And you told me ‘behave like the others’

Then you sent me to school which was all about rules

And I learned to pretend

And so I faked my way through school

And now I fake my way to you……”

Opening lyrics to “Discover” by Tim Booth

.

I heard a simple yet very powerful story the other week, told over dinner by a friend of mine. It was about his young son – I’ll call him Tommy. When he was at nursery, the teacher got all the children together one morning and led a few rounds of the song “If you’re happy and you know it, clap your hands”. All the children joined in and obediently clapped and sang along.

There was one exception though – Tommy. He chose not to participate.

The teacher was surprised and concerned:

“Why aren’t you joining in Tommy?“

 “I’m not feeling happy at this moment, so I don’t see the point!”.

It takes a brave soul, young or old, to veer away from the norm like that.

This tiny story begs the question as to how early we may be programmed to conform. How early might any sense of independence, individuality and genuine freedom of choice be drummed out of us by an expectation that we fall in with others?

I have to admit that I fancy myself as a bit of a rebel. However, if I’m truly honest about it, I know that I conform in all sorts of ways. This is predominantly driven by a longstanding and deep fear of getting into trouble. I’m also certain there will have been a plethora of occasions in my formative years where I was encouraged to go along with the crowd and what was deemed  “appropriate”.

So, I lead this kind of dual existence whereby, parts of my life are indeed unconventional (home schooled children, no TV etc) whilst the foundations are pretty much conformist (tied into a mortgage, dependant on the system etc).

Yet, perhaps I’m not that unusual. Some years ago, a woman I know was a member of an anarchist group. The group decided that they wanted to open a cafe in their locality  where they could meet and from where they could spread their message. The initiative  collapsed as their application for planning permission was turned down by the local authority.

As youngsters the length and breadth of the country are encouraged to “clap along and participate” – both literally and figuratively, I wonder whether those free thinkers like my friend’s son, will be the ones who make a real difference and drive change for the better in our messed up society over the coming years and decades. Frankly, I hope so, and trust that they help stem the tide of our all becoming – in the words of the writer Gore Vidal – “obedient consumers”.

If only I were quite that brave!

.

www.chrismarkiewicz.com                     chris@chrismarkiewicz.com

TRAINING – COACHING – FACILITATION – SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS

via Things the bible bans but people do anyways.

A fairly good list of the practices and items that are banned and have set consequences in the Bible but modern believers look over.

Anyway, my school-girl-crush on Mr. Perry stems from noting his bravery to display issues that we are all too afraid to talk about. Sure anyone can write a fictional story, but it takes someone with some really big man parts to write about real issues; especially the ones that we tend to want to sweep under the rug.

Truth is, we, especially women, go through some really gruesome things, and I applaud Mr. Perry for being brave enough to so openly and fearlessly address these issues.  Temptation speaks-rather loudly I may add- about many issues, yet at the same time it is very open to interpretation and application to one’s situation.

For me it reiterated something that I have been thinking. How is it that we (females and males alike) can be so blinded by empty promises and fake whispers of affection when we hit a little bump in the road? With Brice (Lance Gross), Judith (Junrnee Smollet-Bell) knew what she had. Sure, Brice wasn’t rich nor was he famous, but he was a loving, dedicated husband who had the drive to get somewhere, no matter how slow it seemed to have been moving. But, she [Judith] allowed herself to be blinded by the glitter that came with Harley (Robbie Jones)- by the way, all that glitters is not gold- and was all too ready to leave her husband for the things he [Harley] promised her; promises that were all a ploy to “get” her, with no real (or visible) intentions to actually fulfill them. 

Rather than face our issues head on, we tend to cower in fear! Not once did this woman voice to her husband that she was unhappy or displeased with him constantly ignoring her. Instead she ran to the nearest open arms; something that we have all done at some point in our lives.  I found myself wondering how much differently things could have went if she had said something about it. But she didn’t, instead she ran to someone else for the affection that she wanted so desperately; and I believe that is why people tend to cheat.       

The thing is, shit happens in our relationships. People change, situations change, and the ways we react to them are different, but what seems to be consistent is the fact that no one ever really wants to deal with those situations and changes. The belief that there is greener grass on the other side has tainted our ability to properly assess situations and it isn’t until we get to the other side that we notice how high the cost of that greener grass tends to be.

