice I didn’t call them Mormons), so his social development will soon depend highly on his involvement in such enterprises.

For example, on the Sundays he doesn’t go to church, he’s basically stuck with me (which is not a bad thing for him, yet) since none of his friends aren’t available to go, say, bowling instead. I love our Sundays together (we usually go ice skating) but I know, as he grows up, he might feel more inclined to attend church in order to be more involved in his social circle.

The Cub/Boys Scouts program in Utah is generally considered an extension of the LDS child’s role in the church. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has a verifiable stronghold on the Boy Scouts of America through the highest numbers of membership and very aggressive fund raising.
They are the largest single sponsor of units (over 30,000) nation wide.

At face value, there is nothing really wrong with that; the Church obviously feels that the Scouting program is in line with good moral, psychological, and physical development goals for the youth of the Church.
It would be fine if it ended there, but there’s clear evidence over the years that the Church’s influence over the program (followed by other religions) has changed Scouting to mean something a little different.
In essence, it has prevented the Boys Scouts of America to progress its core values along with the rest of the world.

It is a known fact that the BSA does not allow gays and avowed atheists membership into its program and in many cases has called for the expulsion of leaders and revocation of membership due to this discrimination, which has led to many court cases all the way to the Supreme Court, most of which fall in favor of the scouts on the basis of freedom of association in the Constitution.
To make matters worse, the LDS Church has stated in the past that it will withdraw from the Scouting program if forced to accept openly gay Scout leaders.

Unlike its foreign counterparts, like Canada and most of Europe, the BSA has stood strongly against changing its policies against homosexuals and atheists to, I’m sure, the heartbreak and anguish of many of its prominent leaders and members.
In countries where homosexuality is legal, other scouting programs have sprung to allow homosexuals to take leadership roles and have been equally associated into the World Organization of the Scout Movement (WSOM).
However, efforts by other groups to start such organizations in the US have been consistently squashed by the BSA’s granted injunction barring the use of the terms “Boy Scout”, “Scout”, “Scouting”, etc.

According to their bylaws, “no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God.”
Since all members must recognize an obligation to God, that’s equivalent to saying that no NON-member can grow into the best kind of citizen.
That’s as ludicrous and unfounded as saying one can’t be good without religion.

Now, I don’t want to make this into a bigger issue than what it really is. They are a private organization to which no one is required to join, so they’re free to stipulate whatever standards they choose.
The Boy Scouts do plenty of good by their involvement in community services, fund raising, and educating our youth to be responsible and self-reliant citizens (and most importantly, keeping them busy and out of trouble).

But I hope the Boy Scouts of America can move forward and away from its religious-based dependence and adopt more universal and ethical standards of membership.
What if the BSA didn’t allow physically handicapped individuals into their program?
What about blacks or Hispanics?
The Equal Opportunity Policy of The Scout Association in the United Kingdom is an example of the direction towards which this side of the lake should be aiming:

“To enable young people to grow into independent adults the Scout Method encourages young people to question what they have been taught. Scouts and Venture Scouts who question God’s existence, their own spirituality or the structures and beliefs of any or all religions are simply searching for spiritual understanding. This notion of a search for enlightenment is compatible with belief in most of the world’s faiths. It is unacceptable to refuse Membership, or question a young person’s suitability to continue to participate fully in a Section, if they express doubts about the meaning of the Promise.”

It’s time we recognize we’re passing our prejudices and insecurities to our children and encourage our LDS Scouts to become Boy Scouts of America.

Historian Fawn Brodie might make a good case against Joseph Smith by exposing his shady past in No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith and the Ostlings may as well describe the Church’s empire for what it truly is, while also peeking into various open sores in its history, doctrine, and governance in Mormon America – The Power and the Promise (arguably one of the best and most balanced pieces of literature on the LDS Church by non-Mormons), but neither book can summarize so precisely and in so few pages the kind of mindset required to send any Mormon running from the Temple as The Berenstain Bears and the Double Dare.

If you’re not familiar with the Berenstain Bears books and you have children, you’re a bad parent. Ok, maybe not, but you could improve your approval rating (a la Calvin and Hobbes) by picking one up at your local library on your next visit. The Berenstains (the authors) have an amazing ability to communicate to children some of life’s most universal experiences and problems in a very entertaining way.

In this book, The Double Dare, Brother Bear is pressured by Too-Tall and his gang to steal a watermelon from Farmer Ben’s patch. Brother Bear is reluctant to follow their lead, but the gang is quick to apply the ultimate force and start calling him “chicken” and clucking at him. In a very McFlyish manner, Brother Bear succumbs to the gang’s pressure and proceeds to try to steal the watermelon but is then caught red-handed by Farmer Ben.

