OtterPop

Lost One, I hope you are getting good treatment for your mental-health problems. Michael Newman, although the effect (as I understand it) in terms LDS church policy/doctrine is the same, asking to have one's name removed and being excommunicated are not the same thing. It's like the difference between being fired from versus quitting a job. Either way, you're not an employee and you don't get benefits -- but the process is really different.

gppuddinpie, First, I want to say that I agree with everyone who has said this is not about your or about your attractiveness as a woman or about whether your husband loves you. I think getting support from other LDS wives is a great idea. Second, I agree with the poster who said that your husband is not damaged goods. My main point may sound a little harsh: I think you need to get some perspective about your situation. This is far from the worst thing that could happen in your marriage. Trust me, if he had actually had sex with or even had an "internet affair" with another woman, you would feel much, much worse. If he had told you he was gay, that would be much worse. If he had told you he was terminally ill, that would be much worse. For you (I'm assuming) if he had told you he no longer believed in the LDS Church, that would be much worse. If he had had a psychotic break or developed bipolar disorder or gone into a severe depression, that would be much worse. This is a manageable, solvable problem. From what you've said, he does believe he needs to repent, and he is motivated to change, and he is taking action to address this problem. So do some grieving for your lost assumptions, get the support you need, and learn the difference between supporting him and trying to control him (which is not possible).

Post deleted because the machine is putting weird characters in instead of quotation marks -- and the post was too hard to understand without them.

It doesn't sound like damnation to me, either, but you're the one who pointed out, "Eternal damnation is also used mostly within the LDS church to mean a lack of progression."

I actually don't believe in damnation or in the ability or need to be saved or redeemed, so I don't have any answer to your question. I am genuinely surprised to hear Mormons using and defending the term eternal damnation to refer to what the D&C describes as glory. Seems very odd to me, so I was exploring with the two of you.

No, just pointing out inconsistencies that I've noticed. You give yourself too much credit. I don't think or fear for my eternal salvation because of your understanding of what Mormonism teaches. I'm just having a discussion here.

No, we're not. How can salvation also be damnation? That's what is being asserted here.

"The hit bird flutters." So, if someone doesn't enjoy being told by other limited, flawed, mortals who lack the wisdom and perspective of an eternal God, that they are damned to hell because their spiritual experience differs from that of Mormons, this is because they know those flawed mortals are actually correct? That's a simplistic point of view. When conservative Christians say that Mormons are not Christians, can I assume that Mormons "flutter" because they've been "hit"? (Just for the record, I think Mormons are Christians.) I was taught in Mormonism that there is outer darkness, there is salvation, and there is eternal life. I was not taught that it is all or nothing -- either eternal life or eternal damnation. And in my discussions with Mormons, they tend to very quick to point out that they don't believe in hell, that other churches have a "measure of the truth," and that those who kept their first estate are not damned.

I wonder if you would find the term eternal damnation ambiguous if it was being applied to you.

When I grew up LDS, I honestly don't remember the term being used at all. And, as I said, your description is not what a cursory glance at lds.org shows.

Of course you are free to have an "issue" with this -- but it couldn't hurt for you to take a glance at the 11th Article of Faith.

To me, "denying the Holy Ghost" -- that is, sons and daughters of perdition -- are people who have had a "sure knowledge" but then deny it. This hardly represents most people who have their names removed from LDS church records. Your post seems to assume that anyone who leaves the LDS church has been led away by "tempters." Real people with real lives and real struggles don't always fit into simple categories -- as you said yourself.

skalenfehl, Could you explain your comment? I'm really not sure who you're referring to, or who is preventing the progression of others.

Your understanding seems to be a very harsh interpretation. I did a quick search on "eternal damnation" on lds.org, and that term appears to be generally used in connection with Satan, with those who followed Satan in the pre-existence, and with those who deny the Holy Ghost.

Since when did Mormons believe in "eternal damnation"? Whatever happened to the telestial kingdom being so glorious?