So maybe we have tried talking to our other half, maybe everything we have done to fix it isn’t working, so why then are we still so afraid to make the decision to leave? Why make excuses in failed attempts to justify why we stay; yet punish ourselves with guilt at “hurting” them, and still continue to cheat?

When did we as a people become so crippled by the thought of being alone? Why are we so desperate for the love and affection of someone else?  

How have we become such cowards, that it is easier to run that to say something to the person hurting us? 

Why have we become so needy that we desire affection no matter the cost?          

Now to side track just a bit, there has been some criticism about Perry’s films targeting and punishing women for falling from the ways of God (or something like that), and something else about H.I.V being the punishment. But like I said before, the message which is pulled from the movie is open to every individual’s own perception of the film. I am neither deeply religious nor am I an atheist, and I fail to see their arguments. What I see is real life happening.

Whether we want to admit it or not, there are people out there who go through same/ similar situations. H.I.V/A.I.Ds is a real threat, yet we chose to be ignorant about the possibility of contracting the disease. How often do we find out someone’s “status” before we sleep with them?  So what Harley was referred to as a devil several times in the movie? Anyone who has “that deeply religious relative” knows that any and everything that is perceived as “falling short of the glory of God”   is referred to as the “devil” by said relative. Also, how often is it that we tend to “find God” when we are knocked down or knocked out by the curve balls that are thrown at us by life? Maybe there are a few debatable things within the movie, but very few of them fall far from the truth; so again, I applaud Mr. Perry for his boldness and his courage to so openly address these issues in his film.

Considering everything, I believe that everyone should watch this movie with an open mind. I also think that everyone should consider the things that they have done once they have realized that they are unhappy in a relationship. With every action there is an equal or greater reaction. Maybe contracting H.I.V is a little out there, but consider all the single mothers and fathers who are out there because of one bad decision with a lonely heart. Consider all the broken/breaking relationships that are out there because we are afraid to talk and/or listen to our partners.

Simply put, it’s about time we faced our relationship issues.  

I wasn’ t on YouTube looking for these videos but they came to me, perhaps by divine intervention? (no I don’t think so) I am in a debate with a fellow on FaceBook about Dawkins, religion, and evolution and he claimed Dawkins believed aliens seeded the human race. I was looking for a clip of Dawkins which someone claimed existed where he admits that he believes that an advanced alien race seeded the humans….it does and it doesn’t exist. He says he can entertain the idea of that happening but that race too was developed by Darwinian natural selection to the way they were. He maintains that no “creator” had a hand in it all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg  pt1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPfFx9JTQl8 pt2

Ive never put a bunch of thought into the different names for the god (godS) of the Bible. Its pretty strong evidence of the evolution of the polytheistic Old Testament fusing the gods into one being for the New Testament. Sorry, I’m really not doing them justice but theyre worth the watch.

This going to be a long post for you guys and some people are not going to take it very well.

If a video surfaced that clearly showed a Sasquatch/BigFoot (not pixelated, not miles away, a clear image of it walking around) we would use that as evidence for the claim of their existence. If however evidence comes up that the person who brought the video public had only days before bought a brand new camera and a very nice costume we would instantly and rightly question the video evidence. Changing your belief in the existence of that Bigfoot would not look badly on you and you should not be embarrassed about believing it when that was the only evidence that was available. You should however be embarrassed if after counter evidence is submitted you still hold to that first belief.

Believe the evidence and change your view when evidence requires and do not be embarrassed by that. This changing of views is the way of science and should be the way of the world. It is how we got to our modern world. We thought the world was flat until Magellan’s crew made it around the world one way (too bad Magellan died on the way). We thought the body was balanced in the humors until evidence came for the complexity of our systems working together. We believed in Santa until we found out our parents bought, wrapped, and placed the presents.

I have changed my views on the world in light of evidence (and more so the lack of evidence) I have been shown. I am not embarrassed, I have not made a big deal about it because it has not changed who I am. I make this post now because I do not want rumors and misinformation spreading. I am willing to debate my point to anyone, though I must insist it be in writing, as I can get all of my ideas out in writing and can get tongue tied or forget what I want to say when in person.

