Skip to main content

Uchtdorf, Halvorsen and Ford, OH MY!

I find myself getting upset, maybe even angry, over small things on Facebook. All of them are in some way related to religion, whether it’s obvious upon first glance or not. I’ve told my husband on occasion that prior to leaving the LDS church, I never experienced true anger. Frustration? Countless times. Disappointment? Of course. Disgust or irritation? Yes. But never a pure anger. Some, especially those who are religious, might be thinking, that’s wonderful. Why would you want to experience anger? Anger is a negative emotion, therefore, it is from the devil. I grew up believing this wholeheartedly, which I truly believe contributed in good measure to my suppression of most emotions.

But I’m angry now. Despite the belief among the religious that being angry at god is the main reason why individuals leave religion, I can’t claim that sentiment. I am not angry at god. I am, however, angry at Joseph Smith. This man was real. This is something that can, and has been, proven. I’m angry at the damage he’s caused since creating this “one true church”. I’m angry at him because of the women he took advantage of. I’m angry at him for taking advantage of their husbands, though on a completely different level. I’m angry at the ideals he created and inspired continuing generations to uphold. I’m angry because his desire to be famous or rich or just needed/loved hurts people every day, whether they believe it or not.

I find that little things make me angry, and nearly all of them, as I stated before, are linked to religion, and more specifically, to the LDS belief. For example, a few days ago a picture was circulating on Facebook. This picture was of Gail Halvorsen, “the candy bomber” and member of the LDS church, President Dieter F. Uchtdorf and, much to my surprise, Harrison Ford. For some context, I have been a loyal fan of Harrison Ford since I first watched Star Wars at 6 years old. Even as a member, if I had been asked who I would rather spend a day with, the prophet of the Church or Harrison Ford, I would not have hesitated to say Harrison Ford. Okay, now that this is clear, let me see if I can explain in some measure, why this picture bothers me.

To begin, the comments that were inevitably posted in response to this picture irritate me to no end. Most focus on wondering if Ford knows who he’s standing in between, implying that his accomplishments as a human being pale in comparison to the two LDS men beside him. Others rejoice in the thought that since Ford is “associating” with these priesthood holders, then perhaps there’s a chance that he will convert. Comments such as: “I wonder if there were any Book of Mormons given afterwards???” or “Does Harrison Ford KNOW who he’s standing by? One man is an incredible man! The other is an APOSTLE! I don’t think he knows that. Did someone tell him? Does he know? He needs to know! He needs the Gospel Too!” (I really hate this comment, because it implies that whatever Ford has accomplished in his life, is nothing compared to a pilot in WWII and an apostle. This person obviously has no idea of the humanitarian work Ford has done, nor of the search and rescue missions he’s been a part of.) A small, but interesting conversation followed after this comment in particular.
I completely agree with the Blue highlight individual. It doesn’t matter if Harrison Ford knows what being an apostle “means”. That’s not why Uchtdorf and Halverson were with him. They were attending the Legends of Aviation Awards, not a religious meeting.  They’re being commended for the abilities and exploits as pilots, not for any missionary work they may have done.

Now, while I’m not a huge fan of Uchtdorf at the moment (just read his talks from October 2016’s General Conference), I don’t see Uchtdorf using this Awards gathering as a platform to perform missionary work. I think, unlike many laymen members of the LDS church, and religion in general, that Uchtdorf is intelligent and respectful enough to recognize that there is a time and a place to introduce his believed version of the gospel. So I’m not angry at Uchtdorf. Not even for posting the bloody picture to Facebook. After all, Harrison Ford? In the flesh? Who wouldn’t want to show their followers and fans that they’d met a huge Hollywood star?

But I am angry at the underlying agenda of the Church. If you are a member of the Church, active or not, you have heard countless talks pushing the concept of ‘Every Member a Missionary’, which implies that you don’t have to wear a suit and a nametag in order to convert people. You’re taught that you should DESIRE to want to share the gospel with those unfortunate enough to have not yet heard it and to seize every opportunity to teach. I can’t begin to recount how many testimony meetings I’ve sat through where at least one individual stood up to relate their most recent experience with Missionary work. In seminary we were encouraged to carry around extra Book of Mormon’s so that we could give them to people who seemed to need it. We were given Pass Along cards, which are primarily used by missionaries. These cards are generally given to potential investigators and inactive members of the Church. Each card has a Toll Free # on it so that the individual who takes the cards can call for more information on the Church.

