This is an archived copy of a post written by Conflict Of Justice (conflictofjustice.com). Used with permission: Conflict Of Justice may not agree with any alterations made.
You walk down the aisle of the store, and you see bags of chips with exciting colors and images of delicious potato chips. Your mouth waters and you purchase a bag. But when you open the bag you are disappointed to find some of the bag is filled with empty air. What a rip off! Like a bag of potato chips, I think every organization markets itself with enticing portrayals. Every group wants to look good. But at what point does it cross the line to manipulation? Is this something big religions do?
Inflicting Trauma?
Controlled trauma is very commonly used to impress messages on the masses. People are receptive when they are panicked into fear. We see this frequently in TV and films, where the shock value of graphic murder or rape portrayals are blended with certain social or political ideas. We see this in World War II propaganda, were people were convinced of an impending danger and sought a strong leader to keep them safe. Pain or the threat of pain quickly convinces a person to accept a solution that they would otherwise reject if they were in a normal state of mind. As George Orwell said: “Prolonged torture can influence anyone to do anything. Eventually, just the threat of torture is sufficient to make them do anything.”
Most people don’t think this happens today, or at least not to them. But the truth is that it is very common. Do we see this happen in religion?
- Bloody images of Jesus on the cross in mainstream Christianity?
- Shaming people for their sins? Helping people overcome their problems is one thing, but making people feel hopelessly unworthy crosses the line.
- Do some groups relish victimhood? I myself like to talk about historical persecution of Mormons, but this becomes undue trauma when it causes resentment that isn’t deserved and otherwise wouldn’t be there.
- Apocalyptic extremism? Unfortunately, this is more common than we would expect. The focus on impending doom fills us with fear, and this fear motivates us to attack some other religious group just as well as it motivates us to build underground shelters.
- In the mainstream media, we see fear hysterias that target religions–and Mormons are often the targets of the fear campaign rather than the source. Mitt Romney’s Mormon religion was exploited by the media, for example, and it seems like every couple months some hysteria pops up to make Mormons look like an imminent danger to some minority group.
Persistent Propaganda – The thing that makes this trauma effective is when it is persistent. In some parts of Europe, there are bloody images of Jesus with weeping women everywhere you go. In a large percentage of TV shows and films in popular culture, we see the same kind of graphic portrayals and messages. If we are constantly surrounded by a trauma-inducing message, it becomes torture that opens us up to the accompanying ideology.
The Mormon church has made a point to avoid using the cross as a symbol–not because we don’t believe in the cross symbolism but because it could be manipulative trauma. We do not get whipped up about some impending doom. We don’t target other religions. We don’t think we are worthless because of our sins. But on the other side, I see Antimormons and skeptics dwell on lurid polygamy stories and fear-inducing hysteria.
Mind-Control Music?
Music is an important part of the Mormon church. We open and close Sacrament services with hymns. But is it mind-controlling? The first time I heard about mind control was from a mission psychologist. He spoke about depression and other emotional issues, and then he explained how the brain processes information and how something as mundane as a pop song affects us. He specifically called out a Donny Osmond song.
I was reminded of this mission psychologist the other day as I watched conspiracy theorist Cathy O’Brian accuse the Mormon church–specifically Donny Osmond–of mind control:
“This was all known back then, and George Romney had two very significant agendas. One was to bring the Mormon church into popularity because it was the place where we get most of our FBI and everything–anybody that they need to robotically follow orders and carry out this criminal government agenda. So they needed to have a mind-control base to drawn from, and they wanted to have someone lead people into it, and here comes the Osmonds. The Osmonds, like the Jacksons, were in the same sub-project of MK Ultra that I was, and that was Project Monarch–it’s a genetic mind control. And in that genetic mind control they took full control of both the Osmonds and the Jacksons and used the Osmonds to bring people into the Mormon church, becase they really brought the Mormon church into the forefront of people’s minds.”