I find it quite coincidental that the very week I choose to “come-out” as it were, is the very same week of General Conference in which this talk occurred. Amazingly the basis of this talk is one of the main counter points I used to come to my decision. You may have seen this already or when you watch it you may get a completely different point than I have. My view is to look before you leap as blind faith can be devastating.

1 ​We believe not in God, the Eternal Father, nor in his Son, Jesus Christ, nor in the Holy Ghost, nor in Odin, the All-Father, nor in Ganesha, the Lord of Obstacles, and so forth.

2 ​We believe science is the best method for explaining reality, as far as it is practiced correctly.

3 ​We believe not in sin, nor in the punishments for such.

4 ​We believe that the principles and ordinances of the Scientific Method are: first, Formulation of a question; second, formation of a Hypothesis; third, Experimentation by systematic manipulation of variables; forth, Analysis of the data; fifth, Submission for review by a group of our peers.

5 ​We believe skepticism is the best default position. We assume the null hypothesis until proper evidence indicates otherwise; indeed we may say that we apply Occam’s razor to all phenomena.

6 ​We believe morals are derived, revised, and refined by our ability to reason. The Golden Rule is the basis for our ethics as far as it is formulated correctly.

7 ​We believe that today’s churches are based on the ignorance of the Primitive Churches, namely, their beliefs in the scientifically inaccurate, the scientifically improbable, the scientifically impossible, and so forth.

8​ We believe not in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, nor in the interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

9​ We believe the Bible to be the word of Man, not of a god; including the Qur’an, Torah, Book of Mormon, Bhagavad-Gita, and so forth.

10​ We believe that the burden of proof rests with those that make the claim.

11​ We claim the privilege of investigating the Cosmos according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them explore how, where, or what they may.

12​ We believe that our understanding of the Cosmos is subject to change contingent upon the proper presentation of sufficient evidence. We welcome all constructive criticism and encourage debate as well as free exchange of ideas.

13​ We believe in being honest, inquisitive, virtuous, and respectful to the autonomy of all men and women; indeed we may say that we follow the science of Darwin-We believe all things science can show evidence for, we have endured many things as an evolving species, and hope to be able to endure all things by adaptation. If there is anything virtuous, evidential, praiseworthy, and of good report, we seek after these things.

I’m in this phase where I am questioning everything. My beliefs, desires, and needs are all up for discussion and debate. We come into this life as malleable as the finest clay. Our beliefs about ourselves, others, and life are molded by outside forces. Our desires are dictated to us by the media and a plethora of advertisers. As a child commercials enticed me with visuals of Barbie dolls and accompanying accessories. As a result I desired them. Even the things we think we need are often dictated to us. We are told we need college degrees (although they are barely any help in this economy) homes and cars.

If it wasn’t for this conditioning what would I believe about myself, life, and the purpose of human existence? What work, relationship status, and possessions would I find myself naturally drawn to or desire? If not for media and cultural socialization would I care about things like romance or my biological clock?

As children we are soil…

Our parents, community, extended family, government, culture(both ethnic and national)…plant the seeds which become beliefs, thoughts, ideas, desires.

As adults we have the capacity to become free thinking individuals who disregard what’s been embedded…

And determine for ourselves what we believe, think, deem important and desire.

Free thought is where I reside now. I’ll continue to sift through the soil and pull up any weeds that are not in line with my true self.

OH, THE PLACES YOU’LL GO

Salutations! I’m writing to say,
I’m off to great places! I’m off and away!
My mind is wide open, I’m ready to choose,
I can see for myself, I can see through the ruse,
I’m off and away, and I choose where I go.
I’m in charge of myself, to flourish and grow.

I’d rather be open, to wonder and doubt,
than closed by belief, day in and day out.
I’ll read what I want, I’ll drink what I dare,
You’ll still judge my choice, although I don’t care.

With a free-thinking mind and my eyes open wide,
I’ll guide my own life, spare me your scorn and chide.
I’m off! Truth here I come! To Boyd I’ll pay no mind,
for all truth is useful, even the non-Mormon kind!

Empirical fact, to truth is the key,
John 8 fills my mind: “The truth sets you free”

It’s my goal in life, my aim, my apogee.
From now on, only the truth will lead me.

History has a way you see, of coming back around.
Even when its white washed, or put deep underground.