The idea of always being a missionary is constantly pushed on every member of the Church, so the fact that comments like the ones I provided are attached to this image of an LDS apostle with a Hollywood actor isn’t really that surprising. But it doesn’t make it any less maddening.

Always being on the look-out for missionary experiences was a directive that I had a really hard time with. I’m not good with confronting people, even if it’s not necessarily a controversial encounter. And I am not the only one who feels this way. Some people are shy and it’s not a part of their character to ‘serve’ in this fashion, but the constant pressure to be a missionary, even without the official tag, can be really damaging to a person’s psyche. It’s one more characteristic, in a long line of characteristics, that you come to believe is imperfect, and therefore a weakness. It’s one more thing you have to overcome before you can truly feel like you can ever be a true member of the Church.

The image bothered me even before I read any of the comments. Maybe this initial reaction is indicative of some underlying issues I have yet to fully identify and address, but I feel somewhat justified after reading through some of the comments. Just because ‘you’ believe something wholeheartedly on nothing but faith does not mean that anyone else should follow your example. Leave religion out of it and just rejoice in the fact that THREE great men came together on a special night to celebrate their accomplishments outside of religion.


Comments

  1. Feeling anger towards the church is normal. In a way, even therapeutic. I've been out of the church for some time and I still get angry. It can be helpful to view anger towards one's former religion as one of the stages of grief, due to the huge loss which can occur when one loses their religion/worldview. At least, this has helped me process through some of my anger towards the church.

    Also, Mormon Fanboys are annoying, especially when they look down their noses at the beliefs of others.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

In Response to Mr. Greg Trimble

(Apologies for another long post) In a perusal of my Facebook news feed, I stumbled across a lovely article that a neighbor of my parents shared entitled “So…You Think the Book of Mormon is a Fraud” . Mr. Trimble, who authored this lovely article, uses the typical Mormon circular reasoning that states that if the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith was a prophet; and if Joseph Smith was a prophet, then the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the same Church that Christ established while he was on Earth. So in the Mormon mind, it all comes down to whether the BOM is true or not, and for this, they rely on warm fuzzy feelings to confirm that the Book is in fact, true. Mr. Trimble states that he noticed that most of the people who criticize the Book of Mormon the loudest, have not actually read it. While this may be true, I don’t think a person needs to read a book fully to understand whether it’s true or not. That’s what research is for. Reading the Book of Morm

I'm Not a Fan of Matt Walsh: Part 2

Matt Walsh is an Idiot: Why “Yes, Gay Marriage Hurts Me Personally” is not effective. I am a glutton for punishment where Matt Walsh is concerned. He is a pompous ass, and reading his articles makes my blood boil, and not just because he writes for Glen Beck’s network and we don’t share the same opinions. Bottom line is that he is not a great writer. If he were to turn one of his articles into any of my University English professors, he would not have fared well. Even my 11 th grade English teacher would have ripped him a new one. Why: Because he cannot write an argumentative paper. Not a single one of his articles I have read has contained any semblance of argumentation. He likes to say things like, first and second, as if he’s actually introducing solid reasons to support his opinion, but they end up being wordy and condescending with an overabundance of analogies that don’t actually provide support. The article listed in the title of my post is one of Walsh’s more recent

Types of Inaccurate Information in Abstinence Only Education

The state of Utah, in which I reside, staunchly promotes abstinence only education. Recently, a Bill was introduced, H.B 215, that would enact provisions related to reproductive health education. The Bill emphasized providing evidence based, age appropriate, information that have been shown to be effective in changing negative behaviors that contribute to teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and infections. Last year, a similar Bill was introduced but was not passed, which seems to be the fate of H.B 215, as the last action taken on March 9, 2017 was to file it in ‘bills not passed.’ I thought of Abstinence only Education within the context of types of inaccurate information (i.e.  Honest Mistakes, Out-of-Date Information, Disinformation, biased information, misleading information, bullshit and withholding or removing information) and considered how this type of curricula falls into many of the previously listed categories of inaccurate information.  First, le