Cathy O’Brien
I’ve heard that the government recruits a lot of Mormons (though I haven’t seen any data on this), but why would my missionary leadership teach me this if that’s what the Mormon church was doing to manipulate me? Do people really have Mormonism at the forefront of their minds when they listen to Donny Osmond? I know I don’t. That’s all a wacky conspiracy theory. But is there some truth behind it?
Frequencies Affect Us – Certain beats and notes affect us physiologically in different ways. Ancient writers found that notes on the universal Solfeggio scale cause certain reactions. I find it interesting that LDS hymns often reflect these reactions. For example, hymn #1 in the hymnbook is “The Morning Breaks” and it talks about the majestic dawn of a better day. This is in the key of C, 528 hz. C on the Solfeggio scale. Ancient writers said this frequency creates an “increased amount of life energy, clarity of mind, awareness, awakened or activated creativity.” Hymn #2 is “The Spirit of God” and it is in the key of B flat. On the Solfeggio scale, B flat 852 hz. is about “opening a person up for communication with the all-embracing Spirit. It raises awareness and lets you return to spiritual order.”
We need to pay attention to how music affects us. Sometimes I find myself agitated, and when I try to figure out why I realize there is a low rumbling from an air conditioner or car speaker nearby that is getting on my nerves. Pure chords calm and help us think. Dissonant chords with clashing harmonics and low rumblings distress us. Constant rhythmic beats place us in a hypnotic zone that help us focus but don’t allow us to see a wide frame of view. I don’t see how Mormon music does anything but help us touch into the positive power of music with pure chords, as all traditional Christian music does. If the music were manipulating us by distressing, agitating, or using trance-like rhythm, we would feel it.
Follow The Prophet Vs. Pink Floyd – The song that skeptics always point to for Mormon mind-control is ‘Follow The Prophet’. It is a children’s song about following the prophet because “he knows the way.” Are Mormons indoctrinating children to follow their church leaders? No, the lyrics don’t say anything about modern prophets, but just relates quick stories about the lives of biblical prophets we can learn from.
Something interesting I noticed (maybe this idea is too far out there, I dunno) is that Follow The Prophet sounds so similar to Another Brick In The Wall by Pink Floyd. Similar minor keys and basic chord progressions. Yet Pink Floyd’s song is about stopping the indoctrination of children and thought control. Is the message in ‘Follow the Prophet’ comparable? Yes, I think so. “Now we have a world where people are confused. If you don’t believe it, go and watch the news. We can get direction all along our way if we heed the prophets—follow what they say.” The message is that in our modern world full of confusion and so many people telling us false things, trying to influence us to their own ends, and that there is classic wisdom in the scriptures that keeps us grounded. In the third part of ‘Another Brick in the Wall’ there are a mash of confusing sounds from a TV and then the words: “I don’t need no arms around me and I don’t need no drugs to calm me. I have seen the writing on the wall. Don’t think I need anything at all.” The phrase ‘writing on the wall’ is a reference to the prophet Daniel in the bible who retained the ancient wisdom of his prophet forefathers while living in a foreign land. He was able to translate the writing that appeared on the non-Israelite king’s wall because he didn’t give in to Babylonian influences. I think that’s kinda the same message. So it’s weird actually how these two songs not only relate musically but also in the message they teach, which is a message against thought control.
Food Restrictions?
Drugs – Utah has an enormous drug problem that I wish the church would address. Prescription drug deaths in Utah have quintipled in the last 15 years, making it a higher cause of death than guns or car crashes. A third of adults have taken pain killers in the last 12 months. It is a huge nationwide problem and only getting worse. Medication should be used when appropriate. But such large numbers is a problem. In North Korea, every home is said to have an ample supply of marijuana. Such mind-altering drugs are a staple of cults. They get people addicted, use hallucinations to imitate a spiritual experience, and make drugs a dependency to gain control. The Mormon church urges people to avoid this.
