Getting rid of Mormon books and other various books

[dianaiad]

Diana,

Please see post number 72.

Are you going to provide a source for this statement, or are you just going to pretend that 2 requests for the information were not made?

If you make a definitive statement like that, you are to provide your source.

Please do so, or retract it.

OK, here it is…a list, including the source (the Pew research center) of where Catholics and Mormons stand, educationally, in terms of college degrees.

BTW, I don’t use Lightplanet for anything but my own entertainment. I may LIKE the bias it represents, but I also recognize that it is biased.
At first I used something I read in the FAIR site, where it showed the educational levels of different religions. I remembered that it was Jews, then Mormons…
But I was wrong. It’s not “Jews, then Mormons.”
In the order of the most college degrees, Americans come in these flavors:
Reformed Jewish
Orthodox (the Eastern Orthodox folks)
Hindus (though they have the most post graduate degrees by far)
Greek Orthodox
All Jewish
Agnostics
Unitarians
Atheists
Buddhists
Mormons
Catholics
Muslims
New Age
Evangelical Protestants
Historically Black Protestant
Jehovah’s Witnesses

That’s for BA’s.
For advanced degrees, we have, in order of ‘the most,’
Hindu (I said that already)
Jewish,
Unitarians
Atheists
Agnostics
Catholics and Mormons are neck and neck
We’re both ahead of Protestants in general, and WAY ahead of the evangelical and historically black Protestant churches.
As far as the Jehovah’s Witnesses go, evidently they don’t emphasize higher education much.

Found it here: religions.pewforum.org/pdf/table-education-by-tradition.pdf

 

[twopekinguys]

OK, here it is…a list, including the source (the Pew research center) of where Catholics and Mormons stand, educationally, in terms of college degrees.

BTW, I don’t use Lightplanet for anything but my own entertainment. I may LIKE the bias it represents, but I also recognize that it is biased.
At first I used something I read in the FAIR site, where it showed the educational levels of different religions. I remembered that it was Jews, then Mormons…
But I was wrong. It’s not “Jews, then Mormons.”
In the order of the most college degrees, Americans come in these flavors:
Reformed Jewish
Orthodox (the Eastern Orthodox folks)
Hindus (though they have the most post graduate degrees by far)
Greek Orthodox
All Jewish
Agnostics
Unitarians
Atheists
Buddhists
Mormons
Catholics
Muslims
New Age
Evangelical Protestants
Historically Black Protestant
Jehovah’s Witnesses

That’s for BA’s.
For advanced degrees, we have, in order of ‘the most,’
Hindu (I said that already)
Jewish,
Unitarians
Atheists
Agnostics
Catholics and Mormons are neck and neck
We’re both ahead of Protestants in general, and WAY ahead of the evangelical and historically black Protestant churches.
As far as the Jehovah’s Witnesses go, evidently they don’t emphasize higher education much.

Found it here: religions.pewforum.org/pdf/table-education-by-tradition.pdf

I did just a quick look at the link you provided (I will look at it more in depth later), but, it looks like Catholics and Mormons are pretty neck and neck for the college degree section and tied for the post grads.

Not really a definitive statement on who is better educated, wouldn’t you say?

 

[Brandon_Cal]

I believe that I was rather clear in my differentiation here: it’s all in the motive.

In some cases, burning is considered the respectful way to treat a symbol/book/item that is too old or damaged to serve its purpose.

In some cases, the purpose for the burning is the fire; nothing else around, you need heat, or light, or the ability to cook, and that’s what’s there.

I deliberately avoided these scenarios since, as you aptly point out, there’s no question about motive. I chose my words very carefully in that post and wanted you to explain how it is in your mind you can conflate this:

In some cases, the motive is to express displeasure/hatred/disagreement with the ideas expressed within the book.

with this:

It is the latter that is problematic, and it doesn’t really matter WHERE it is done, the motive is the same; hatred for the ideas…and for the people who believed in, or originated, those ideas.

Ideas are not people, no matter how frequently you assert it to be. Hating ideas are not the same as hating people. The two can coincide, but they do not do so necessarily. Do you remember that Evangelical pastor who made headlines a couple years ago for having a “Burn the Qur’an Day”? He made a huge spectacle of it, created a mock trial for the book, advertised the event, filmed it, and published it for all the world to see. In this case it’s fairly obvious that his motive was to rile up Muslim people. He wanted to anger Muslims and provoke them to react because he hated not only the Qur’an but Muslim people as well. You want us to believe that this same conclusion about his motive could be arrived at had he done none of the above and rather burn the Qur’an in his fireplace with nobody watching, and him having told nary a soul that he did so? How could his hate for Muslims be evident if not a single Muslim on the face of the Earth knew about the burnt Qur’an?