I got the same score as John Doe -- 84.85

FunkyTown -- I'm curious. Why does explaining your viewpoints involve "bible bashing"? To be clear, I don't mind. I don't believe in the Bible, but I'm assuming that you do, to some extent.

First, it is certainly rude and wholly unacceptable behavior to tell a stranger in a bookstore that he is wrong about his religious beliefs. But, remember, the LDS church teaches that everyone else is wrong about theirs. The church sends out missionaries to tell peole that they are wrong about their religion. Before someone jumps on me for saying this so bluntly, I ask you: Are missionaries taught to ask if the strangers they approach are satisfied and happy with their spiritual lives? If the person says that they are, do the missionaries simply move on? Some do, I'm sure -- but some certainly don't. Which is more offensive -- to have a stranger tell you in public that your religion is wrong? Or to come to someone's home, knock on their door, and tell them that, regardless of what religion they are, you have a better one to offer? People on this board have told me directly that I have made the wrong decision in my life because I left the LDS church. That's more acceptable than the man in the bookstore, because I have chosen to be part of this discussion. People have told me I only "think" I am happier outside the LDS church. People have told me that I will regret my decision in the hereafter. I still wonder frequently just exactly how so many Mormons have more insight into my life, my spiritual experiences, and my relationship with God than I do. It's unfortunate that your husband experienced rude behavior from someone in a bookstore -- but it should give him some insight into what it's like to have your deepest, more important self dismissed out of hand by someone who doesn't even know you. Happens to me frequently.

anotherbrick, Your profile says that you live in Provo and are 23 years old. I think you are at the worst age and in the worst place in regard to dating LDS girls and not being an RM. I'm sure you do have a hard time dating. As you get a bit older -- and in almost any other place -- your RM status will not be nearly the issue it is now. If you don't have anything holding you to Provo specifically, move north of Point of the Mountain. You will notice a difference.

The Boy Scouts are not a religion, which makes a big difference. Freedom to practice your religion is a Constitutional right. Freedom be a scout is not.

I am thankful for two small things today specifically: I'm thankful there are honest people in the world -- most especially in the deli where I had lunch today and left my wallet. I'm thankful that my 15-year-old, very cute, very beloved, and very nasty (to everyone but me and my husband) little cat is -- according to bloodwork we got results of today -- completely, disgustingly healthy.

No, I was never counseled badly by a bishop. I would like to comment on the rest of your post, but it wouldn't be appropriate for this board.

I'm wondering exactly what makes PP so completely evil. The percentage of their services that are abortions? The amount of money they make from abortions? The fact that they do abortions at all? For all of you who believe that having a pap smear at PP sullies one's soul and constitutes a sin in and of itself, I'm wondering if you know how many abortions your OB/GYN has done? How many would he/she have to do before they were deemed to be "evil" and unqualified to treat you? How many abortions are done at your local hospital? What exactly is the threshold for knowing it's OK to patronize a given health care provider?

I respectfully suggest that it is not always a win-win situation. If you counsel with your bishop about your marriage, and he recommends that you seek divorce but is incorrect in his advice -- but you obey because he is your called and ordained bishop . . . I think being "blessed" for obedience is cold comfort for having followed uninspired advice -- especially if you had your own misgivings. Again, I'll say that considering a leader's input is one thing. Obeying for the sake of obeying is another.

I have to say, when I clicked and saw the picture, I thought it was intended to look like a burning cross. I don't think that is the intent, but the design is poor, with the bulbs sticking out of the sides. They could have outlined the cross in white lights, or covered it with white lights in rows and not had them sticking out. Unfortunate. Though I'm not old enough to remember the civil rights movement as she does, I think Elphaba and I have some touchstones that others here don't have. I lived in Alabama from 1965 to 1970 and from 1977 to 1982. I remember hearing about riots at the junior high school when I was in elementary school. I remember seeing the grand imperial wizard of the Ku Klux Klan on the news when I was in high school. The image of a burning cross strikes me with gut-level disgust, fear, and shame for what humans are capable of doing to each other -- similar to the feelings I have when confronted with a swastika. I really think our reactions here are based on our different backgrounds.