Coffee – What about alcohol and coffee? The church’s 1833 health standard was ahead of its time by warning Mormons to avoid alcohol, tobacco, and coffee because of “the hearts of conspiring men” who want people to get addicted. Alcoholism is definitely a problem, and as much as we see article after article about the health benefits of coffee, I think the long lines of dreary-eyed people sitting in Starbucks on street corners show there is a problem that needs to be addressed in America. Some accuse these restrictions in the church as manipulative, but human beings were getting along fine without coffee for millions of years. Why is it suddenly a human necessity?
One thing I will admit is that sometimes we in the church use a manipulative tactic of serving refreshments after a long sermon. There is a kind of Pavlov Dog’s effect, where we feel rewarded with the treat by sitting through the sermon, and that leads us to associate the sermon with that reward. But I suppose the same trick was used when I got served orange slices in halftime soccer games as a kid.
Aspartame – Growing up, I had an uncle who sang in the Tabernacle Choir, and when we visited his home he warned us of the grave dangers of soda pop. I always thought that was silly, though I rarely drank soda as a kid and hardly ever ate fast food at all. But soda is becoming the Mormon’s alternative to alcohol, and soda is served way too much in America in general. Some sodas use the chemical aspartame as an articial sweetener, which has been linked to cancer and mood disorders. It is becoming a huge problem.
I would say there is a dietary problem with Mormons, but this is a problem with the West in general. Our health code goes a long way to help, and just the fact that we have a health code helps–so many people don’t care what they eat. Most people don’t consider how their diet affects their brain.
Emotional Dependency?
The difference between a mind-controlling cult and an uplifting organization is that cult tells you to color inside the lines while the uplifting organization teaches you artistic principles to draw what you want. Cults are described as intentionally stunting psychological development to keep a person dependent like a child and a parent. But Mormons don’t call their religious leader “Father” as other churches do, do they? They don’t tell members which person to marry, who to work for, where to live, or what to do. We teach correct principles and let people govern themselves.
There are cultural conventions in the church, like going to BYU for school, marrying a return-missionary, and so forth; but those are just cultural conventions. Those are positive convenient resources that we have available, but by no means a requirement or expectation (or at least they shouldn’t be).
Oh, but Mormons are all told they should get married, volunteer service in the church, go on missions, have certain gender roles, etc. Isn’t that coloring inside the lines? These are cultural expectations that a member doesn’t necessarily have to follow but are encouraged to. They are encouraged to do this because marriage makes most people happy and is important for societal stability. It’s like going to school: certain institutions are good for people. But you don’t have to do these things.
I have noticed that many skeptical and Antimormon groups try to poke holes in Mormon doctrine, but what alternative do they offer? Just ideology. To me this is mind control. It is restrictive if you are given no basis to form your own ideas and must mimic whatever you read from the Reddit group. To get the answer for every little thing and not get the principles for how to get to the answer is like a school kid who always cheats from his neighbor and never learns the school lessons. Mormonism is all about learning the principles, not getting the answers for every little thing in life. We don’t sit around at church and tell each other what to do, and we don’t fit everything around an ideological box. In the church, we are not handed crayons and coloring books. We are empowered with principles to create our own lives, however we want.
Patriarchy – Feminists claim they have to depend on men for confessions, ordinances, blessings, and community leadership. The church is somewhat unique these days by how it is organized, but is the fact that a social structure exists an indicator of mind control? Rigid social structure could be a problem if leadership becomes overbearing, like a school teacher that won’t let you get a drink of water without her/him breathing over your shoulder. But the fact that simple hierarchy exists I don’t think is a compelling argument. Women in the church are treated as adults like anyone else, and they teach and give sermons and participate like anyone else.