In other words, people who burn their enemies in effigy are a lot more likely to burn their enemies than people who don’t.

Burning enemies in effigy? Do you frequently refer to inanimate objects as enemies? We’re talking about book burning here, not people burning. A true “burning a Mormon in effigy” would be making a doll of Thomas S. Monson and setting it ablaze. This would of course constitute true hatred for a person.

Some ideas need burning…but they need burning with other words, not with flames.

I agree with this.

 

[dianaiad]

I did just a quick look at the link you provided (I will look at it more in depth later), but, it looks like Catholics and Mormons are pretty neck and neck for the college degree section and tied for the post grads.

Not really a definitive statement on who is better educated, wouldn’t you say?

Indeed.

…so perhaps the Catholics should not assume that Mormons are uneducated, stupid and ignorant?

 

[iepuras]

Indeed.

…so perhaps the Catholics should not assume that Mormons are uneducated, stupid and ignorant?

Who on this forum has said that Mormons are uneducated, stupid and ignorant? Please provide a link.

 

[dianaiad]

I deliberately avoided these scenarios since, as you aptly point out, there’s no question about motive. I chose my words very carefully in that post and wanted you to explain how it is in your mind you can conflate this:

with this:

Ideas are not people, no matter how frequently you assert it to be. Hating ideas are not the same as hating people. The two can coincide, but they do not do so necessarily. Do you remember that Evangelical pastor who made headlines a couple years ago for having a “Burn the Qur’an Day”? He made a huge spectacle of it, created a mock trial for the book, advertised the event, filmed it, and published it for all the world to see. In this case it’s fairly obvious that his motive was to rile up Muslim people. He wanted to anger Muslims and provoke them to react because he hated not only the Qur’an but Muslim people as well. You want us to believe that this same conclusion about his motive could be arrived at had he done none of the above and rather burn the Qur’an in his fireplace with nobody watching, and him having told nary a soul that he did so? How could his hate for Muslims be evident if not a single Muslim on the face of the Earth knew about the burnt Qur’an?

He would know…and so would God.

BTW, his ploy would not have worked (and it certainly did work) to rile up the Muslims if doing this were not as insulting an action as it is.

Burning enemies in effigy? Do you frequently refer to inanimate objects as enemies?

An effigy is an inanimate object.

I We’re talking about book burning here, not people burning. A true “burning a Mormon in effigy” would be making a doll of Thomas S. Monson and setting it ablaze. This would of course constitute true hatred for a person.

Burning the efigy…burning the books containing the ideas and beliefs of the people targeted…pretty much the same sort of hatred being expressed here.

I wish it were not true, but it is; in almost all cases where book burning is done, the only thing preventing the next step, that is, physical/legal action against the target group, has been superior force, either legally or militarily.

Nobody has ever, as far as I am aware, figured that burning the book was the culmination, the finish, of the matter. It is always followed by more rhetoric at least, and almost always by escalated action, unless someone OUTSIDE stops it.

In other words, the question I was asked was whether it wasn’t better to express hatred for a thing rather than to hurt people. My answer is…neither; expressing hatred for the thing…the book that contains the ideas, is the prequel to violence against the target people, not a substitute for it.

Better figure out some other way to handle things. Some less emotionally violent way.

I agree with this.

 

[PaulDupre1]

Who on this forum has said that Mormons are uneducated, stupid and ignorant? Please provide a link.

It’s the LDS persecution complex in full gear. “Persecution is the heritage of the faithful”, doncha know? Critique of your religion and your beliefs is a personal attack on you. The LDS leadership drum that into Mormons from the cradle onward. It is no surprise that we see it manifest in LDS posters.

The LDS actually want to be persecuted, because it proves how much better they are than we are (they are “the faithful” whose heritage is persecution). So they infuse persecution into everything a non-Mormon says and does. Then they can sleep peacefully at night, knowing how superior they really are.

That must be nice.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[iepuras]

It’s the LDS persecution complex in full gear. “Persecution is the heritage of the faithful”, doncha know? Critique of your religion and your beliefs is a personal attack on you. The LDS leadership drum that into Mormons from the cradle onward. It is no surprise that we see it manifest in LDS posters.

The LDS actually want to be persecuted, because it proves how much better they are than we are (they are “the faithful” whose heritage is persecution). So they infuse persecution into everything a non-Mormon says and does. Then they can sleep peacefully at night, knowing how superior they really are.

