Does CougarBoard derive its freedom of speech

[SoonerCoug]

model from the LDS Church? I really think the model on Cougarboard is not unlike Church discipline, in the sense that a single person makes a judgment call, and you're allowed to say anything crazy that you want on Cougarboard as long as it's crazy conservative and not liberal. It really seems like a microcosm of a typical LDS ward.

For example, I got jumped on in my ward when I commented in Sunday School that I am grateful that we as members of the Church are taught principles about how to live our own lives, and then we are allowed to make political decisions, vote for candidates, and make secular decisions as we see fit.

I said something completely moderate, and I the Bishop said: "I feel it's necessary to clarify the Church's position on politics after Brother SoonerCoug's comments."

My bishop proceeded to explain that the Church does not "openly support a single party" but that we should vote for members of "the party whose principles are similar to those of the LDS Church," implying that one must vote Republican. This same Bishop had a 30 minute heart-to-heart friendly phone conversation with my ex-wife in the middle of a pre-marriage temple recommend interview with me and my fiancee (who is now my wife). Real idiot. Whoops, I just spoke ill of the Lord's anointed. My wife dropped the f-bomb about 30 times after that temple recommend interview.

[Indy Coug]

<Shakes head> Did you get banned from Cougarboard yesterday or something? Cougarboard is not liberal vs conservative as far as who gets busted and who doesn't or who gets deleted or who doesn't.

I've seen scores of very liberal stuff remain on that board.

[Solon]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

For example, I got jumped on in my ward when I commented in Sunday School that I am grateful that we as members of the Church are taught principles about how to live our own lives, and then we are allowed to make political decisions, vote for candidates, and make secular decisions as we see fit.

I said something completely moderate, and I the Bishop said: "I feel it's necessary to clarify the Church's position on politics after Brother SoonerCoug's comments."

My bishop proceeded to explain that the Church does not "openly support a single party" but that the we should vote for members of "the party whose principles are similar to those of the LDS Church," implying that one must vote Republican.

I don't know about Cougarboard (have never been), but this story from Sunday School is priceless. In my ward, we had a woman complain to the bishop because the new RS president was a democrat. The complainer seriously thought the RS pres's party affiliation precluded her from being a good LDS.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Solon

I don't know about Cougarboard (have never been), but this story from Sunday School is priceless. In my ward, we had a woman complain to the bishop because the new RS president was a democrat. The complainer seriously thought the RS pres's party affiliation precluded her from being a good LDS.

If it did, most people here would immediately join the dems to avoid callings.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

model from the LDS Church? I really think the model on Cougarboard is not unlike Church discipline, in the sense that a single person makes a judgment call, and you're allowed to say anything crazy that you want on Cougarboard as long as it's crazy conservative and not liberal. It really seems like a microcosm of a typical LDS ward.

For example, I got jumped on in my ward when I commented in Sunday School that I am grateful that we as members of the Church are taught principles about how to live our own lives, and then we are allowed to make political decisions, vote for candidates, and make secular decisions as we see fit.

I said something completely moderate, and I the Bishop said: "I feel it's necessary to clarify the Church's position on politics after Brother SoonerCoug's comments."

My bishop proceeded to explain that the Church does not "openly support a single party" but that we should vote for members of "the party whose principles are similar to those of the LDS Church," implying that one must vote Republican. This same Bishop had a 30 minute heart-to-heart friendly phone conversation with my ex-wife in the middle of a pre-marriage temple recommend interview with me and my fiancee (who is now my wife). Real idiot. Whoops, I just spoke ill of the Lord's anointed. My wife dropped the f-bomb about 30 times after that temple recommend interview.

Though I do think you're a little paranoid about the topic as you've been posting a lot about stuff like this lately, I do think that you're basing this on extreme experiences, not the norm type of experiences.

I mean I can find one extreme experience from some whack job in church every week, but those people I think aren't as much some would like to think they are.

For instance an experience several Sundays ago: While giving the announcements in Elders Quorum....the guy prefaces them by saying..."Bro So-and So couldn't make it here today, he's asked me to handle announcements and the lesson. He's been delayed by the fires down in Southern Utah and won't make it back in time."