The issue of female participation in the church is far from new. Victor Hugo condemned the religious convent as a relic of ancient times: “[The nun’s] nerves have turned to bone; their bones have turned to stone. Their veil is of woven night. Their breath under their veil resembles the indescribably tragic respiration of death. The abbess, a spectre, sanctifies them and terrifies them. The immaculate one is there, and very fierce.” There is a large discussion going on today about what empowers women. What kills a person’s abilities, free will, and spirit? What enlivens abilities, free will, and spirit? Destructive cults tell people that they need to sacrifice abilities for the sake of God, and I don’t see this happen in the Mormon church. We do not have cloisters or nunneries. Feminists complain that women give up employment for the sake of motherhood, but doesn’t this happen the other way around–don’t many women in America sacrifice motherhood for the sake of employment? Who today resembles the nuns of ancient times who gave up motherhood to do busywork? Which kind of woman today ends up angry, fierce, and empty inside, as Victor Hugo described? So, there needs to be a balance, and I think it happens on an individual basis. This balance becomes increasingly difficult to determine as popular cultural expectations become more extreme and ideological notions of “empowerment” more convoluted.
Avoiding External Dependencies – I am not aware of any theological restriction that prevents a Mormon from exercising free will. Oh sure, there are restrictions. But like the Mormon health code guidelines, these restrictions prevent addictions and dependency on outside controlling influences–physically, emotionally, and spiritually. Individual agency is a central idea in the Mormon gospel and is part of everything we do. A few individuals may stray from church teachings and set a bad example, because we value personal agency, but I believe the alternative is an authoritarian system that does not give us spiritual independence.Death wishes from the media for Mormons in the aftermath of Proposition 8:
Gay Rights – A scholar named Steve Hassan criticized the church for its policies about homosexuality. This is a hot topic right now, with widespread media hysteria everywhere about Mormons, while in reality Mormons have nothing against homosexuals. We don’t go around hating people that violate what we consider commandments. We feel no need to compel people to believe as we do or behave as we do. We also do not define people by their behavior. Are people cultists unless they believe in gay marriage?
I find this ironic coming from Steve Hassan, as he reportedly got his start after Jonestown killings in 1979. Jim Jones persuaded people to join his cult by talking about civil rights. Witnesses said Jim Jones “seemed to want to empower and defend you” by protecting rights. “He was determined to make the Peoples Temple a more openly homosexual” friendly church. Witnesses said: “Every single person felt they had a purpose there and they were exceptionally special and that’s how he brought so many young collage kids in, so many older black women in, so many from diverse backgrounds who realised that there was something bigger then themselves they needed to be involved in and Jim Jones offered that… He was a man who understood the troubles of minorities and just generally of others, always ready to empathise with others.” (Tim Brooks on jonestown.sdsu.edu)
So Steve Hassan ought to know that minorities who feel disenfranchised by society can be exploited by a cult if they are made to feel special. That is a danger as well. I know homosexual Mormons who feel welcome, included, and happy in the Mormon church. Members do not attack them for their feelings or call them sinners. The political attacks on Mormons by the mainstream media paint a false picture of how we are and how we treat people. We do not cave to political correctness or flatter people with platitudes. But we try to treat people with the respect they deserve as children of God.
Intellectual Manipulation?
| See also: | Is Mormonism A Cult? |
No New Ideas Allowed – Ideologues encompass all opinions and all speech within the ideology, so that you are a sinner if your choice of breakfast cereals falls outside the group’s decision. With ideologues, all opinions must be the same. They hiss and scream at you for thinking differently. Does this describe Mormons? What about Antimormons?
It would be nice if Antimormons and skeptics would allow for open discussion in their spaces, and I think open discussion is important. By all means, let’s have a healthy debate, and let’s not misrepresent the other side, stifle their conversation, or debate dishonestly. Mind-controlling groups say they are having an “open discussion” but really it is all about purging anything that conflicts with the ideology, and this must not become the purpose of dialectic and debate, because this shuts down constructive discussion. There are many who have blocked me on social media because they couldn’t tolerate my opinions. They don’t allow room for my ideas.Mormons stereotyped by Google:
Stereotyping Outsiders – Ideologues paint a broad stroke of anyone not in their group. This is an easy trap to fall into for any group, and particularly a group with such unique differences as Mormons have. I guess I do it a little myself. We all do. But I don’t really see it as a problem among Mormons. Conversely, however, we are one of the most falsely-stereotyped groups in America. Do a Google Image search and see how idealogues have stereotyped us.