That must be nice.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

Boy do I know this is true! I still like calling then out on it.

 

[twopekinguys]

Indeed.

…so perhaps the Catholics should not assume that Mormons are uneducated, stupid and ignorant?

You know what they say about the word “assume” right?

I don’t think anyone has said that, or inferred it, so, I’m not really sure where you would get that idea.

 

[zaffiroborant]

…who then dies from a rattlesnake bite.

Actually, your posts are mysogynistic. I just don’t think you can really see that.

So an elderly woman or small child in their own homes are putting themselves in the power of a rapist? Is the woman in a burqa accompanied by a male relative putting herself in the power of a rapist? Are teenagers in a busy park during daylight hours putting themselves in the power of a rapist?

I agree that everyone should pay attention to their surroundings and know some simple self-defense and even pack heat if they desire. However, that does not mean that if someone does not meet your standard, they are putting themselves in the power of a rapist. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what a victim does. If the rapist wants to rape, he or she will rape no matter what the victim does or does not do.

Are parents putting their four year old daughter in the power of a rapist when they put her to bed in her own room by herself?

 

[zaffiroborant]

For Drug facilitated rapes: don’t drink. Don’t go to places where your date (or anybody else) can slip you a roofie. Be aware of your surroundings. Have a plan to get OUT if you are feeling ‘hinky.’

If you don’t go to the bar, the bad guy will come to you and force you to swallow the date rape drug? If you don’t get drunk at a frat party, the guys will break into your apartment and force you to drink the booze?

You mean like McDonalds, Dairy Queen, Chick-fil a, Starbucks, the bowling alley, mini golf, 7/11, the movies or, a 5 star restaurant? Why in the world do you think that a roofie can only be given in an alcoholic beverage and why do you think the bad guys are only in situations that involve alcohol? How much of the date rape that happens at BYU is related to alcohol or bars or frats.

 

[zaffiroborant]

A woman who only group dates isn’t nearly as likely to be ‘date raped’ than someone who goes out with every man who asks her.

This runs counter to what one of your apostles counsels:

Hanging out consists of numbers of young men and young women joining together in some group activity. It is very different from dating.

For the benefit of some of you who are not middle-aged or older, I also may need to describe what dating is. Unlike hanging out, dating is not a team sport. Dating is pairing off to experience the kind of one-on-one association and temporary commitment that can lead to marriage in some rare and treasured cases.

Men, if you have returned from your mission and you are still following the boy-girl patterns you were counseled to follow when you were 15, it is time for you to grow up. Gather your courage and look for someone to pair off with. Start with a variety of dates with a variety of young women, and when that phase yields a good prospect, proceed to courtship.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Mormons drop out of college at a higher rate than Catholics.

Particularly women.

 

[RebeccaJ]

He would know…and so would God.

BTW, his ploy would not have worked (and it certainly did work) to rile up the Muslims if doing this were not as insulting an action as it is.

An effigy is an inanimate object.

Burning the efigy…burning the books containing the ideas and beliefs of the people targeted…pretty much the same sort of hatred being expressed here.

I wish it were not true, but it is; in almost all cases where book burning is done, the only thing preventing the next step, that is, physical/legal action against the target group, has been superior force, either legally or militarily.

Nobody has ever, as far as I am aware, figured that burning the book was the culmination, the finish, of the matter. It is always followed by more rhetoric at least, and almost always by escalated action, unless someone OUTSIDE stops it.

In other words, the question I was asked was whether it wasn’t better to express hatred for a thing rather than to hurt people. My answer is…neither; expressing hatred for the thing…the book that contains the ideas, is the prequel to violence against the target people, not a substitute for it.

Better figure out some other way to handle things. Some less emotionally violent way.

I agree with this.

I think maybe you are assuming that burning items from ones past is only done in anger. It can be a symbolic letting go of the past and being rid of it forever. It can be ritually therapeutic, and not include anger or hate. If item(s) represent to you, a person who you no longer are, burning those items can feel very freeing. It doesn’t mean anger or hate are involved. Just a cleansing fire, of the person you no longer are.

 

[zaffiroborant]

It is the latter that is problematic, and it doesn’t really matter WHERE it is done, the motive is the same; hatred for the ideas…and for the people who believed in, or originated, those ideas.

History has shown us that people who are willing to express their hatred through destroying THINGS are almost inevitably willing to take the next step and express their hatred against the people who hold those ideas.

In other words, people who burn their enemies in effigy are a lot more likely to burn their enemies than people who don’t.

