Jeff_Ricks
26th August 2005, 07:42 AM
The publisher of our local Cache Valley newspaper, The Herald Journal, recently (on July 24th) wrote an editorial where he slams former Mormons. They agreed to allow me "equal time" to respond but I've not had time to finish it yet -- probably will this weekend.
I've been meaning to type up his editorial and post it here and was finally able to squeeze it in this morning before my shower. What do you all make of it? Here it is:
Faith arguments mind numbing
Compared to other places I have lived, Utah and Cache Valley are unique in at least two ways: Almost everyone leans toward the Republican, conservative political point of view and the LDS Church is by far the dominant religion.
The debates people engage in about politics are generally pretty calm because there are not many Democrats to argue with. On the other hand, debates about religion are lively and entertaining., especially when people who have left the LDS Church try to convince those who are still believers how gullible and stupid they are.
There are a number of people who claim they are no longer members of the LDS Church who continually write long, detailed letters to the editor trying to validate their position, convince those who are faithful believers of LDS doctrine the foolishness of their beliefs, and draw them into a religious debate so they can prove that they are wrong. I’ve had conversations with many of there people, and they not only write letters to the editor but insist on having conversations with everyone they come in contact with about why they left the church and point out what they believe are the fallacies of basic LDS doctrine and principles.
For some reason many who have left the LDS Church just can’t move on with life and leave it alone. They are obsessed with trying to convince everyone who they come in contact with that they made a smart, educated choice when they left the church. It also appears that those who once held positions of leadership in the LDS Church, and those whoa went on missions when they were younger, can be the most active and vocal opponents of the religion as they try to convince the LDS faithful to do what they have done—leave the church.
A few years ago I had a conversation with a young man who wanted to write a guest column in the paper explaining why he left the church and also explain he couldn’t leave it alone. He felt compelled to convince others to his way of thinking. He wanted to do “reverse missionary work.”
He was a regular letters-to-the-editor writer and his letters prompted many of the faithful LDS to respond th his anti-Mormon claims with their letters to the editor. It took us awhile to discover that the name he used on his letter wasn’t his real name to use when he submitted his letters. When confronted with the lie, he said he didn’t want to hurt his family so he gave us a bogus name to use when he submitted his letters.
His reason for insisting on a guest column was that he didn’t believe a letter to the editor gave him the credibility the needed to convince others of this point of view. He wasn’t willing to use his real name on a quest column either. He was extremely aggressive and was not a bit happy when he was told he had to use his real name. He also tried to put an ad in the newspaper directing readers to an anti-Mormon we site but refused to put his real name on the advertisement. He felt so compelled to convince members of the church that their beliefs were foolish that he was willing to pay money to get his point across.
Some of the LDS faithful cannot refrain from taking the bait and feel obligated to respond with their own letters expressing their view of how things really are in the church. The result of the two opposing groups attempting to validate their positions is a lively scripture-filled debate in the letters to the editor that leaves most of us just shaking our heads wondering why they would spend so much time and effort trying to change someone’s mind about religion.
It’s doubtful that a letter to the editor will convince anyone to either leave of join the LDS Church. People who engage in this religious banter on the editorial page of the newspaper get so caught up trying to prove that hey are right and the other person is wrong that they leave the rest of us wondering what they are talking about.
The recent letters on this page arguing about scientific research on the DNA of Native Americans is an example of people who have left the church using scientific research to confirm their decision. They use this scientific information to try to convince others. The result is both sides of the debate have their t who allude to endless scientific evidence and quote scripture after scripture that they feel support their point of view. It gets so complicated and confusing that on one really understands what they are talking about. And the debate goes on and on.
My father once told me, “Only fools argue politics and religion.” A person’s political persuasion and religious affiliation most of the time are based upon some very personal beliefs and values. Politics and religions arguments on the editorial page of the newspaper will probably never convince anyone to change their mind. However, it does however make interesting reading and does sell lots of newspapers.