All-Encompassing Ideology – Ideologues encompass politics, opinions, ideas, and all beliefs around one ideology. So when Mormons get called mind-controllers because we oppose gay marriage, that sets up a red flag to me because they don’t even know why Mormons oppose gay marriage or the Mormon history with marriage. Anyone who opposes gay marriage must hate gays and must be hurtful? Look at any of the social issues that Mormons get attacked for, from racism, to sexism, to homophobia. They are always telling us there is one prescribed path to follow for all of these issues, while we recognize issues are complex and require a balance of policy and individual tailored care. Personal agency requires a large amount of individualism.
Mormons recognize that the gate is narrow and the path strait, but we don’t say that there is always one prescribed solution for everything, one formula to use. People are not robots that react the same to each condition. This is why God sends out individual missionaries to talk to people one-on-one while Satan broadcasts programs on TV and messages in the media to millions of people at a time. It is the fate of machines to receive the same programming as if every other machine is built the same way. But we are not machines. We are men and women, and the Holy Ghost talks to us individually on a case by case basis, and most of the time there is not one single “correct” choice that we must make. Socialists think individuals are shaped by society and Mormons think society is shaped by individuals. We promote individuality.
Purging Thoughts – Ideologues purge thoughts that conflict with the ideology, and this is something we definitely see with skeptics and Antimormons. Only after you purge a testimony of the gospel from your mind can you see truth. For example, CES Letter says: “It was only after I lost my testimony… that I could clearly see the above cultish aspects of the Church and why people came to the conclusion that Mormonism is a cult.” Ideologues kill their beliefs to fall in line with a strict ideology of conformity and pre-scripted narrative. Why does CES Letter copy multiple pages from an Antimormon website and rehash the same kind of arguments that have been made against Mormons for hundreds of years? Are people really free to speak their minds once they leave the church? Or do they just copy the narrative that others like them have carried before? Mind control is truly successful if a target thinks they are free-thinking when they are just copying a pre-written script. It is frustrating to talk to many Antimormons because critical analysis is just not there. It’s like the atheist who replies “there is not objective evidence for God” no matter what you say. There is a pre-written narrative based on the ideology and they won’t budge or truly investigate.
In my analysis Antimormon rhetoric I have found several mind-controlling sophistic elements.
- Oversimplification – Antimormons often oversimplify. For example, Joseph Smith had 34 wives, right? They don’t get context of what a “wife” meant or why it happened, just “Joseph Smith had 34 wives.” Antimormons also add unnecessary complexity. For example, they accuse us of having ‘blind faith’ yet they build a complicated narrative based on extremely unreliable quotes about Joseph Smith translating with seer stones –he started with a white stone, then used the Urim and Thummim, then used a chocolate-covered stone, then nobody said anything about it until forty years later, etc.
- Out Of Context – Rarely do Antimormons give quotes that aren’t out of context. It’s like they take everything out of context. For example, CES Letter takes a revelation out of context to incorrectly claim Joseph Smith changed the church’s name to ‘The Church of the Latter Day Saints.’ Actually, the revelation says nothing about a name change.
- Conceal Information – Antimormons often accuse Mormons of hiding information, but Antimormons build their arguments by hiding essential information themselves. For example, when they incorrectly claim Joseph Smith tried to translate something that a scientist declared fake, they don’t mention that it was a church scientist that declared it fake. Do Mormons hide information? Every organization is a little selective about what they talk about, but I have never seen a Mormon leader or teacher lie about Mormon history or Mormon beliefs–and I have seen many talks, lectures, lessons, and literature. If someone is accusing a Mormon of lying, it is probably because that person has a false strawman impression about Mormon beliefs or Mormon history.