After searching the web, I see my life’s been spent,
in service of a church, whose honesty is bent.

Most folks don’t like being duped, just you wait and see.
They’ll see your skewed truth as blatant dishonesty.

I’m sure you’ll quip: “He’s nuts! He’s lost to apostasy!”
Clever lies and half-truths won’t keep all of us in,
and droves will leave when with Google they begin.
Steel in the new world? Horses and chariots? Nope.
I say dear brethren, adieu! These stories have no hope.

Surely native ancestry, will exonerate Joe’s claim?
From Asian lines not Jew, are whence the red man came.

Science gives apologists a real sense of dread,
their answers make scholars scratch their head.

The versions of the first vision are quite a few.
Same with history and doctrines; what’s really true?

It’s so confusing—one day it’s this, the next it’s that.
What was it again, special stones or a magic top hat?

“No! It was no such thing!” “Peep stones and a top hat?”
“That’s not faith promoting!” “Who would swallow that gnat?!”

This is a choice you’re sure to regret…
but serving up camel is not the safer bet!

“How noble and pure Joseph was, just look!”
“Young boy, to stave the pain you must imbibe.”
“No sir! I’d rather endure pain by my dad’s side.”

What’s this? Smith had a bar? Wine in Carthage jail?
Give that answer in Sunday school and you fail.

Joe had many wives, but leaders from this always shy.
Past nor present, our leaders won’t openly confide.
Why veil god’s command? Must have something to hide.

“Surely we can explain! It’s not as it seems!”
Spare me! Real men don’t marry girls of fourteen!

“Ol’ Brigham, he’s prone to false doctrine and blasphemies.”
“Blood atonement and Adam God are just theories.”
Silly me, I thought he was the prophet, wasn’t he?
We won’t talk about the Meadows or John Lee
but was there a slip, a lapse, with the prophetic keys?

I’m beginning to think there were no keys to begin with…

With sourced truth all around, what are we to conclude?
Is all of Mormon history, deliberately skewed?

The answer I might’ve found, had the latter-day prophets sought,
at least to be forthright, but forthright they are not.

Years past, faithful stalwarts had to dig and comb,
to see the history and roots from whence they’d come.
Rules were quickly set, making examples of some.
Like my friend Paul T, a scholar among six:
“Opine church history, will you? Have him nixed!”

To doubt was apostate. To question was heresy.
Sharing ideas with friends, was considered mutiny.

For days I could write the absurdities of Bruce R.
“The time for black priesthood is still quite far.”
“As a man only was how he gave the speech.”
Isn’t the pulpit where the prophets reveal and teach?
Not to worry, Spencer flipped ol’ Bruce on his head,
and saved our blessed “Y” having its accreditation shed.

Seems to me most convenient,
while at times change avoidant,
a prophet and god can sway,
and bow to what the masses say.

Ten percent’s a steep demand,
and even the poor must sacrifice.
Shouldn’t we all pay worship,
without money and without price?

“What to do with this tithe?” A mall you say? Am I awake?
How much for such a mall? “Just a few BILLION give or take.”

For one, shouldn’t we leave the ninety and nine?
“Trouble with doctrine? Get out! Or fall in line!”
“Poor boy, you’ve used the atonement to get out of a bind?”
“Stay home, we’ve raised the bar! We don’t need your kind!”
“Interested in the same sex? We don’t buy your bluff, your knuckles aren’t yet broken or bloody enough.”

Homosexuality, hmm, anomaly or fate?
Thanks, but I’ll side with science, it leaves out the hate.
How many bright lives are lost because of this…
whose end comes undue, too soon, like Stuart Matis?
Oh the heartache and tears you could have spared,
if you’d just offered that their burden be shared.

Instead, we’re offered a love with conditions,
from leaders at pulpits with elevated positions.

If twenty years back, a saint like Carol Lynn,
she loving all, or voices like John Dehlin…
these forward thinkers, these lovers of all,
their fate would’ve been seen all over the wall;
Gone! Nixed with the six, slandered and estranged.
But not so, not now, what seems to have changed?

Let’s search and ponder, what is it I wonder?!
You’ll do just about anything, to avoid another PR blunder.
You’ve learned bad press has a way of putting your bottom line asunder.
“Focus groups, what will you say?”
“Surely our image is okay?”
“We should spend millions for their expert advice!”
Silly me, but why doesn’t inspiration suffice?

