Faithless in Zion

If there is one thing that Jesse Fruhwirth's article Temple Termination shows is that the more a religion emerges as oppressive and absurd, the more humorous and ironic it becomes.
Drew Call's story of castigation by his church and his employer merely confirm the theory that the LDS church keeps two sets of doctrines: one for the rank-and-file members heard from the pulpits and
insolently forced across the desks in bishop's offices throughout the Mormon world; a doctrine of guilt and shame and loathing for any who dare to be --either by choice or by nature—different; and one that is shown to the rest of the world of clean-cut, happy, straight members whose only concern is whether to serve green or red Jell-O on Family Home Evening. Such behavior in an individual is capricious at best and schizophrenic at worst; but in an institution it borders on evil.

Those of us who have seen through the lugubrious and pitiful religious bulling that emanates from Temple Square find it pitiful that a church which allegedly prides itself on family would have its adherents choose between following the prophet or rejecting the love of their own flesh and blood simply because they are gay, or atheists, or critics of what the LDS church claims to be the truth.  As an atheist, I embrace my family members, many of whom still believe in golden plates and reformed Egyptian; and in all fairness, they accept me.  What is of concern is  when  my parents or my siblings have their next temple recommend interview they find  they can no longer ‘affiliate’ with me because of my non-belief,  lest they risk the wrath of their ecclesiastical leaders who hold the keys to salvation with the right propitiations.    The antics of the LDS hierarchy seem to indicate no love of family except one that is so narrow as to render the definition inane.