Illegal or not?

Public forum for those seeking support for their experience in the LDS Church.
angel333
Posts: 17
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 04:06

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by angel333 » 29 Jan 2014, 08:28

I guess what I should explain is that we have our own forum.Not just put out on facebook. Maybe thats where everyone is confused.

angel333
Posts: 17
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 04:06

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by angel333 » 29 Jan 2014, 08:31

I'm not going to respond anymore either.Its not what I thought it was.I do apologize.

User avatar
Daeruin
Posts: 439
Joined: 15 Dec 2013, 20:56
Location: Utah

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by Daeruin » 29 Jan 2014, 09:31

Angel333, I totally understand your position. I wouldn't have gone to church either. It's important to me to obey the law, and if the government says to stay off the roads, I'll stay off the roads. For the same reason, if same sex marriage is legalized, I will uphold and support that law as well regardless of the opinions of my local leaders. I don't understand the mentality of people who will take a local bishop's word over the law of the country I'm living in. On the other hand, I think a lot of people view driving and traffic laws as pretty bendable. Virtually everyone ignores speed limit laws, and getting a traffic ticket is seen as a minor offense at worst. I think that may be part of what makes a lot of people feel like the injunction to stay off the roads can be ignored.

I'm sorry that some of the replies here didn't feel supportive to you. When I made my first post on this forum, I was actually pretty mad about some of the replies for a while, for exactly the reason you mentioned. I didn't feel like some people were really listening to me and sympathizing with my point of view. One of the people I was annoyed at was Curtis (hi, Curtis!) because his first response to my post felt pretty abrupt. I've since learned that's part of his manner—he can be a bit blunt. But I've also learned that he's an extremely caring and accepting individual, and I've learned to really value his input here. As DarkJedi and a few other have pointed out, we are all different, and everyone has different opinions and priorities—that's actually one of the values of this forum. Because we're all different and there's no one right answer, what we often do on this forum is offer our own take on the original post, whether it's in agreement or not. Overall, I've found that I really value hearing the different range of opinions, because it helps me understand that there's not just one way of looking at a problem, and there are many possible choices for me out there. I'm really sorry if our replies weren't supportive to you. I'm sure that wasn't anyone's intention, and I hope you stick around.
"Not all those who wander are lost" —Tolkien

User avatar
On Own Now
Posts: 1754
Joined: 18 Jan 2012, 12:45

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by On Own Now » 29 Jan 2014, 09:34

angel333,

As to whether this is the right forum, what I'd say is that the general tone here is that, yeah, there are frustrating things that people in the church do and say, but the people here are trying to find peaceful resolution. Not in all things and not all the time, but at least most of the time it seems to be that way. But in doing so, we all understand that we can sometimes elevate frustrations to a point well beyond our ability to be successful in our endeavors to stay LDS. Much of the benefit of this community is in helping to find a balance. It simply does no good to be angry all the time at the Church or its members.

Your voice is welcome here. I hope you stay, because I think this community is strengthened by many voices, and I also think it can help you work through the issues you are having. FWIW, I have found this forum to be extremely helpful in my own situation. I appreciate the variety. I have learned so much in terms of coping in my own situation.

I was interested in your post about all this. You are trying to work through something frustrating. I think we can all relate to it. Your specific case is one we have all faced in general terms. But I also think that a post like this has to be more than a simple rant, or it has no value, either to the author or to the reader. So, usually, when people here post about frustrating experiences, it is because they are trying to work their way through it... to come to some acceptable place where they can continue to operate. Sometimes they are just cataloging their experiences and how they came to terms with it, or what they learned (see mackay11's recent thread about his outburst at Church). Sometimes people are sincerely seeking the thoughts from others about how to temper their feelings (see joni's recent post about being a woman in the temple). But, if their only purpose is to rant, then they typically find some 'validation' by people saying that they agree that it's frustrating, but they also will find voices trying to offer ways to set it aside.

In that regard, when it comes to dealing with the things that people do or say in the Church, I can tell you that I find it helpful to put myself in "their" shoes and see it from "their" perspective sometimes. They are just living their faith, and I think this is a particularly bland example of hypocrisy... hell, I've seen far, far worse hypocrisy by religious people in and out of the Church, and I've come to a place in my life where I don't let myself get wrapped around the axle because of it. My beliefs belong to me. To the extent that I feel spiritual enlightenment, it is by my own actions, not those of others.

I would not have gone to Church under the circumstances you described. I think your Bishop was wrong to say the roads where "fine", but I can't fault him for holding Church. Why? Because, as I said in my earlier post, I would go to a Super Bowl Party under those same conditions, so it would, in fact, be hypocritical of me to be angry at the Bishop. Ultimately, I believe it is important to live and let live. I wouldn't have gone, others would. It makes absolutely no difference to me.