Below is my intial response to Bruce in an email, his back to me and my followup.
Bruce,
I was very surprised at your editorial on Sunday. It appears to me that your primary purpose in writing was to vilify those of our community who have left the Mormon Church. In it you made highly exaggerated claims such as they "insist on having conversations with everyone they come in contact with about why they left the church…" and "they are obsessed with trying to convince everyone who they come in contact with that they made a smart, educated choice when they left the church." You can’t possibly believe that Bruce. I write those comments off as more of an emotional venting exercise than as being factually based. Even people like **** *****, the fanatical "young man" you reference in you editorial, can’t be that way. Not only is it impossible, it’s not even close to being true.
The truth is 99% percent of those who leave the Church keep their lack of belief to themselves or share it only with others who have also left the Church. Even I, one of the more vocal letter writers only write when it’s in response to someone who writes something that I feel is incorrect, misleading, or discriminatory. Otherwise I keep to myself. If you had the time to research all of my letters, and the editorial I wrote last fall, you would find that to be the case. I and others of the former Mormon community do not appreciate being publicly lumped into the same category as the **** *****, the **** *****, and other fanatics who use an offensive, as opposed to defensive, approach in their letters and other efforts to promote their views.
On behalf of the Post-Mormon Community I ask that you please allow me equal time to respond to your editorial with a follow-up editorial to address the areas where I feel you have grossly misrepresented the majority of former Mormons of our community. The Post-Mormon Community is a non-profit corporation register in the state of Utah. Our mission is not at all to do as your editorial claims. Or official mission statement adopted by the Board of Trustees earlier this year is as follows:
"The Mission of the Post-Mormon Community is to provide and maintain systems that facilitate the growth and development of a safe and supportive community for those who leave or are considering leaving the Mormon Church."
Sincerely,
Jeff Ricks
Executive Director
Post-Mormon Community
**************************
Jeff,
I have noted your request for "equal time" to respond to my column in last Sunday's paper. I really don't get involved in the day to day things that are put on the editorial page with the exception of my every other week column. I have told Charlie that you have taken exception to what I had to say and want to write something. I would ask that you give it to him and he will decide if he wants to use it.
So you will know the subject of that column has been on my mind for a long time. You Mentioned **** *****. At One time **** pushed real hard for the newspaper to allow him to write a guest editorial to tell everyone why those who have left the LDS Church feel compelled to spread the word. Of course he didn't want to use his name so it never happened. Contrary to what you say I do believe that a good number of people who leave the LDS Church feel compelled to tell their story over and over again, they just can't leave it alone. I recently made a trip to St. George with a guy who had left the LDS Church and had to listen to him talk about it for more than 300 miles. When I go to Salt Lake I see people carrying signs and demonstrating. I have had contact with many others who have left the LDS Church and all they want to talk about is why they did it. They just can't leave it alone.
My column also pointed out that many of the faithful LDS can't resist in "taking the bait," and feel compelled to respond in kind, i.e. endless scripture references and scientific evidence to support their position. For some reason they can't seem to be able to let it alone either. They also were probably not to pleased with what I wrote.
Anyway, the column was just my opinion about the endless "Mormon Debates" we have in the letters column, that in my view don't accomplish much.
Thanks for your comments, I always wonder if anyone ever reads the stuff I write, obviously some do.
Bruce K. Smith
The Herald Journal
***********************************
Bruce,
Thank you for the quick reply. I'll send my request for equal time to Charlie. I'm more aware of **** ****** and his aggressive activist ways than I would like to be. I don't at all agree with what he does and really don't understand why he does it. The same applies to those who regularly protest on Temple square.
Bruce, I think you should consider that the reason you perceive former Mormons as you do is because you're not aware that the 99% who aren't that way ARE former Mormons because they keep it to themselves. There are far more former Mormons in Utah than you might think, as indicated by the Tribune article titled, "Keeping Members a Challenge for LDS Church." While the Church can no longer claim that they are the fasted growing religion, they CAN claim that they have one of the highest turnover rates.