After this incident, the Berenstains beautifully write what could arguably be one of the biggest lessons in a child’s life, all in about 3 pages, which I will quote here:

“‘Well’, said Ben as they walked through his chicken yard, ‘chickens aren’t very bright. But they’re too smart to do something stupid just because somebody calls them chicken.’
‘I guess so,’ admitted Brother.

Just ahead was the meadow where Ben’s sheep were grazing. One of them – a large ram – took it into his head to start running. And run he did – straight for the highway!
‘Your sheep are headed for the highway, Ben!’ cried Brother.
‘Don’t worry,’ said Ben. ‘Shep, my old sheepdog, will take care of ‘em.’ Shep raced ahead and cut the sheep off before they got there.

‘Sheep are like that,’ said Ben. ‘Follow a leader anywhere – off a cliff, if that’s what the leader decides. And some folks are like that too. Follow a leader wherever he goes – across a highway, over a cliff… to the edge of my watermelon patch.’ He looked at Brother, and Brother knew exactly what he was talking about.”
(They go on to share the watermelon and Brother ends up facing the gang again, but you’ll have to read the book for the exciting ending).

The Mormons love the word SHEEP!!! In fact, the scriptures are filled with references to the word and Jesus himself is referred to as “the good Shepperd” and his followers as “the flock” or sheep.
The concept of following someone blindly is Christianity’s big ticket item. Understandably so, since it would be hard to control and use people who can think for themselves and who can decide what is right or wrong outside of dogma.

However, no sane parent would teach their children to follow anyone blindly outside of religion, in all aspects of their lives, be it at school, work, or any organization. The ability to think on our feet and make logical, rational decisions is one of the most important tools available to help us successfully navigate through life.

The Berenstains have written many books dealing with many common moral dilemmas in a simple, direct, and fun way. Their only book (to date) that directly deals with religion, The Berenstain Bears and the Big Question (which is argued to be faith-promoting, but I think it’s just going over most Christians’ heads), summarizes nicely this post in a short dialogue between Sister Bear and Papa Bear.

When walking home, Sister asks Papa “Did God make questions?” to which Papa answers “Yes, Sister, mostly questions.”

When my good friend of 17 years died suddenly in a tragic car accident, I prepared to go through my first Mormon funeral.

Mormon funerals, unlike Mormons weddings, are open to anyone, whether the person is a member of the Church or not. This makes complete sense since it’s the Church’s last chance to presume the person’s level of belief and faith and use it in order to preach to those present.

I was asked by my friend’s wife to write what’s called a “Life Sketch;” the equivalent of an eulogy in other religions, which I was honored to do. I tried to focus on his character, his accomplishments, his relationship with his friends, with his children, and with his wife. I also talked about fun and funny moments in his life, his childhood (with the help from his mother), and his goals and dreams.

I was proud of the work I had done and figured he would have been proud as well.

Aside from my talk and his wife singing one of their songs, the rest was pretty much a Sunday sermon, full of references to eternal living promises, marriage covenants, and dishonest judgments on how he would certainly be in the presence of the Lord (despite the fact that he was going through one of the biggest turmoils of his life prior to his death).

I felt the focus quickly shift from his life to his life in the Church. There were so many people there. He was the kind of person who just knew everybody everywhere. Not one of them spoke. I have no doubt that there were hundreds of stories that could have been shared that day, but the day was spent glorifying a “loving God” who (allegedly) prematurely left 3 children under the age of 10 fatherless and a young wife widowed by her second attempt at wedlock, not to mention hundreds of friends and next of kin missing the presence of such a lovely person.

To be fair, I’ve attended my share of Catholic funerals and I’ll take Mormon Funeral Potatoes any day over the monotony and morbidness of the clergy’s attempt to kill the deceased once again (along with all those present) with long sermons and depressing talks of repentance and Resurrection, not to mention the required black attire.

Common sense and freedom of religion, however, tells us that a funeral, or whatever name it may have, should consist of the gathering of the deceased’s loved ones, friends and family, with the sole purpose to remember and reminisce in the life of the dead person (uh…while he/she was alive, of course).

If it had been up to me, my friend’s funeral would have been held at his favorite Brazilian restaurant. His body need not be present, but his soul, so to speak, would have been made to come alive in song, pictures, videos, and stories shared by those whom were touched in some way by his life.

A person’s religious convictions are but one of the many aspects of their character and the least upon which we need to focus after their death. I find it nearly disrespectful to hand this final dedication over to someone who, in most cases, knew little to nothing of the person outside the chapel.

Case in point, it seems that someone always brings Funeral Potatoes to a Mormon funeral. My friend hated Funeral Potatoes.