- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
If you want to save taxes and pay tithing at the same time, donate stock to the church. Of course, it only makes sense to donate stock that has appreciated in value. (If it depreciates, you’re better off selling it for a loss, donating the proceeds, and claiming the loss to offset your taxes.) If you hold on to stock for at least 1 year, you can donate it to the church without paying Capital Gains taxes. I’ve been doing it for a few years. I just call my broker here in SLC, and he donates it to the church. I get a record from my broker, and the church mails me a tithing statement independent of my bishop. Now if you live outside Utah, your broker may not know the church’s account number, but here in Utah it is a pretty painless thing to do. I will tell you that not all brokers or tax accountants are aware of this. When I had my taxes done, I had to educate my income tax accountant, and then he realized it was a pretty slick way to avoid capital gains. (At first he advised me against it.) I’ve been told that the church doesn’t advertise it, but they really like to have stock donated.
As for the caste system, it seems apparent to me that we have a different definition of caste. My understanding of a caste system means there is no mobility to higher or lower castes. Once you are born into a caste, there is nothing you can do to change your caste.
Now, in the NBA, things are a bit different. I’m a huge Celtics fan. I became a fan in the late 70’s when they were terrible. Then they drafted Larry Bird and won 3 titles in the 80’s. Then they got old, Len Bias and Reggie Lewis both died, and they hired Rick Pitino and ML Carr to coach, and they sucked. Then Danny Ainge fleeced Kevin McHale to get Kevin Garnett (and somehow he got Ray Allen too!), and they’re good again. They’ve jumped from bad to good to bad to good. That doesn’t accurately describe “caste” in my mind.
As for the Lakers, I remember when the Jazz swept Shaq and Kobe in 4 games (Del Harris was the coach) in 97 or 98. That was awesome. (I couldn’t stand Nick Van Excel.) Lately, the Jazz haven’t done much to the Lakers…. But once again, even the Jazz have had some mobility in getting really good and really bad. That doesn’t accurately describe a caste, IMO.
You can choose whether you want to pay tithing or not. Therefore you can choose whether you want to go to the temple or not. If you quit paying tithing, you are not banned from the temple forever. When you start meeting temple recommend requirements, you can go back. Once again, there is mobility between temple attendance and non-temple attendance. You are not stuck in your caste forever–there is mobility, and it is your choice. If you want to have a dynasty like the Yankees or Lakers, you can always attend the temple. If you want to be a one-hit wonder like the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, you can do that to. (And if you want to be cool, you root for the Red Sox, Celtics, Bruins, and Patriots!!!)
I agree with the comments that you have to decide if tithing is a godly commandment, or man’s commandment. If I thought tithing was man’s commandment, I wouldn’t do it either. If I thought tithing was a form of indulgences, I’d have a problem with it too. But I don’t view tithing as a control mechanism.
Quote:CASTE – Latin, to be cut off from 2. any exclusive and restrictive social dealings with the others. 3. any rigid class distinction based on birth, wealth,
etc. operating as a social system or principle. Yes, I suppose one can move around within the caste systems of the church if they so choose, but I don’t see how one could argue that we don’t have caste in the mormon culture – at least not if you use the dictionary definition of the word. I guess we just have to politely disagree about the church being a caste system.
mormonheretic wrote:I agree with the comments that you have to decide if tithing is a godly commandment, or man’s commandment. If I thought tithing was man’s commandment, I wouldn’t do it either. If I thought tithing was a form of indulgences, I’d have a problem with it too. But I don’t view tithing as a control mechanism.
Let me be blunt —- I believe the principle of tithing is a commandment from god. I believe that “to pay 10% of one’s increase to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in order to receive exaltation in the CK through Temple attendance,” is a commandment from men, used as a control mechanism.
I see born-in vs convert as being a caste thing. There is maybe also a division between Deseret Mormon and rest of us Mormons…. Only in some people’s eyes, Sam – and it goes both ways, ironically. SamBee wrote:I see born-in vs convert as being a caste thing. There is maybe also a division between Deseret Mormon and rest of us Mormons….
