The nature of the jargon is indeed one of the hallmarks of a cult, not the mere existence of it.
Pick a group you consider a cult and a group you don’t. Sure, they both probably have jargon. Can you identify any quantitative differences in the nature of the tow groups, particularly as to how the relatinship between jargon, insiders, and outsiders differ?
Or not having members, in the case of Cybele.
That wasn’t me who said that.
I just think calling a bishop lay is stupid, not a hallmark of a cult.
Sorry about the misquote. I realized loooong after the edit window expired that the cult accusation was from Dogzilla, not from treis.
Wikipedia lists a reasonable description of religions vs sects vs denominations vs cults. I found no mention of hijacking words from other religions in order to reinforce an us-against-them mentality. Admittedly, by Wikipedia’s descriptions Mormonism still falls pretty heavily in the “cult” category. But considering that the word is generally used as a perjorative rather than as a sociology term, I think such name-calling is counterproductive when discussing religion.
Maybe I am just being dense. In what way is an LDS bishop not lay?
Bitter, ex-Mormon checking in. Heaven forbid that I agree with Monty on anything concerning Mormonism, but you are pissing into the wind here.
Take it up with the New York Times.
From today’s paper.
Another “not a Mormon and not a fan of the LDS” but whatever connotations the word lay has, and with the obvious room for “laid out” jokes acknowledged but not acted upon out of respect, the details of the title bishop are a bit less germane to the story than the fact a man who had a wife, kids, position and respect was senselessly murdered in front of his congregation by a crazy veteran who was then killed himself. Not to be preachy but… some decency please.
Respect is a matter of subjectiveness. The whole situation is unfortunate, but let’s not forget that this Bishop and his entire congregation worked and spent like madmen as recently as 2 years ago to make sure that their religious beliefs are embedded in the California Constitution, stripping 38 million Californians of existing civil rights in the process. It is hard to imagine an act that is less American a nd worthy of respect than that.
And given the inevitable reversa of this heinous actl in the lifetime of his children, possibly very soon, perhaps even before the next spring thaw in California, his children and all the children over whose spirtual life he had some say, will surely learn how wrong the adults in the Church were on this matter, and have to work to reconcile what the Church and their parents taught them with who knows how much therapy or its equivalent.
I am sure the man was polite and clean cut and smiling. But let’s not pretend that as non-Mormons, anything he or his flock did that interacted with us was in any way worthy of respect. I find him and his other local brethren (and I am local to this incident) worthy of nothing but disdain and contempt for what they have done and continue to do to the rest of us in the civic arena.
I wish his family peace, but I hope they find it in actual love for other people and acceptance of what is American at its core.
And the thread crapping goes on. Mods. Please close this. Obviously, there are too many posters who can’t restrain themselves.
With what part do you disagree? That one’s religion should not be used to embed values in the state constitution? that the work so done is about to be undone? that stripping civil rights from people is worthy of respect?
I am VERY local to the incident in question, I can assure you that among a good portion of locals, the Mormons who worked to pass prop 8 (and others who did so also) were regarded as worthy of no respect even before this incident. Many of them were quick - see local new site comments - to blame gays for the murder, but it turned out to be one of their own.
So does being shot after all that make him worthy of respect in retrospect? the kids are going to learn the truth eventually, no need to sugar coat it.
so what do you object to exactly?
This thread has gone seriously off the rails, in part because of Monty’s minimalist OP. In general, this is why we prefer OPs that state an opinion or a direction for the thread, and not just post a link. It’s hard to keep a thread on topic when it’s not clear what the topic is.
I am, for now, leaving this thread open for a specific discussion about this specific murder of a specific individual by another specific individual.
It does not appear at all relevant what the LDS has done with regard to prop 8, and so all such comments are off-topic to this thread and any additional comments on that topic will get a warning. Ditto for “the fact that they call their clergy ‘lay’ proves X, Y, or Z about them.”
(If you want to go after the LDS on prop 8, not_alice, feel free to start a thread in GD or the Pit, depending on your level of vitriol. If anyone who’s up in arms about the Mormon use of the word “lay” to describe their clergy wants to continue that hijack, figure out what your question or comment is and start a thread in the appropriate forum.)
Again, discussion in this thread should be limited to the specific facts about this murder.
twickster, MPSIMS moderator
I don’t have a problem with that phrasing because it explains that what is meant by bishop in the Amish faith is not the same as the normal meaning in a clear manner.
treis, please read the post immediately above yours.
Thanks,
twickster, MPSIMS moderator
I believe my comments DO fall into the category of “specific” to this murder. As noted, I am local to the incident, and I am discussing how the local people have reacted to the unfortunate incident.
When the earliest comments on local news sites speculated and insisted that gays committed the murder, the implication was that it was about Prop 8. This is the sort of thing that drives local politics. We are represented by Roy Ashburn for example. The founder of the nationally active, in-your-face activist group GetEqual.org teaches at a local college midway between the church where the murder occurred and where the ex-Mormon murderer was shot in front of his boyhood home. While I haven’t checked lately, in the first few days after the incidents, there were no apologies online for asserting that a gay committed the murder.
These are but only a few examples of the atmosphere in which this murder occurred.
In this thread, I am not debating the prop 8 issue, only sharing the nature of the environment that the man found himself in. Until he was killed, I never heard his name before, so I don’t lay the blame for the Mormon strategy that created that environment at his feet. But I find it extremely unlikely that he didn’t embrace it wholeheartedly and use his senior position to advance it.
In the meantime, the issue that the shooter and his family seem to have had some sort of beef with the church in the 1980s is being kept quiet, and thus sounds a lot like we have seen repeatedly with the Roman Catholic Church. Yes the man was mentally ill now, but not then. This shooting was not entirely random. The mental illness may have affected his impulse control, but what was it abut the church that he was so upset about all these years later that he had the impulse in the first place?
That is what I intended to express.
And that’s the point at which you’re dragging prop 8 into this.
You have made your point.
I have made my point.
Since I am a moderator in this forum, I get the last word in this thread on this subject. If you wish to pursue it, start your own thread and link to it from there.
Thanks,
twickster
Oh gosh. Do you have a ring we can kiss and everything?
Not if she’s Mormon.