Seems just a little strange, that the prophets of god,
would fail to foresee, what Google would laud.

“By single lines we grow.”
“In time the lord will show.”
The cost of a pace so slow?
“Merely a few lost souls.”

“What ever should we do?” “We can’t teach truth pure!”
“Only milk for these sheep, never meat, that’s for sure!”

“Please be patient! Please give us more time,
we’re adjusting the history to make it benign.”
“It’ll be white and delightsome, every last senine!”
“Then with excuse anew, you best fall back in line!”
I’ll stay out of line, I can see through the guise.
I won’t allow the wool to cover my eyes.

To less active, apostates, you plead “Come back!
We’re open now; we’re willing to share the facts!”
Do you think we’re blind and we can’t clearly see
your feigned new resolve for open transparency?
Fool me once and I’m done, you’ve had your shot!
You’re only changing now because you were caught.

Like Dorothy I feel, she being told to pay no mind,
as the curtain parts to show a man standing behind.
After a journey so deep and so long, I need to say:
My trust is broke, this silly game I’ll no longer play.
What’s more, Gordon gave an escape to be had:
“All of its good, every last bit, or all of its bad.”

With this point alone, I have reason to leave.
I consider all the rest, and your store is cleaved.
With my mind opened up, and my past steered by lies,
off I go with the droves, with my path open wide!

Credit to Dr. Seuss, “Oh, The Places You’ll Go”
and to RedBullet750

And not just for the kids…but for me too.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have myself an empty nest (without the empty nest syndrome).

No early wake-up calls, cooking, cleaning up after everyone, running everyone to and from, and absolutely NO step-monster.

Just me, my blog, and my coffee guys.  It truly is just what the title states (unless there’s some anxiety pills..then I’ll take those too).

Would anyone like to have a seat and hear about the kids’ egg donor?
No?
Yes?
Not sure?

I have nothing else eventful to write about seeing as how Easter was not up my alley this year and I kind of blacked it out.

Let’s start at the beginning….17 years ago when M was born.
Two young teenagers, both without any real parental figures in their lives, meet at a party.  The one night stand that will last for forever.
Maybe this will be easier to get through if I just create a list…

• donor is raised by her grandmother…who gives her everything she wants, and never uses the word “no”.  
• donor gets pregnant with M.  During doctor’s appointments, she tests positive for gonorrhea, and Jay tests negative.  -Warning signs of infidelity?-
• M is born, donor actually seems to be a mom.
• Happy family with some cheating thrown in.  Jay gets job as a truck driver in order to make enough money to support child and wife.
• Wife doesn’t feel like getting a job (even though M is now in school).
• Spends her days maxing out Jay’s credit cards instead.
• Tension arises, and another pregnancy.
• Loss of youth, making both parent’s take turns to go out and drink.
• Cheating, cheating, and cheating while Jay’s on the road.
• Donor comes home at 4am drunk and high on who knows what.
• Jay confronts her, she trashes house, stabs Jay in the chest.
• Jay wrestles the knife from her, gets thrown in jail.
• Jay moves out, begins paying non-court ordered child support.  Gives donor the house.  Still pays utilities.
• Donor begins having various men over at all hours.  
• Also begins selling drugs out of the house.
• Gets arrested.  Grandma bails her out.
• Jay moves into house, donor moves out.  Children begin living with Jay. 
• Jay finds out the money he was giving donor, wasn’t in fact being used for the utilities. Has to pay all of the extremely delinquent bills.
• Also has to replace all of the appliances due to them getting trashed and/or stolen.
• Meanwhile, grandma pays for donor’s new everything.  House, bills, etc.
• Jay continues paying non-court ordered child support. -To keep her off his back?-
•  Donor bails on grandma to move in with abusive psycho. Tries to take kids with her.
• Kids once again, move back with Jay.
• Jay continues paying non-court ordered child support.
• Donor gets kicked out of abusive psycho’s house.  Grandma to the rescue.
• Divorce finalized. Jay owes child support? Tells donor to get it corrected. She doesn’t.
• $3,000 + owed.
• Children move back in with donor.  
• Phone calls every single day and night, unable to handle or tolerate children.
• Let’s them do whatever. She stays at the bar all week.  Meets new psycho.
• Gets pregnant.
• Let’s new psycho call her children retards, cunts, whores, etc.
• Begins doing drugs in front of children.
• Has social services called multiple times due to loud arguments at all hours of the night.
• Tries to throw kids out of house. (Packed trash bags with their stuff and locked them out of the house).
• DHS inspects home, made an appointment beforehand.  Made kids clean her house before DHS got there.
• Continues allowing psycho boyfriend to call her kids all of the names listed above, along with vandalizing and destroying their things, and convincing donor to get rid of them.
• DHS is called multiple times once again, due to same behaviors as before.
• Children are removed from the home.  Drug and alcohol abuse charges are filed.
• Orders of protection in place for children against psycho boyfriend.
• Children decide to stay out of house.
• Court custody battle ensues.