I would never have seen it that way. That has not been my experience, however I am a BIC, so I might have missed something. I was a Deseret Mormon for 25 years, and a “rest of us Mormon” for the last 15. Caste system? Hmmm? I am certainly treated differently, however, I also have been stuck in Fowler Stage 4 forever, so that probably has something to do with it?
I really see the caste system as, those who have a current temple recommend, and those who don’t. Those who are going to the CK because they are worthy of temple attendance, and those who are going to the TK because they are not worthy of temple attendance. Those who have TR and hold the callings, and those who don’t have a TR and are “ineligible” to hold the callings. IMO, there is an obvious pecking order in Mormondom, and it revolves around the temple recommend. Isn’t that what we grill to our children? “One MUST marry within the covenant and have a
temple marriage…” Certainly, one can choose to rise in the caste, or lose caste, depending on their behavoir, and that decision, IMO, really determines the social aspect of where one stands within the church membership. Obviously there are those members who have transcended the caste system, but I think the general membership has not. And you know — I’m not altogether convinced it all bad. If maintaining a caste system is what it takes to help 85% of the church membership be successful and “stay out of trouble” and find peace in this life, than it really probably is a good thing.
I honestly don’t know which caste I belong to. On the one hand, I’m a temple recommend holder, so apparently I’m in the “good” caste. On the other hand, here in Utah County, I’m not orthodox enough to be in the “in” crowd. I’ve been called into the bishop’s office for the heretical use of a non-KJV Bible. So, yes, I do feel a bit like an outsider here. I have been in wards where I felt the Bishop really appreciated me to be there. I’ve served in high profile callings. In my current ward (and other wards), I feel I am essentially hidden from high profile callings, because I don’t follow the republican, BYU loving, orthodox line. I wear blue shirts. I wear Runnin Ute ties. I celebrate that Utah got in the Pac-10, and BYU didn’t. I suppose I could really feel excluded (and to some extend I do), but I would never consider myself, or non-temple recommend holders in a different caste.
My best friend in my current ward is a temple recommend holder, and his hair is longer than his wife’s hair (by quite a bit.) We both wear beards. Neither one of us feel like we’re in the “good caste”. I just find this whole notion of a caste idea as judging unrighteously. Sure, there are a lot of people who do it, but that doesn’t mean you have to. You’re separating yourself with this caste notion unnecessarily.
Sure the BYU people bug me, just as much as the Utah people bug them. For that matter, I can’t stand Yankees ties at church, and I’m sure to wear my Red Sox tie to tweak them a bit. But I’d never consider a person with a Yankees tie as in a lower caste (well, then again…..)
😈 mormonheretic wrote:I just find this whole notion of a caste idea as judging unrighteously. Sure, there are a lot of people who do it, but that doesn’t mean you have to. You’re separating yourself with this caste notion unnecessarily.
Hmmm? Perhaps?
Quote:I celebrate that Utah got in the Pac-10, and BYU didn’t.
Looking forward to seeing the Utes more. Of course, I would have loved to see BYU in our conference as well – would have been a special rivalry for me. I’m still a little chapped over that whole Las Vegas Bowl fiasco.
BICs know all the motions and the jargon, how everything works. They often tend to accept everything as usual, even if they don’t agree with it. It’s a question of fervor (of converts) vs familiarity (BIC). Occasionally I’ve had people laugh, because I don’t give a prayer in the usual way, bear testimony with the set phrases or occasionally come across something unfamiliar. When it comes to the temple interview, I believe that the BIC has a good idea what’s coming up. Also, if you’re Deseret, I think you’re less likely to have been exposed to “corrupting influences” than in mainly non-LDS areas and have the heritage, plus someone who’s never broken the WoW will have the temptation but not the nostalgia about the whole thing. In the church hierarchy, BICs of Deseret heritage still predominate.
I think ironically it’s probably easier for a convert to break away, mainly for family reasons.
cwald wrote:I really see the caste system as, those who have a current temple recommend, and those who don’t. Those who are going to the CK because they are worthy of temple attendance, and those who are going to the TK because they are not worthy of temple attendance. Those who have TR and hold the callings, and those who don’t have a TR and are “ineligible” to hold the callings. IMO, there is an obvious pecking order in Mormondom, and it revolves around the temple recommend.
