Lookie what some P.O.S. self righteous mormon puke has to say to the wives of so-called apostate men:


His entire diatribe is here under his site S.P.A.M.(Society for the Prevention of Anti-Mormonism):
http://spamlds.ning.com/profiles/blogs/ ... hildren-of

The Foyer is burning about this guy and ready to hang him out for public display by the masonic nipple marks of his one piece jesus jammies. See it here
Are there any current TBM MDB members that would like to show their support for this vile home wrecking mormon?

I believe the person he speak about is good old Bob McCue.

Apparently he has responded to the firestorm:

http://spamlds.ning.com/profiles/blogs/ ... ck-a-nerve

A sharp jab at Fair/Farms:
With this member spouting off his own feelings about this and given the mainstreaming efforts of LDS Inc, one has to wonder how long before LDS Inc silences him.

Porter,
Someone else mentioned this. It got me to thinking about a quote of Matthew Cowley. he was speaking in regards to women who join the church whose husbands do not. he stated that they shoudl simpy be as faithful as they could and to set the example for their husbands, praying that the Spirit might work upon them and entice them to join.

An apostate is a different matter entirely. its one thign to be apathetic, it's another thing to be antagonistic. If there are children involved that makes matters worse. I think if the unfaithful spose lets things alone and allows the spose to practie her faith with the children, then its just sad and she shoudl just do the best she can. If the husband is militant in his stance is is actively preaching against the church, then divorce may be the best option.

Gazelam

Depends on the apostate I suppose, but from what I've seen here, I highly recommend the believing spouse should divorce and seek full custody in order to protect the children. If the Church is true, it's the only logical conclusion one can come to.



Agreed.



"The Foyer" seems to be full of people who have a hard time functioning in normal society. What makes you think their opinions matter?

Thanks Gazelam and bc for your replies.

So then, a father, such as I, has no rights to stand for his children?

At least in the pious pupils of LDS members such as you two?

Would you seriously rather see a family split up because the father exits mormonism and feels strongly about getting his kids out?

The exact same could be said about the majority of the members of the MA&D house.

I guess a believing defender like yourself cannot view places like the foyer and this board without contempt.

You're welcome!



The other spouse has no rights?



You think I'm being pious?



I'd rather see a loving husband and wife, strong in the Church.

Could be said indeed. But could it be proved? Personally, I think it's a small minority.



Righteous indignation indeed.

Bitch slapping you all with a CHI!

2006 Church Handbook of Instruction, page 26, paragraph 12:

I'm aware of the instruction. Acting as a priesthood officer, I have never so counseled.

The other spouse has no rights?[quote]
In my case, my wife always did have her own rights and own choices. Even served as a counselor in the RS presidency for nearly three years after I went completely inactive.

It took her much longer to realize what I did in three weeks. But once she did, she now thanks me for taking a stand and not hiding my feelings about what mormonism can do to children.

What did I do?

Drank coffee in front of the kids and even let them try some when my daughter came home from a primary lesson that said drinking coffee was bad.

I never drank alcohol in front of them. But today now that we all are out, my wife and I keep beer and wine in the fridge and drink freely in front of them, in moderation of course. Hell we have even taken them to the local BevMo alcohol store to pick up a mini keg of german beer for a party.

Every week I told the kids I would miss them while they were at church.

And yes, she had a bishop, two actually, all but tell her to divorce me. The got as close to it as they could, probably because the CHI stopped them.

I actually had to call on bishop on the phone and told him to stop talking to my wife and kids or I would fill his office with future apostates. He stopped even looking at my wife in the hallways of the chapel.

Bottom line is the LDS church still values membership over families. They are just more subtle about it now.

Christmas would come early for me if someone could stamp "Tool" above this guys' head in corporately sinister block letters....

This is complete nonsense. Are we talking about killing the spouse, or divorce? How on earth are you protecting the children from the apostate parent by divorcing them? Unless the father/mother drops off the face of the earth and decides to never see their children again, I don't see how this can protect anyone. If anything, this will only make the apostate more hostile to the church, and the children will see Mormonism as the cause for the break up of the family.

Even if the spouse has very antagonistic views of the religion and is actively "fighting the church", how does destroying a family give the kids a better chance at becoming stalwart Mormons? Most of the kids I grew up with from broken homes did not remain active in the church and struggled during their teen years.


What about the apostate mothers out there who get full custody of the children. Do you still recommend divorce?

These responses by TBMs on divorcing apostates are some of the most disgusting I've ever seen on Mormon discussion forums.

Hi PP,

Nice to see you're still active..

If I were to discover a pious busybody like this clown speaking these words to my wife or kids I'd have to hunt him down and kick his pious ass.

