From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Subject: Oaths & Fervor (was `MORMONISM')
Summary: Religious zeal causes all sorts of things.
Keywords: zeal, znake, zloth, zailfish, zalamander, zcorpion, `Zoof!'
Organization: Glassboro State College
Disclaimer: Brandy the WonderDog is promoting Z awareness.
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 16:23:03 GMT


Just a few dozen articles after describing the JWs as paranoid, Jay Windley
starts to sound a bit unglued himself.  The issue is former LDS who have been
to the temple and then gone back on their `covenants' to be silent about what
goes on inside.

Mr Windley says that either they made the promises falsely, or they have gone
back on their words.  "However you look at it, these individuals are clearly
dishonest."  Then he asks why the feel the need to tell everybody about all
the little details, and why they are trying to tear down the LDS church and
drag it through the street.  His conclusion is this:

> Because the concern of these people is not for the welfare of their fellow
> men.  They're showmen, just like P. T. Barnum.  They thrive on the
> sensationalism, on the thrill of having people hang on their every word.

I think the business of covenants goes directly against Jesus' advice NOT to
swear oaths -- if you haven't sworn an oath to what ends up being an immoral
cause, you don't have any oath to go back on.  But given that one _has_ sworn,
and then discovers that fulfilling the oath entails allowing immorality, the
resulting conflict is not completely cut & dried.  If the ex-LDS truly believe
that LDS are going to burn forever, then embarassing millions of people in the
hope of turning even one away from Mormonism as a good trade.  The only
problem is the oath (which, granted, they shouldn't have taken in the first
place), but which pales in comparison to having people fry forever.  They may
even feel that the `covenant' was made under false pretenses, and therefore
they do not need to honor it.

As for the sensationalism, the fact that they use awful methods does not mean
that they don't care about the job; maybe they just feel that what they do is
the best method of getting results.  How many times has Joe Buehler written
to praise the Spanish Inquisition in this newsgroup?  He seems to really care
about his fellow men, and he seems to think that Isabella had a good idea.
Nothing the ex-LDS have ever done even comes close to Mr Buehler's heroes.


Suppose you made your promise, went into the temple, and found that human
sacrifice was going on; would you have kept silent, or run to the nearest
police station?  If you told, would going back on your promise have made you a
lousy source of information?  Would bringing 5 dozen police cars with lights
and sirens (making a huge public spectacle and embarassing many people) have
justified the claim that you didn't care about your fellow men?


I'm sorry that the ex-LDS expose things for public ridicule, and I'm sorry
that they took the ill-advised oath in the first place.  But you cannot
reasonably conclude that they don't actually care about people based on the
methods they use to help the people.  The most you can conclude is that they
aren't very tactful.


kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu      Darren F. Provine      ...njin!gboro!kilroy
"It is easier to guard against an enemy than against a friend." -- Alcmaeon