Upon hearing this...a guy sitting right next to me mumbles..."Serves him right for driving back from vacation on the Sabbath." To which I just roll my eyes and say nothing....He sees me do this and goes..."I'm serious..." to which I respond...."yeah...I know you are." That's what I call an extreme wacko...but I don't think those are the norm as much as they used to be in some peoples eyes.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

Upon hearing this...a guy sitting right next to me mumbles..."Serves him right for driving back from vacation on the Sabbath." To which I just roll my eyes and say nothing....He sees me do this and goes..."I'm serious..." to which I respond...."yeah...I know you are." That's what I call an extreme wacko...but I don't think those are the norm as much as they used to be in some peoples eyes.

First of all, I haven't been posting much of anything lately.

Secondly, fanaticism is rampant in the LDS Church. If Church leaders would speak out against fanaticism more often, then the general membership would become more moderate. The problem is that most Church leaders aren't interested in having more moderate members of the Church, because moderates are less likely to pay their tithing and serve missions, etc.

Great things are accomplished when people are insanely religious. It's a form of idealism from which all humanity could benefit. Unfortunately, that same insanity that that leads to great things can also lead to horrible tragedies. It's a delicate balance, and I'm not sure what the answer is.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

First of all, I haven't been posting much of anything lately.

Secondly, fanaticism is rampant in the LDS Church. If Church leaders would speak out against fanaticism more often, then the general membership would become more moderate. The problem is that most Church leaders aren't interested in having more moderate members of the Church, because moderates are less likely to pay their tithing and serve missions, etc.

Great things are accomplished when people are insanely religious. It's a form of idealism from which all humanity could benefit. Unfortunately, that same insanity that that leads to great things can also lead to horrible tragedies. It's a delicate balance, and I'm not sure what the answer is.

Rampant? Nonsense. I've been in enough wards in enough states and countries to know that fanaticism is hardly rampant. It's fairly isolated.

Methinks you're just a bit oversensitive to those that are fanatical and then you attempt to paint this as a bigger issue than it really is.

Who in their right mind comes away from General Conference feeling like the leadership is fomenting fanaticism? If anything, moderation is being preached to those that would be fanatical.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Rampant? Nonsense. I've been in enough wards in enough states and countries to know that fanaticism is hardly rampant. It's fairly isolated.

Methinks you're just a bit oversensitive to those that are fanatical and then you attempt to paint this as a bigger issue than it really is.

Who in their right mind comes away from General Conference feeling like the leadership is fomenting fanaticism? If anything, moderation is being preached to those that would be fanatical.

I don't think the leadership is fomenting fanaticism. I think the problem is the masses, not the leaders. I think the leaders could do more to deal with the problem, but as a general rule, most general authorities are far more moderate than the average member.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

First of all, I haven't been posting much of anything lately.

Secondly, fanaticism is rampant in the LDS Church. If Church leaders would speak out against fanaticism more often, then the general membership would become more moderate. The problem is that most Church leaders aren't interested in having more moderate members of the Church, because moderates are less likely to pay their tithing and serve missions, etc.

Great things are accomplished when people are insanely religious. It's a form of idealism from which all humanity could benefit. Unfortunately, that same insanity that that leads to great things can also lead to horrible tragedies. It's a delicate balance, and I'm not sure what the answer is.

I have heard in conference lately many references to be more moderate. The Prophet himself has so spoken often. We are human. People hear what they want to.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

First of all, I haven't been posting much of anything lately.

Secondly, fanaticism is rampant in the LDS Church. If Church leaders would speak out against fanaticism more often, then the general membership would become more moderate. The problem is that most Church leaders aren't interested in having more moderate members of the Church, because moderates are less likely to pay their tithing and serve missions, etc.

Great things are accomplished when people are insanely religious. It's a form of idealism from which all humanity could benefit. Unfortunately, that same insanity that that leads to great things can also lead to horrible tragedies. It's a delicate balance, and I'm not sure what the answer is.

Your comment that fanaticism is rampant is more an indication of your paranoia perception than anything. Yes,,,there will always be those way out there,,,but those aren't the majority. Most are decent, normal down to earth people. Yes,,,the culture is a little odd, but that's always been the case.

You're ripping on fanaticism but at the same time are coming across that way with your point of view.