I left the church because Smith did not represent my personal ideals of morality and virtue. He was a scumbag in the most literal sense.

The ignorant little p-holder makes the allusion that a mormon woman that divorces her "apostate" husband will get full custody of the kids.

This guy has done nothing but teach a dumb woman how to saw off the branch she's sitting on.

On the board that is... :) Don't want people thinking I am back to wearing jesus jammies and reading make believe stories from Joe & Co...

Yep. Just like I told the bishop who kept hounding my wife when she still attended. I essentially kicked his spiritual ass!

I have a hunch this guy has some "moral" problems of his own. In my experience, people like him who spew the most about issues like usually end up a cheater, closet something, or a pope punisher..

Bingo. I agree and this was why I wanted to make a stand and set an example for my kids and wife to see.


Excellent mental image! Oh man if I were as talented as Steve Benson, I'd draw a cartoon of the image you just formed in my head!

This guy is dumber than a rock with his reasoning.

Shunning the non-member is not a Christian act. Divorce and acrimony are not a good thing for most.

The years that pass change people in various ways but deep hurt turns to bitterness and prevents a return and or reconciliation.

That one believes and the other does not is not reason enough to separate no matter what this fool says. How can one bring a non-believer back into the fold by punishing them this way? Whether it happens or not, you close the door with this choice. You deliberately make it hateful and hurtful rather than allowing free choice and befriending one who is married to a believer. Many who do not believe later come into the fold. This choice and method pushes them away and pisses on the idea of change and acceptance. It is Satans way, not that of a loving Father or God.

Believe LDS or not, how do you fellowship someone you are beating over the head? How do you preach repentance and love when you deliberately force ruin and family break-up on someone? This is teaching hate an intolerance, not charity and understanding.

West also makes reference to The 2nd Token of the Melchizedek Priesthood or Sure Sign of the Nail given during the temple endowment. The name of this token is the actual prayer a mormon man will mutter and peep to resurrect his wives, mistresses, concubines and their children.

Basically West is saying that if a man can't resurrect his family he is not fit to preside and should be abandoned.

I did catch one doctrinal mistake: Contrary to his opinion, a woman remains sealed to her children even if her husband is no longer a member. Keep in mind ladies that you generally don't pick your new spouse, biblically the mornon God will give you and kids to whoever the patriarch is in the family - brother that's broke and working yet another MLM or his senile old grandpa..

Sounds like the same argument the church uses on people leaving.

6 months after I went through the temple in 1988 I had questions that no one would answer. I admit I had a terrible marriage of 17 years but the temple was to make all that better because we worked so long to become "worthy". In just 6 months and because I asked questions the Bish and company hired a ward member attorney for my then wife and filed for a divorce. They paid for it or the attorney donated his services. She never paid for it. The Bish (a foot Doctor) gave her a job in his office. Long story short, 5 years later he had to let her go for embezzlement. Charges were never filed but she should have went to prison. I believe he was diddling her from the beginning. During my 6 month questioning period they had weekly 3 and 4 hour "marriage counseling sessions" per week. When I demanded that I attend one of these sessions or she wasn't going to, then they filed on me.

So much for the CHI.

This.


And this.

While custody battles still favor the mother, there is a chance that the father will get at least partial custody of the children; if he does he'll still have plenty of access for teaching the children his views on the church. I imagine what he says about the church is going to be a lot harsher if his wife divorced him for no reason other than his apostasy. And how are the children going to feel about the religion that broke up their family?

This is just bad advice. Want some better advice? If you can't deal with the possibility (however remote) that your spouse might someday leave your religion, don't get married.

It's not the religion that keeps a man and woman together, it's the ideals they share.

This tool doesn't recognize this. He lives a life of misplaced duty and mormonspeak to seek balance and peace. He'll never truly find it if he's actually looking for it. I feel for his wife unless she's as shallow as he is.

I assume he lives in Mesa, Arizona because that's the temple I got married in behind him.

You have to read the full quote. He's arguing for divorce and full custody. He wants the nonbeliever to be completely stripped of his or her children to cut off their influence. Unfortunately for BCSpace, the court system isn't a theocracy yet. Getting a divorce isn't going to guarantee you full custody. So one would think he'd have to temper his advice based on how effectively the believing parent can destroy the apostate's relationship with their children.

I'm not a big fan of using the word "cult," mainly because its too loose, polemical, and inconsistently applied. But I insofar as it is used to refer to these kind of manipulative belief maintenance techniques, I'm not shedding a tear if the term gets thrown around.

P.S. I read the "SPAM" link and I had a hard time telling if it was a parody or not.