- Spying – Antimormons allege a secret committee that purges nonbelievers from Mormonism. This is false. I have seen zero spying or monitoring within the church. But what about Antimormons? For many years, Antimormons have been stealing information and leaking documents from the church. But lately, it has taken a much darker turn. Antimormons have started releasing hundreds of videos taken inside the temple and church Sunday School groups–common members of the Mormon church who did not consent to being video-taped. Antimormons also pretend to be believing members and send their child to meet with the bishop privately, and then they publish hidden videos on the internet of the Bishop. These undercover videos are being released on the internet for millions of people to ridicule, and no Mormon is safe. Antimormons are tresspassing on private property to take these undercover videos, and they are illegally stealing private information, and these spies are planted all across the church at many levels. “Moderate” Antimormons feign to condemn such practices, but in reality they support the people who do this and invite them on their shows.
Loaded Language – In my analysis of CES Letter I made lists of logical fallacies for each argument they present against the church. One fallacy that we frequently see in propaganda in general is emotionally charged language that prevents critical thought. In one single page of CES Letter, for example, there is frequent talk of murder and killing associated with Mormons. Or we get dramatic language that makes us upset about a mall being funded by the church. There are repeated slogans. It is hard to think critically about something when it is framed with words that lead to a certain strong emotion. Does the church use loaded language? Sure, but I haven’t found any language that prevents me from thinking critically.- Historical Guilt – The LDS church does not lead me to feel guilty about anything my ancestors did. I think the glaring example in religion of historical guilt is the idea that we are damned because of Eve partaking of the forbidden fruit. But Mormons don’t believe in original sin. “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam’s transgression.” Likewise, we don’t believe people are cursed for anything their ancestors did. Scriptures do speak of a “curse” because some people are born into underprivileged circumstances. But we are not destined to anything or liable for anything someone else did. But Mormons are constantly shamed by the media and skeptics because of polygamy, aren’t we? Polygamy? The media won’t stop talking about it. Or what about the racial priesthood ban? That was a long time ago, but Antimormons, skeptics, and the media insist that it is still a problem we need to address. We are guilty. So really there is all kinds of social and historical guilt heaped upon Mormons by not by the church, it’s from Antimormons. It becomes even worse when Antimormons say we are trying to omit it. Mormons cannot express the outrage they rightfully feel about this because, after all, polygamy did happen. It becomes an original sin. This goes back to the idea of “original sin,” which feudal lords taught to their workers. If faced with a sin that you didn’t commit and you can’t reconcile, universal salvation is the only possible answer. If I’m being blamed for polygamy which I had nothing to do with it, how else could salvation come to me except universally? In a Socialist society, you are lumped by class and suffer for the misdeeds of others in that class: Mormon men are unequal to Mormon women because of this original sin, and we need “social justice” to equalize the classes. It is interesting that some skeptics would treat polygamy like some kind of original sin that Mormons aren’t allowed to get past, as the feudal Dark Age Lords also enforced their universal salvation ideology by oppressing the people with an original sin doctrine–Adam’s sin. Universal salvation follows original sin: You must propagate social justice or you are damned for Joseph Smith’s polygamy. This is how an extreme alternative ideology is often propagated using this narrative about Mormon polygamy.
- Fear Of Leaving – It can be hard to consider leaving any group that is such a deep part of your identity. Could you just pick up right now and move to Siberia? The problem is if your fears of leaving an organization are based on impractical scenarios, like thinking you will become homeless if you leave the church. Do some Mormons think they will become homeless or druggies or whatever if they leave the church? I don’t know. Ex-Mormons often say they thought that. I don’t think that. The church doesn’t teach that. But what do skeptics and Antimormons say they will become if they become Mormons? Well, look at the caricatures they present of Mormons, as mindless dupes or sex-crazed brainwashed robots. Look at how they talk about their ‘previous life’ as a Mormon. Would you say their fear of becoming Mormon is based on impractical scenarios? Often it is.