I think you should also consider that a former Mormon shouldn't be so vilified by Mormons just because they stand up for themselves once in awhile. My letters to the editor have always been in response to a Mormon who I felt had crossed the line in something that they said. Former Mormons, the ones you aren’t aware of, are regularly singled out and discriminated against in Utah, either publicly as you did in your editorial, but most often in their families. The Post-Mormon Community was created to provide support for those former Mormons. When I see Mormons claiming or assuming special privilege in Utah, which happens far to often, I feel compelled to say something about it and sometimes will.
One more thing. You will find that the Mormon Church is far more public and active in how it promotes its views than is any former Mormon – even **** *****. And the church is sometimes obnoxiously aggressive in how it does so when viewed from the perspective of the 99.9% of the world who don’t agree with those views. I can tell you examples too, like the missionaries who were so aggressive with my 14 year old daughter in trying to get her to listen to them that they made her late for her bus. They didn’t apologize, they said, "There’ll be another bus." Then they almost made her miss that one. She was so late coming home from school that I was beginning to worry. Then there’s the various people that used to show up on my doorstep regularly trying to get me back into the Church, pretending to be my friend but always finding a way to work the Church into the conversation. Funny how when I resigned from the Church I’ve not seen hide nor hair of them. Shows how sincere their friendship was. Then there’s the guy at work who was so aggressive with promoting his views to the non-Mormons that he put one woman under so much stress that it triggered her MS that had been in remission for years. She now has to walk with a cane because of it. He tried for three years to get me to discuss religion with him. When I finally did and he became uncomfortable with the information I was telling him, because he couldn’t respond to it, that he backed out of the "debate," as he called it, but not before calling me evil and misguided and that he felt so sorry for my eternal soul.
Given all of the above I hope you can see how your editorial was very unfairly slanted and biased against a significant portion of our community. You might consider the appropriateness of an apology but I will only ask Charlie for equal time.
Jeff
There was no further response from Bruce.
Jeff
I've been meaning to type up his editorial and post it here and was finally able to squeeze it in this morning before my shower. What do you all make of it? Here it is:
Faith arguments mind numbing
Compared to other places I have lived, Utah and Cache Valley are unique in at least two ways: Almost everyone leans toward the Republican, conservative political point of view and the LDS Church is by far the dominant religion.
The debates people engage in about politics are generally pretty calm because there are not many Democrats to argue with. On the other hand, debates about religion are lively and entertaining., especially when people who have left the LDS Church try to convince those who are still believers how gullible and stupid they are.
There are a number of people who claim they are no longer members of the LDS Church who continually write long, detailed letters to the editor trying to validate their position, convince those who are faithful believers of LDS doctrine the foolishness of their beliefs, and draw them into a religious debate so they can prove that they are wrong. I’ve had conversations with many of there people, and they not only write letters to the editor but insist on having conversations with everyone they come in contact with about why they left the church and point out what they believe are the fallacies of basic LDS doctrine and principles.
For some reason many who have left the LDS Church just can’t move on with life and leave it alone. They are obsessed with trying to convince everyone who they come in contact with that they made a smart, educated choice when they left the church. It also appears that those who once held positions of leadership in the LDS Church, and those whoa went on missions when they were younger, can be the most active and vocal opponents of the religion as they try to convince the LDS faithful to do what they have done—leave the church.
A few years ago I had a conversation with a young man who wanted to write a guest column in the paper explaining why he left the church and also explain he couldn’t leave it alone. He felt compelled to convince others to his way of thinking. He wanted to do “reverse missionary work.”
He was a regular letters-to-the-editor writer and his letters prompted many of the faithful LDS to respond th his anti-Mormon claims with their letters to the editor. It took us awhile to discover that the name he used on his letter wasn’t his real name to use when he submitted his letters. When confronted with the lie, he said he didn’t want to hurt his family so he gave us a bogus name to use when he submitted his letters.