And here we are.  Basically.  There’s been a lot of bullshit in between such as, donor refuses to have visitation with J. Only wants to see M. Told J to his face that she didn’t want anything to do with him and didn’t want to have to put up with him.
Broke his heart and he started seeing her for who she really is. 
But then it turned into her showing up and getting M whenever she wanted and ditching J every single time.
She’s been court ordered to take the children every other weekend.  That definitely hasn’t happened.  These past two months has been the most time she’s spent with both of them in the entire year and a half that we’ve had custody.

When M told her that she wanted to live with us, the first and only thing out of donor’s mouth was, “I guess this means I won’t be getting child support anymore”. She wasn’t upset that her kids were too afraid to live with her, she was upset that she wouldn’t have easy drug and alcohol money.
Even though both children wanted to stay with us, she refused to sign the custody papers until the very end.  Even though she had a mountain of evidence against her, and could’ve very easily been declared an unfit parent.  
Did she think she was going to continue getting child support until then? I don’t know, but that didn’t happen.

She started calling Jay and telling him all of this stuff that M had done (I guess to get her in trouble as a way to get back at her). I don’t know what her game was at this point.

Now she spends her time saying and doing whatever she can to wrap M back around her finger, and it’s working.
M hates me, hates being here.  Even though I take her everywhere she needs to go, I stay out of her business, go to every single competition and performance she has (even all of the freezing ass cold football games and band competitions).  Things that were really important to her.
Slowly J is being turned against me too.  Seems like every time he goes with the donor he comes back just a tad bit more resentful towards me.
I guess because the donor is the ultimate actor and puts on a good show for everyone so they’ll think she’s such a superb mother.

When it comes down to it, there’s really so much shit that this woman does, there’s really not enough time in the day to tell you about it.
But maybe upon reading this, you’ll understand what type of situation I’m in.

I spend every day trying to be anything BUT what this woman has been for her children.  Although I don’t want to replace her in their lives, I do wish they had a better example set for them in the mom department.  Someone who gives a damn about them the way I do.  Someone who is willing to say, “he isn’t good enough for you”, “you can do better because you are better” etc. 
I’ll never matter as much as she does, and that really kills me. Not because I want all the glory, but because these kids deserve better than a woman who’s too narcissistic to make room for her kids and try to lead them down the right path.  I’m so worried that M will be the same person…in abusive relationships with psychos, blowing off college and work to rely on someone else, drinking in excess, using drugs.  I’m already seeing the beginning of all of these things.
The boy she’s with calls her a whore for wearing yoga pants.  Accuses her of cheating almost on a daily basis (because he’s the one cheating and projects his guilty conscience on her). I’ve found pot in her room, empty liquor bottles in her room, empty beer bottles.  She doesn’t take responsibility for herself when she’s home.  She has a job but the only reason why is so that she can keep her cell phone. And I’m truly worried, as her grades are dropping, that she’s going to blow her chance at college and won’t care.  I think her only focus right now is having a good time with ‘mama’ and turning 18 so she can get out of here and go live with her psycho boyfriend.  College isn’t in that equation anywhere.
She and I used to sit and talk about all of her collegiate options, and the types of towns/cities that that she could live in. She has the ability to get into almost any major university, near or far but I really think it’s going to be too much work for her, and it’s all going to take too long and she’ll give up before she even tries.