- Ends Justifying The Means – One narrative that Antimormons tell about the church is that doctrine updates to take care of problems. For example, they allege a blood-atonement doctrine that Mormons used to keep people in line. Well, this blood-atonement allegation is a hoax. The ends do not justify the means. But again, what about Antimormons who tresspass onto church property and film Mormons without their permission? What about fake press releases that Antimormons fabricate to whip up a media narrative and embarrass Mormons?
- Power Of Suggestion – Mimetic theory states that people internalize an idea if it is something commonly said around them, and then they repeat it on to the next generation. We can see this theory operate in the mainstream media, where the same headlines and the same narratives are often repeated on hundreds of thousands of news sites and blogs around the world. The same ideas spread rapidly across national boundaries. (To be clear, I’m not saying all media does this.) Antimormons often portray the Mormon testimony of the gospel as a mimetic idea that we have internalized because it has been repeated so many times. I guess it is easier to get rid of a deeply held belief if you decide you only think that because you have been brainwashed to think that. But Mormon testimonies are not mimetic. We don’t just ignore contradicting information and convince ourselves of the gospel. We gain knowledge through tests of faith. With Antimormons, I see lots of repetition in their rhetoric, appeals to popular cultural belief, and ideas that we are just supposed to accept. Skeptics say the “burning in the bosom” that some Mormons say confirmed their testimony is a manifestation of suggestion. Mormons just heard about the burning in the bosom, wanted it badly to happen, and made themselves feel that way in a moment of meditation? Well, that wasn’t my experience. I felt the burning in the bosom as a confirmation of my testimony, but for me it happened before I even knew what the burning in the bosom was. It happened when I was very young and nobody had even talked to me about it. I didn’t know what was happening, and it wasn’t until years later that I made the connection. It was not something I wanted to happen. It did not occur during meditative circumstances–no soft music, repetitive chanting, droning sermon, boring video, or anything like that. So all I can say is I know for a fact the burning in the bosom phenomenon is not mimetic.
Getting Both Sides Of The Argument, Or Just Pretending To? – One time, I came across some Moonies when I was on my mission. We were tracting, and a teenage kid agreed to meet with us at his home, and he mentioned that he was in the Unification Church. My missionary companion and I discussed how to approach this. Should we talk about cults? Should we debunk everything they believe in? In the end, we decided to simply lay out some of the Mormon core beliefs and not talk about Moonies at all. We would only get half an hour tops with the kid, if any at all, and that probably wouldn’t be enough to change his mind about anything. If the Moonies were really everything that I had heard about, the parents certainly wouldn’t let us deprogram their son.
Both parents greeted us with warm handshakes. Their home looked like any other home I’ve been in. They invited us to talk with their son alone in the other room. He asked us a few questions about our beliefs and we gave our answers, and that was it. Nobody attacked each other. I don’t know if the parents were listening in. If they did, I hope at least our visit established good will and let them know that Mormon missionaries aren’t out to tear down anyone’s beliefs.
It reminded me of my dad as I was growing up who played Christian radio whenever we were in the car. Often, the radio would attack Mormons, and my dad just sat there and let it play. I later asked him why he didn’t switch stations, and he said he wanted me to get both sides of the argument. He didn’t deprogram me after–he didn’t talk about the Antimormon attacks. He didn’t give me answers to the accusations. He didn’t even tell me that he expected me to get answers for myself. He just let the radio play. That taught me a valuable lesson, and that is why I try to learn about as many different viewpoints and as many different beliefs as I can, even beliefs from people that hate me. I take seriously the belief that I shouldn’t be overbearing as a leader or church member, authoritarian, or engage in “priestcraft.” But I’m also not wishwashy either–giving into political correctness or accusations of racism or sexism. I am going to believe what I believe and practice what I practice, and if some people think that my mind is under someone’s control or influence, that’s fine. But it seems like people who say this often are projecting their own issues onto me.