His reason for insisting on a guest column was that he didn’t believe a letter to the editor gave him the credibility the needed to convince others of this point of view. He wasn’t willing to use his real name on a quest column either. He was extremely aggressive and was not a bit happy when he was told he had to use his real name. He also tried to put an ad in the newspaper directing readers to an anti-Mormon we site but refused to put his real name on the advertisement. He felt so compelled to convince members of the church that their beliefs were foolish that he was willing to pay money to get his point across.
Some of the LDS faithful cannot refrain from taking the bait and feel obligated to respond with their own letters expressing their view of how things really are in the church. The result of the two opposing groups attempting to validate their positions is a lively scripture-filled debate in the letters to the editor that leaves most of us just shaking our heads wondering why they would spend so much time and effort trying to change someone’s mind about religion.
It’s doubtful that a letter to the editor will convince anyone to either leave of join the LDS Church. People who engage in this religious banter on the editorial page of the newspaper get so caught up trying to prove that hey are right and the other person is wrong that they leave the rest of us wondering what they are talking about.
The recent letters on this page arguing about scientific research on the DNA of Native Americans is an example of people who have left the church using scientific research to confirm their decision. They use this scientific information to try to convince others. The result is both sides of the debate have their t who allude to endless scientific evidence and quote scripture after scripture that they feel support their point of view. It gets so complicated and confusing that on one really understands what they are talking about. And the debate goes on and on.
My father once told me, “Only fools argue politics and religion.” A person’s political persuasion and religious affiliation most of the time are based upon some very personal beliefs and values. Politics and religions arguments on the editorial page of the newspaper will probably never convince anyone to change their mind. However, it does however make interesting reading and does sell lots of newspapers.
Below is my intial response to Bruce in an email, his back to me and my followup.
Bruce,
I was very surprised at your editorial on Sunday. It appears to me that your primary purpose in writing was to vilify those of our community who have left the Mormon Church. In it you made highly exaggerated claims such as they "insist on having conversations with everyone they come in contact with about why they left the church…" and "they are obsessed with trying to convince everyone who they come in contact with that they made a smart, educated choice when they left the church." You can’t possibly believe that Bruce. I write those comments off as more of an emotional venting exercise than as being factually based. Even people like **** *****, the fanatical "young man" you reference in you editorial, can’t be that way. Not only is it impossible, it’s not even close to being true.
The truth is 99% percent of those who leave the Church keep their lack of belief to themselves or share it only with others who have also left the Church. Even I, one of the more vocal letter writers only write when it’s in response to someone who writes something that I feel is incorrect, misleading, or discriminatory. Otherwise I keep to myself. If you had the time to research all of my letters, and the editorial I wrote last fall, you would find that to be the case. I and others of the former Mormon community do not appreciate being publicly lumped into the same category as the **** *****, the **** *****, and other fanatics who use an offensive, as opposed to defensive, approach in their letters and other efforts to promote their views.
On behalf of the Post-Mormon Community I ask that you please allow me equal time to respond to your editorial with a follow-up editorial to address the areas where I feel you have grossly misrepresented the majority of former Mormons of our community. The Post-Mormon Community is a non-profit corporation register in the state of Utah. Our mission is not at all to do as your editorial claims. Or official mission statement adopted by the Board of Trustees earlier this year is as follows:
"The Mission of the Post-Mormon Community is to provide and maintain systems that facilitate the growth and development of a safe and supportive community for those who leave or are considering leaving the Mormon Church."
Sincerely,
Jeff Ricks
Executive Director
Post-Mormon Community
**************************
Jeff,
I have noted your request for "equal time" to respond to my column in last Sunday's paper. I really don't get involved in the day to day things that are put on the editorial page with the exception of my every other week column. I have told Charlie that you have taken exception to what I had to say and want to write something. I would ask that you give it to him and he will decide if he wants to use it.