Please show me in history where a person has taken out their anger over a personal involvement with a group, idea, teaching, in a private setting say their fireplace, stove or backyard fire and then gone on to burn members or professors of the group, idea or teaching? You are being overly dramatic here. The question is what do do with books of a former religion, throw them away (disrespectful maybe?) give them away (spreading false or damaging teachings maybe?) burn them (could be cathartic maybe?) oh my God no if you burn those items you are a hairs breadth away from actually burning, shooting, stabbing, poisoning or killing members or professors in some other fashion.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Hyperbolic hyperventilating.

 

[zaffiroborant]

It’s the LDS persecution complex in full gear. “Persecution is the heritage of the faithful”, doncha know? Critique of your religion and your beliefs is a personal attack on you. The LDS leadership drum that into Mormons from the cradle onward. It is no surprise that we see it manifest in LDS posters.

The LDS actually want to be persecuted, because it proves how much better they are than we are (they are “the faithful” whose heritage is persecution). So they infuse persecution into everything a non-Mormon says and does. Then they can sleep peacefully at night, knowing how superior they really are.

That must be nice.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

I usually am not totally convinced by references to Mormon persecution complex, I often don’t see a direct connection but I am seeing it here. If it was ever suggested in this thread that a public burning in protest was in order I could see her having a point. That is what my kids and their classmates have done in my backyard. But that is not the case under discussion and Dianaiad’s overblown drama in equating a quiet, private “ceremonial” burning of things that have had a personal negative effect with rabble rousing and murder is seriously over the top.

 

[Telstar]

He would know…and so would God.

BTW, his ploy would not have worked (and it certainly did work) to rile up the Muslims if doing this were not as insulting an action as it is.

An effigy is an inanimate object.

Burning the efigy…burning the books containing the ideas and beliefs of the people targeted…pretty much the same sort of hatred being expressed here.

I wish it were not true, but it is; in almost all cases where book burning is done, the only thing preventing the next step, that is, physical/legal action against the target group, has been superior force, either legally or militarily.

There is a huge problem with your entire analogy of burning books being equated to burning people ‘in effigy’. Books are not people, even if the ideas and beliefs related in the books are believed by some people.

Let’s look at the definition of effigy:*ef·fi·gyˈefijē/

1. a sculpture or model of a person.
   “coins bearing the effigy of Maria Theresa of Austria”
   synonyms: statue, statuette, sculpture, model, dummy, figurine; More
   likeness, image; bust
   “protestors threw water-balloon “bombs” at an effigy of the president”
   2) a roughly made model of a particular person, made in order to be damaged or destroyed as a protest or expression of anger.
   “the senator was burned in effigy”

Books are not ‘effigies’ of anyone. They only represent beliefs or ideas. If someone burns them, at most they are only expressing disdain for the ideas or beliefs expressed within them. There is no actual connection to any living persons who might hold those beliefs to be true. So your entire point is moot.

Nobody has ever, as far as I am aware, figured that burning the book was the culmination, the finish, of the matter. It is always followed by more rhetoric at least, and almost always by escalated action, unless someone OUTSIDE stops it.

I doubt that any rational human being would ever think that after burning a book for emotional release, that they should follow that action by doing physical harm against anyone who happens to follow the beliefs expressed in the book. If they did, then I would believe that person was mentally unstable and should seek professional help. Those two things are totally opposed to each other. Symbolically burning something, for emotional or spiritual release from it, is an act of a pacifist, not an aggressor. Again, your relating those two different types of actions is way off base.

In other words, the question I was asked was whether it wasn’t better to express hatred for a thing rather than to hurt people. My answer is…neither; expressing hatred for the thing…the book that contains the ideas, is the prequel to violence against the target people, not a substitute for it.

Better figure out some other way to handle things. Some less emotionally violent way.

The purpose for people burning books or other things that remind them of something in their past that they wish to let go of, is a form of ‘cleansing’ themselves of their residual emotional or spiritual effects. It is not done as an act of aggression against anyone that may be remotely connected to those books or other things. Anyone that thinks it is, has much greater issues than the person that actually burns those books.

 

[dianaiad]

So far I have been accused of being ‘over dramatic’ about this, and indulging in a ‘victim’ mentality…

but hey.

What can I say to this?