But onto the next element of all this. I have to tell you, there is zero chance I would have gone onto facebook to call the decision to hold services into question. The one and only thing I might have done on facebook, doubtful, but in the realm of possibility, is to say, "Well, those of you who are going, enjoy it, be safe, and I'll see you next week." Again, it comes down to the concept that my worship belongs to me yours belongs to you and theirs belongs to them.

Just to be completely clear, I believe your facebook post is easily interpreted as an attack. I'm sure you didn't intend it that way, but that is the way it reads.

I think it is impossible to be happy or to reach spirituality in our own lives if we define ourselves by what we are NOT. Feeling anger at the faith of others is never going to end well, IMO. Rather, I think it is important to own our own faith and be at peace with it. If there is something I do or don't do, but I feel right with God about it, then I don't need to answer to anyone else about it, and just as importantly, I don't need them to answer to me about it.
- - -
“Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves.” ― Carl Jung
- - -
"Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another." ― Romans 14:13
- - -

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16808
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by Curt Sunshine » 29 Jan 2014, 10:09

We are a support forum - and real support includes honesty in how we respond to each other. If you want an echo chamber of nothing but positive support and reinforcement, that's not us. We give that type of support all the time, but we also give constructive criticism. A big part of our mission is helping people learn how to find individual solutions, and we can't do that with nothing more than flowers and sunshine.

To repeat:

1) I believe your Bishop was wrong to hold church if the official government announcement was to stay off the roads. I personally would not have gone with that sort of announcement in place. I believe you are justified in your viewing the Bishop's message as wrong.

2) I would not have posted something on Facebook that absolutely would be seen as an attack on the Bishop. There is no way, objectively, to read what you wrote and not see how other members would see it as an attack. I believe in going to the person directly and addressing it with him or her, if I feel strongly about something. In this case, I would have contacted the Bishop and asked if he was aware of the non-travel order and simply said that I believe in following the law and protecting my family and, therefore, wouldn't be attending in that sort of situation.

3) You said you can't stomach going to church with people who would break the law, because they are hypocrites. That leaves only two possible scenarios:

a) You never, ever break the law - no speeding, no changing lanes without signalling, etc. You could say those are "minor violations", but they still are laws. If you never break the law, and if you won't attend church with people who do, you might as well accept the fact that you need to stop going to church anywhere - since there is no congregation of people who keep all the laws of the land perfectly.

b) You do occasionally break the law, so not going to church with lawbreakers makes you a hypocrite just like the other hypocrites in church.

I accept that every one of us is a lawbreaker (governmental and/or moral) to some degree, and I accept the fact that going to church means, by definition, I will be attending meetings with fellow hypocrites - if I define hypocrite as meaning not living perfectly the ideal standards I espouse (which, for the record, is not how I define the word).

Therefore, while I disagree with the Bishop's decision to hold meetings, and while I agree with your decision not to attend, the situation you described is not one that would prompt me to publicly challenge the Bishop or start quoting scriptures at him and the members who felt they were defending him - and I certainly wouldn't label them as egregious hypocrites over it.

That's my honest answer to your post - that, yes, it sounds like it was illegal, but I would not have reacted in the way you did. I also will add that I think you have an opportunity to learn from this experience, repent (meaning nothing more than change the way you act in the future, with NO horrible meaning at all) and let it help you find more peace than you obviously have right now. What you take from this, however, is completely up to you.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

Roy
Posts: 6112
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by Roy » 29 Jan 2014, 10:42

angel333 wrote:Would someone let me know what law of the land Im suppose to obey and what law of the land Im not suppose to obey so i can have a clean Temple recommend.
Hey Angel,

Typing on a keyboard is such a limited way to communicate, but I will try my best. I wanted to add that I see through a lens of the buffet or cafeteria of Mormonism. Noboby does everything that we are taught all the time. Everyone has their favorite dishes in the grand buffet. This isn't very apparent as long as you perceive that those around you are eating the same things as you are but can get more and more jarring as your tastes differ from the norm.

I have a few examples. Pres. Kimball said in a talk once that he hopes that church members won't play with face cards. I have been told by some that filing for bankruptcy is not being honest with my fellow men and will put temple recommends in jeopardy. I was recently asked by some new converts what type of tea they could drink because they are getting conflicting and confusing opinions on the subject. My MIL thinks birth control is a sin (SWK once compared it to idolatry).

If we were to poll an average ward on the above topics, I imagine that there would be a range of opinions. I hope that we can agree that all of these people can also hold "clean" TRs.

The major frustration for me is the members that believe that their understanding of the Gospel is THE GOSPEL and then try to impose that understanding on others.