So you will know the subject of that column has been on my mind for a long time. You Mentioned **** *****. At One time **** pushed real hard for the newspaper to allow him to write a guest editorial to tell everyone why those who have left the LDS Church feel compelled to spread the word. Of course he didn't want to use his name so it never happened. Contrary to what you say I do believe that a good number of people who leave the LDS Church feel compelled to tell their story over and over again, they just can't leave it alone. I recently made a trip to St. George with a guy who had left the LDS Church and had to listen to him talk about it for more than 300 miles. When I go to Salt Lake I see people carrying signs and demonstrating. I have had contact with many others who have left the LDS Church and all they want to talk about is why they did it. They just can't leave it alone.
My column also pointed out that many of the faithful LDS can't resist in "taking the bait," and feel compelled to respond in kind, i.e. endless scripture references and scientific evidence to support their position. For some reason they can't seem to be able to let it alone either. They also were probably not to pleased with what I wrote.
Anyway, the column was just my opinion about the endless "Mormon Debates" we have in the letters column, that in my view don't accomplish much.
Thanks for your comments, I always wonder if anyone ever reads the stuff I write, obviously some do.
Bruce K. Smith
The Herald Journal
***********************************
Bruce,
Thank you for the quick reply. I'll send my request for equal time to Charlie. I'm more aware of **** ****** and his aggressive activist ways than I would like to be. I don't at all agree with what he does and really don't understand why he does it. The same applies to those who regularly protest on Temple square.
Bruce, I think you should consider that the reason you perceive former Mormons as you do is because you're not aware that the 99% who aren't that way ARE former Mormons because they keep it to themselves. There are far more former Mormons in Utah than you might think, as indicated by the Tribune article titled, "Keeping Members a Challenge for LDS Church." While the Church can no longer claim that they are the fasted growing religion, they CAN claim that they have one of the highest turnover rates.
I think you should also consider that a former Mormon shouldn't be so vilified by Mormons just because they stand up for themselves once in awhile. My letters to the editor have always been in response to a Mormon who I felt had crossed the line in something that they said. Former Mormons, the ones you aren’t aware of, are regularly singled out and discriminated against in Utah, either publicly as you did in your editorial, but most often in their families. The Post-Mormon Community was created to provide support for those former Mormons. When I see Mormons claiming or assuming special privilege in Utah, which happens far to often, I feel compelled to say something about it and sometimes will.
One more thing. You will find that the Mormon Church is far more public and active in how it promotes its views than is any former Mormon – even **** *****. And the church is sometimes obnoxiously aggressive in how it does so when viewed from the perspective of the 99.9% of the world who don’t agree with those views. I can tell you examples too, like the missionaries who were so aggressive with my 14 year old daughter in trying to get her to listen to them that they made her late for her bus. They didn’t apologize, they said, "There’ll be another bus." Then they almost made her miss that one. She was so late coming home from school that I was beginning to worry. Then there’s the various people that used to show up on my doorstep regularly trying to get me back into the Church, pretending to be my friend but always finding a way to work the Church into the conversation. Funny how when I resigned from the Church I’ve not seen hide nor hair of them. Shows how sincere their friendship was. Then there’s the guy at work who was so aggressive with promoting his views to the non-Mormons that he put one woman under so much stress that it triggered her MS that had been in remission for years. She now has to walk with a cane because of it. He tried for three years to get me to discuss religion with him. When I finally did and he became uncomfortable with the information I was telling him, because he couldn’t respond to it, that he backed out of the "debate," as he called it, but not before calling me evil and misguided and that he felt so sorry for my eternal soul.
Given all of the above I hope you can see how your editorial was very unfairly slanted and biased against a significant portion of our community. You might consider the appropriateness of an apology but I will only ask Charlie for equal time.
Jeff
There was no further response from Bruce.
Jeff