It’s not a caste system by definition because you can move back and forth between the two categories at any time. Castes are by definition immobile.
At every interview you are only asked if you consider yourself worthy. No one makes that final judgment but
yourself. The only reason most people don’t have a TR is because they don’t want one. No one is stopping them from fulfilling the requirements. No one is holding them down and forcing coffee down their throats through a funnel. 
Limhah wrote:It’s not a caste system by definition because you can move back and forth between the two categories at any time. Castes are by definition immobile.
Who’s definition? Sure, the old India caste systems are immobile because they are based on birth. America’s caste systems are mobile because they are based on wealth. I’m going to respectfully disagree with you. Here is the definition from Webster.
Quote:CASTE – Latin, to be cut off from 2. any exclusive and restrictive social dealings with the others. 3. any rigid class distinction based on birth, wealth, etc. operating as a social system or principle.
I don’t think caste systems as we understand them today to be “immobile.” but that is beside the point.
Quote:At every interview you are only asked if you consider yourself worthy. No one makes that final judgment but yourself. The only reason most people don’t have a TR is because they don’t want one. No one is stopping them from fulfilling the requirements. No one is holding them down and forcing coffee down their throats through a funnel.
I don’t see it that way. Here is a post I made just last night in another thread.
Quote:SamBee wrote:Maybe, the way I see it, no one’s forcing me to do it, I want to do it, and moreover, I’m not bullying anyone else into it… although I am trying to help a friend stop drinking, but that’s another matter.
I don’t see it that way. We certainly have different experience in this regard – perhaps this is where the BIC/mormon family/Deseret vs convert comes into play. I have no health or addiction issues with the WofW..NONE. I don’t see obeying the WofW as an act of charity. I’ve seen absolutely no ill effect of my not following the WofW. None whatsoever. YET, I do feel like the church is trying to force me to obey WofW. If I want to be part of “the culture” I have to obey. If I want to be active member of the tribe I have to obey. Oh sure, I don’t HAVE to do it, no one is putting a gun to my head, but the social and peer pressure and the guilt that is applied is almost criminal — if I want to remain a member in good standing, I have to obey this silly law of man. Does that make sense? Also, I’m in a struggling branch, and they need me. Im okay with that, and I’m willing to serve, I want to serve, but than I’m told in order to SERVE, I have to have a TR, which means I HAVE to obey the WofW. There is nobody else to do the work. I have (according the church standards) to have a TR. I don’t have the option of just walking away from it all. There is too many people who depend on me.
I think the brethern in 1841 kind of have it right to begin…dont force people to do these things. Teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves. A little bit of wisdom, logic and spiritual guidance can go a long way. Where did it all go wrong?
👿 You have to do what you have to do. If they stipulate certain requirements, you have to meet them in order to qualify for that recommend, that’s just the way it is. It may be pressure but that’s the way it is, or do without the recommend. If you need a cup of coffee or a smoke now and then just do it discreetly away from where you can be seen and discard the evidence later. Discretion is key. But you have to decide what is most important to you. Limhah wrote:If you need a cup of coffee or a smoke now and then just do it discreetly away from where you can be seen and discard the evidence later. Discretion is key.
😯 Very good – I can live with that.
My big problem with that approach is that it would require me to lie. Sure, omissions are one thing in an interview, as is interpretation and view, but making up stuff is another. I think that leads you onto a different ballcourt. If someone asks you if you are living the WoW, you can say yes, because you might view it that way.
But if someone asks you if you drink coffee specifically, that’s another question.
SamBee wrote:My big problem with that approach is that it would require me to lie. Sure, omissions are one thing in an interview, as is interpretation and view, but making up stuff is another. I think that leads you onto a different ballcourt.
If someone asks you if you are living the WoW, you can say yes, because you might view it that way.
But if someone asks you if you drink coffee specifically, that’s another question.
Yep, interpretation is one thing – lying is another. I wont lie to get into the temple. The day I decide to just flat out lie in a “worthiness” interview is the time to just pack my bags and leave. I mean really, what would be the point?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.