Now to get back to the subject at hand. The church does believe in sustaining the law. The church also teaches sustaining its leaders. There is a dichotomy here in your scenario and different people can deal with that as they may.

Finally the church as I understand it is pretty liberal about allowing members to have divergent believes, OTOH the church (at least locally) can be almost draconian about public expressions of those divergent views. I wish that we could have public dialogues about differing views but knowing that this is not culturally accepted - I do my best to keep myself out of trouble.

I am not one that expects to change anything. I do respect people that take risks to make change. MLK is a good example of just such a person and I believe that there are similar people working to change the church on the inside. As for me, I am just trying to navigate the buffet/cafeteria of Mormonism the best that I can.

P.S. I have participated at StayLDS for years. Sometimes I will bring up a topic and expect a certain response from the group. Sometimes, I will get that response and sometimes not. We are definately diverse but for the most part we manage to be respectful and supportive.
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

User avatar
Forgotten_Charity
Posts: 779
Joined: 11 Jul 2012, 18:33

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by Forgotten_Charity » 29 Jan 2014, 11:22

Hi angel. I'm in between on this. Mostly because I am as passive or non confrontational as they come. Except for 1 situation. The physical and emotional welfare of those around me. In that situation I have been known to throw my whole body spirit might and mind into it until the situation changes to safe to protect people, even complete strangers.

However that has resulted in numerous physical and emotional scares to me that I wouldn't want to push on anyone for taking the stances I have, even though I have no regrets.

In this situation it is best to talk to them
Privately and respectfully to make sure they understand not really just the law but the spirit of the law and the safety of others. If he or anyone else regardless of their position still recommended others into possible harms way I would have taken it to the authorities just because it is my moral obligation to not let things pass by that are causing people's safety to be at stake. I personally couldn't live with myself if I didn't actively speak up in a nice way and say something and do all I can to make sure that the situation was brought back to safe.

Outside of that I let people be people, we all have different beliefs and priorities. I personally just can't call myself decent or a good person if I stand by I. Safety, harassment, or belittling of others and do nothing.

There are positive ways to do many things, but if push comes to shove and people safety is concerned then it needs be what it needs be. I don't think personally it reached that level yet. Only if the person was guilt tripping people to come to church in that situation would it have reached that level.

Otherwise I would have kept it private.

Don't feel to bad. We all are people that learn how to interact with one another throughout out lives and most of the time we can't even treat animals right and safety let alone humans.

Attention--humans in board--learning in progress.

angel333
Posts: 17
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 04:06

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by angel333 » 29 Jan 2014, 12:42

I have discovered from all of your comments that I was wrong.I went and apologized to everyone on facebook that I offended.I now will go back into hiding and keep my feelings to myself where they belong anyway .It was nice meeting your people.I apologize once again. I would delete this whole thread but I don't know how. Maybe someone who knows how will do it for me.

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16808
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by Curt Sunshine » 29 Jan 2014, 15:15

I hope it's okay with you that we leave this thread here and open. We all learn a lot from what people post, and I think there are a lot of lurkers who never comment who also can learn from your experience - both from the initial response and from your humble last comment.

I just want to add one thing about which I feel strongly:

Your voice needs to be heard. There needs to be someone who will question bad decisions by leaders. We need to hear all the instruments in the orchestra, so to speak, or the sound we hear won't be as beautiful as it could be.

I think all we are saying is that the method you used could have been better - and I think there is a wonderful lesson in that for ALL of us here. ALL of us need to remember that tone and context and specific words matter - and ALL of us need to keep trying to get better and better at how we respond, online and in person. I know I can be too blunt sometimes, so there has been a good lesson in this thread for me, as well.

For that opportunity to re-learn something, I thank you - sincerely. I hope you continue to read our posts and, whenever you feel like you have a unique perspective to share, comment in the discussion threads.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

fnts
Posts: 20
Joined: 17 Jul 2013, 10:48

Re: Illegal or not?

Post by fnts » 30 Jan 2014, 14:53

FWIW, I'm disturbed by the actions of your bishop. It's one thing for an individual to chose to ignore the law in that situation. It's an entirely different matter for someone in a position of authority to ask other people to put their safety at risk; especially knowing how many people strive to do exactly what their bishop says (as is evident in your facebook replies). There is no question he was in the wrong.

After considering it and reading all the responses to this post, I have to say that I'm glad you posted your reply on facebook. Personally, I wouldn't have done it. That's just not something I would do. However, I'm often glad there are people out there who do things that I wouldn't do. I'm not saying we should start picking facebook fights. But I can see the possibility of someone in your ward feeling like they HAD to go to church because the bishop said so. And maybe your reply helped them see that "it's not that simple".

Post Reply