With all of the evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that mormonism is a sham, **why do people still buy into it? **It almost makes me think that reason will not always work in apologetics. its as if mormonism (and islam among others) trivialize faith by making it appear unreasonable.
Although your question is a little bias, it is nonetheless, valid in some points that I highlighted.
Mormons undergo an intense mental reconditioning when they enter into the cult. This is a common practice in any entity where loyalty is required for success as a unit overall. Psychology, particularly in the areas of emotional manipulation and subliminal suggestion, is the key to most religious cults and sects ultimate recruiting regimen.
Often the adherents are of a personality that craves acceptance with others, as a “recognized” group of special individuals. It tends to work very effectivly with those who have low self esteems and lower IQs. This mindset is literally impossible to shake, and it is usually a mark of some deep seated psychosis that, in most instances, would not render the victim culpable or guilty of sin.
If the Truth, which is contained only in the Catholic Church, is presented to them, and a reasonable time frame is allowed for them to accept it, but they still reject it then the sin is damnable. Often one must remember this is only subject to the final grace and judgement of God, and that the individual must surely undergo some form of mental thought reversal in both learning and belief system for this to actually come about. Miracles do happen.
As for reason in apologetics, I have yet to see it. Often reason is confused with opinion and this is why there exists errors and false religions in the world. Experience fosters reason, but Faith fosters individual beliefs. There is seemingly little reason where it should exist sometimes, even if the proof is right in front of a person. Faith extends beyond reason, and therfore cannot be considered as a key element in religious situations of a personal nature. Naturally, if historical fact is present in apologetics, than reason will have to be present.