What would you do if asked to stop?

[Anonymous]

That’s a hard one. It would depend on what was threatened. If they were threatening my church membership, or some form of disciplinary council then I would probably stop doing it. If they were telling me I would not qualify for a temple recommend, then I would probably keep posting, provided I didn’t think I wanted/needed one in the near future.

So, when it comes to this issue, it’s the law of Moses. What are the consequences? Can I live with them if I keep posting? The answers to those questions would guide me.

[Anonymous]

As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, my husband characterizes StayLDS as an anti-Mormon website that encourages people to leave the church. I still visit this site, I still post, but I’m using incognito browser windows for the time being.

Of course, it would be a little different if it’s my bishop making these accusations rather than my husband. The bishop can take away my TR; my husband cannot. Then again, my bishop will only be my bishop for a few years; my husband will (theoretically) be my husband forever.

So I guess the first thing I would say is, “Why, Bishop! What on earth are you doing on those anti-Mormon websites that encourage people to leave the church?” :angel: After all, lurking on StayLDS or FMH isn’t exactly avoiding the appearance of evil. Beyond that, I guess I would take the chance that between a full time job, full time calling, and family, the bishop doesn’t have time to monitor my online activities.

The other thing is that I would need to make sure that these conversations take place in front of my husband – otherwise he would think I am exaggerating or making it up.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

ITheir concern is that they know it has affected the testimonies of some people in their congregations who have come to them to talk about it because of your posts, and the things you may say in class.

I see this comment as the one that requires the time and effort.

Quote:

Why can my words affect the testimonies of others?

Are testimonies some flimsy thing that is easily blown about on any wind? If a testimony is something that is truly experienced and personally known, or is it a house of cards? I know some of the comments we hear do make it seem weak: “If it’s not constantly growing stronger it’s getting weaker.” This idea doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. If I am a witness in court is my testimony going to change based on what other people say?

On one hand I could imagine a situation where a number of other witnesses all testify seeing something that is slightly different from what I saw, that may cause me to rethink what I saw. But for the most part I would be confident and unchanging in my witness once I sat down and decided on what I actually saw.

If I was in that situation of being told to stop I may be too tempted to draw a parallel of how the desire to snuff/silence other perspectives is like using band-aids on chicken pox, expecting the ointment and cover to slow the illness.

[Anonymous]

Orson…I agree…and would probably remind the bishop that he should shepherd others also, because those people will move on to the next issue, and the next, and possibly be missing the point of inward conversion and the strength from that.

Squeeky wheels sometimes need to realize they can keep up on lubrication and avoid their own problems if they take care of themselves like the other wheels do.

Hence, religion. We all can work on something.

[Anonymous]

Seeing as I hardly post anything anyway, I wouldn’t consider it more than a weak scare tactic. I’m almost at the point of not caring about the discipline thing. My parents would be upset, my siblings (most of them) would be upset, but they wouldn’t disown me or refuse to speak to me anymore (at least I hope so). Then I would also ask how they got my online info and discuss the legality of them spying on me.

Anyway, it’s all hypothetical anyway as they have pretty much left me alone since I stopped going.

[Author]

Posts