When will Mormonism disappear?

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

The difference is that one only has to ask the LDS church to leave them alone - request no more home teacher contact, no missionaries, etc. and that wish will be respected.

No matter how many times I've asked you do let it go, you continue with your quest to drag the active members here into your personal abyss.

You chose to leave. Taq chose to leave. It's time for both of you to shut the hell up.

Just like clockwork, Il Padrino chimes in with his shut the hell up diatribe. Il Padrino is the new tooblue. Maybe a conflation of old Rocky and tooblue.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Just like clockwork, Il Padrino chimes in with his shut the hell up diatribe. Il Padrino is the new tooblue. Maybe a conflation of old Rocky and tooblue.

I won't stop telling you to shut the hell up, because you need to be told to shut the hell up.

You chose to leave. So leave.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

The difference is that one only has to ask the LDS church to leave them alone - request no more home teacher contact, no missionaries, etc. and that wish will be respected.

I actually don't think this is true. These types of messages are not passed on from missionary companionship to missionary companionship, and while my ward has a "Do Not Contact List," it's often ignored. Eventually, the missionaries or a member of the bishopric will be back knocking at your door.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Levin

I actually don't think this is true. These types of messages are not passed on from missionary companionship to missionary companionship, and while my ward has a "Do Not Contact List," it's often ignored. Eventually, the missionaries or a member of the bishopric will be back knocking at your door.

Do Not Contact lists can fade over time, it's true. But if someone really doesn't want to be contacted, a simple letter to the church gets the name removed. It's not complicated.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Plenty of former Mormons just drift away or move on. A few outspoken ones are sufficient for Mormons to smugly declare that apostates just can't leave the LDS Church alone. In practice, it is the outspoken former members that get labeled "apostates" and the ones who just go their way are called something else (or nothing at all).

The "apostates can't leave the LDS Church alone" thing has become a rod with which to smite. It is kind of self-fulfilling as well, as someone carping about how you can't leave their organization alone can contribute to a desire to lash out at that organization.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Levin

I actually don't think this is true. These types of messages are not passed on from missionary companionship to missionary companionship, and while my ward has a "Do Not Contact List," it's often ignored. Eventually, the missionaries or a member of the bishopric will be back knocking at your door.

You are correct, but when one chooses to no longer be a part of the church, a request that no home teachers or anyone else will be respected.

But the chance that it will be a constant daily annoyance on the part of a member of the Bishopric is almost nil.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by Tex

Do Not Contact lists can fade over time, it's true. But if someone really doesn't want to be contacted, a simple letter to the church gets the name removed. It's not complicated.

True, but SU has a point when he calls out people who tell apostates/critics to leave the Church alone when the Church institutionally does not understand the meaning of, "no thanks." The point is, as you indicated earlier, one side is trying to bring good tidings, while the other is meant to destroy.

But I don't think SU's intent is to destroy -- unless trying to offer the clarity of a differeing viewpoint means to destroy. With humor and some insight, I think he offers an interesting foil. It at least has forced you to bring your game to the table -- and in the long run, that's only helped you.

Can you say you are the worse for your engagements with SU?

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Levin

True, but SU has a point when he calls out people who tell apostates/critics to leave the Church alone when the Church institutionally does not understand the meaning of, "no thanks." The point is, as you indicated earlier, one side is trying to bring good tidings, while the other is meant to destroy.

But I don't think SU's intent is to destroy -- unless trying to offer the clarity of a differeing viewpoint means to destroy. With humor and some insight, I think he offers an interesting foil. It at least has forced you to bring your game to the table -- and in the long run, that's only helped you.

Can you say you are the worse for your engagements with SU?

No, SU is serious when he belittle those of us who believe. He is a bitter apostate who thinks himself intellectually and morally superior.

You just haven't been around long enough to recognize this.

[MikeWaters]

SU has no gift and claims that gifts don't exist. It gets tiresome. To the gifted.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

No, SU is serious when he belittle those of us who believe. He is a bitter apostate who thinks himself intellectually and morally superior.

You just haven't been around long enough to recognize this.

But don't you think you're superior to him b/c of your belief? Not necessarily from you, but I've seen SU belittled for his disbelief.