I have a scar from having been stoned, with real rocks, because someone didn’t like the idea of Mormons walking down their street. I have had dogs sicced on me (none of them bit me, though). I have been displayed at the front of a church meeting while the preacher ranted on and on about how horrific Mormonism is, how heretical and blasphemous I was, and how I was going to hell and that everybody in the congregation should get a good long look at me so that they will know not to deal with me in any way: no selling me things in their shops, no stopping and helping, no conversation, no contact. I have had two jobs, for which I was actually hired, refused me because of my religion (actually, I don’t have a problem with that one; I wouldn’t sign their ‘statement of faith,’ and they were ‘Christian’ schools) and have had my daughter thrown out of a Christian book store because the clerk saw her CTR ring and declared that “Mormons aren’t Christians and don’t belong in a Christian book store!”

Something tells me that a Catholic would have received the same treatment from that particular store clerk…

I would, right now, own about ten miles of good Mississippi river front property if the good folks of that area hadn’t driven my great grandparents out of the state. In high school I was targeted, officially, by three groups specifically because I was a Mormon.

Believe me,. I have spent my entire life, a very good life, btw, constantly running into (and honestly being surprised by) some idiot who thinks that Mormons deserve whatever happens to them.

So do NOT tell me that I have a ‘persecution complex.’ it ain’t paranoia if they really ARE ‘out to get you.’

Here’s what I think about burning those books. If it is the ideas you want to get rid of, then burning the books is simply an expression of aggression. It’s, at least subconsciously, an expression of what you would like to do to the ideas themselves; to the people who hold them. Not everybody who burns a book for this reason will go on to be nasty to the people, but i can tell you this: those who do end up doing violent things to the people have NO problem burning the books.

If you want to call this ‘over the top,’ fine, it’s over the top.

But how many of you have had people throw rocks at you because they didn’t like your religion?

 

[PaulDupre1]

So far I have been accused of being ‘over dramatic’ about this, and indulging in a ‘victim’ mentality…

but hey.

What can I say to this?

I have a scar from having been stoned, with real rocks, because someone didn’t like the idea of Mormons walking down their street. I have had dogs sicced on me (none of them bit me, though). I have been displayed at the front of a church meeting while the preacher ranted on and on about how horrific Mormonism is, how heretical and blasphemous I was, and how I was going to hell and that everybody in the congregation should get a good long look at me so that they will know not to deal with me in any way: no selling me things in their shops, no stopping and helping, no conversation, no contact. I have had two jobs, for which I was actually hired, refused me because of my religion (actually, I don’t have a problem with that one; I wouldn’t sign their ‘statement of faith,’ and they were ‘Christian’ schools) and have had my daughter thrown out of a Christian book store because the clerk saw her CTR ring and declared that “Mormons aren’t Christians and don’t belong in a Christian book store!”

Something tells me that a Catholic would have received the same treatment from that particular store clerk…

I would, right now, own about ten miles of good Mississippi river front property if the good folks of that area hadn’t driven my great grandparents out of the state. In high school I was targeted, officially, by three groups specifically because I was a Mormon.

Believe me,. I have spent my entire life, a very good life, btw, constantly running into (and honestly being surprised by) some idiot who thinks that Mormons deserve whatever happens to them.

So do NOT tell me that I have a ‘persecution complex.’ it ain’t paranoia if they really ARE ‘out to get you.’

Here’s what I think about burning those books. If it is the ideas you want to get rid of, then burning the books is simply an expression of aggression. It’s, at least subconsciously, an expression of what you would like to do to the ideas themselves; to the people who hold them. Not everybody who burns a book for this reason will go on to be nasty to the people, but i can tell you this: those who do end up doing violent things to the people have NO problem burning the books.

If you want to call this ‘over the top,’ fine, it’s over the top.

But how many of you have had people throw rocks at you because they didn’t like your religion?

Not rocks, but eggs and seaweed (yes I know that’s weird, but you had to have been on a mission in Taiwan to understand it). They slashed our bicycle tires. They also displayed signs (even on our makeshift “chapel”) that changed the Chinese characters pronounced “Mwo Mun” meaning “loftiest door” or perhaps “door to goodness”, with other characters pronounced “Mwo Mun” which meant “devil’s door”.

But these things weren’t done by the locals. Chinese people have too much sense and are far too polite to do things like that.

No, these things were done by Baptist and Presbyterian missionaries from America (seriously bizarre people).

We just considered the source and didn’t take it seriously. Strange that you did.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

P.S.: In the apartment in SungShan where I roomed with Elder “Bai” Barrett who posts here from time to time, we had a rat that we tried to catch but just couldn’t. Elder Barrett mused “Where did this infernal thing come from?” One of the other elders said “Maybe it was the Baptists?” We all had the giggles for a long time over that one.