Wow. This article is GOOD. What a mini-controversy it has stirred. Tension. Discomfort. So many, active LDS members have responded so passionately here. I would bet 9/10 commentors here are current or former members. Few else know enough to bother commenting.

Hackneyed flattered-protests of the “Saints” are obsequious in their rejections: offended by ommissions but supportive of inclusion, miffed (”you just don’t get me”) yet smug (”that’s right, we’re the Chosen”), critical of specifics but placated of the overall, quick to reject it while highlighting their beliefs…

Myopic on the verge of blindness. Probably because they believe that the Countenance of the Godhead and His/Their Messengers cause blindness.

I hope you follow up this article with one about success stories of those recovering from Stockholm Syndrome.

Wow. This article is GOOD. What a mini-controversy it has stirred. Tension. Discomfort. So many, active LDS members have responded so passionately here. I would bet 9/10 commentors here are current or former members. Few else know enough to bother commenting.

Hackneyed flattered-protests of the “Saints” are obsequious in their rejections: offended by ommissions but supportive of inclusion, miffed (”you just don’t get me”) yet smug (”that’s right, we’re the Chosen”), critical of specifics but placated of the overall, quick to reject it while highlighting their beliefs…

Myopic on the verge of blindness. Probably because they believe that the Countenance of the Godhead and His/Their Messengers cause blindness.

I hope you follow up this article with one about success stories of those recovering from Stockholm Syndrome.

On one hand, I’m tickled by the info(intended, sorry, I’m weak). I will definitely be cocktelling it forward and expect positive reception. It’s also another opp to plug Good. However, as a 99% vegetarian by palate not politics, this is a graphic reminder of why I choose to abstain. Now tell me, what’s the best way to demonstrate this without setting down your beverage?