Luckily J is still young, moldable.  I can impress upon him how important school is.  Whenever he sees a firetruck or cop he shows me so much interest in it.  He wants to be someone like that when he grows up (as most boys do I’m sure) and he knows for the most part, what it’ll take to get there.  He knows how to work for and save his money.  He sets goals for himself.  I’ve done everything I can to show him that if you want something, you have to work really hard for it.  And he does.  If we can just get over this learning disability hump, oh the places he will go.  I am so glad that he’s not spending this time in his life around his mother.  I’m glad that he has the ability to think for himself, and that his daddy is his hero.  Thank God he’s a boy.

I worry for the both of these children because of how they were raised.  No one who cared was here to teach them morals and values, and the person who was here just showed them a half-assed way of scraping by off of the backs of others.  
As much as I’ve tried not to, I’ve basically given up hope for M.  She’s 17 now…I’ve only had 1 year to try to impact her life. 1 year up against, 16 is nothing.  Not even a dent.  There’s nothing I can do now except sit back and watch her implode and try to be here for her when she needs someone to help her pick up the pieces.  As sad as it is to say it.

wow…this blog took a totally different turn.  I should really start outlining and rough drafting these things before I get on here and vomit words all over the page.

Happy spring break.

Tradition, as defined by Merriam-Webster, is an inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior (as a religious practice or social custom); a belief or story relating to the past that are commonly accepted as historical though not verifiable. Traditional beliefs often start from almost nothing; perhaps somebody just makes them up originally to explain phenomena that they did not understand, like the stories about Thor and Zeus. But after they have been handed down over centuries, the mere fact that they are so old makes them seem special. People believe things simply because people have believed the same thing over centuries. The trouble with tradition is that, no matter how long ago a story was made up, it is still exactly as true or untrue as the original story was.
The largest tradition that we come in contact with, in our day-to-day lives, is religion. Most of the people in America are Christian. There are many branches of the “Christian” church: Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, Latter-Day Saints etc. These are just a few of the hundreds of branches of just the Christian religions, there are also Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, etc. There is no way to have an exhaustive list. The differences in some of these are admittedly large while some are miniscule. People who believe even slightly different things from each other often go to war over their disagreements. So you might think that they must have some pretty good reasons, or evidence, for believing what they believe. But actually their different beliefs are entirely due to different traditions. It seems that if evidence comes to light that agrees with their views, it somehow reinforces their position, but when evidence comes up that disagrees with their views they no longer need evidence as much as “faith.”
Many people try to refute the argument against tradition by using language as a crux. Yes, language is passed down by tradition, there is no other way. Evolution states that an organism (like fish, lions, and us!) is built to survive in the environment where its kind lives. Some fish live in fresh water while others live in salt water; lions learn to track and hunt their prey; we learn the language of our people. In order to prosper and thrive in our environment we learn the language of the area. In America, the majority, speak English (in one form or another) and call Racer a cat, in Italy they speak Italian and would call her un gatto. Neither of these words is more right and as such neither the Italian nor the English consider theirs the more correct way, just two sides of the same coin.
Children are required to absorb a myriad of traditional information about the culture they grow up in. The child can’t be expected to sort out the useful information (like language) from the bad information (like gods, devils, and the like). Because children have to learn from adults they are likely to believe nearly everything that they are told; right or wrong, true or false, backed up by facts or unsubstantiated claims. I am not saying to not listen to your elders; they can pass on very valuable information, like I am trying to do with this letter.
Could this be what happened with religion? Belief that Thor caused the lightening, that Jesus had no human father, a select few prayers are answered, or that a group of Jews crossed the globe to populate America while destroying the genetic link to their supposed ancestors. Millions have believed these things; millions more still do, but why? Perhaps they were told that it was true by their elders when they were young and impressionable. Muslim children are told very different things from Christian children, yet both are convinced that they are following the correct path. The two languages are correct for their respective countries because they are not mutually exclusive, but because different religions claim different things happened to the same select group of people they can’t both be correct.
In closing, I want you to know how very much I love you. I have not written this to break bonds within our family; I only want to try to raise you above the influence of authority, revelation, and tradition. I know the topics in this letter are huge, possibly too large for you to comprehend yet. I am ready to answer any questions you have. I may not have every answer and perhaps you should not simply listen to me (authority and tradition, you know), but I will help you find the answers with an open mind and heart. I hope this letter finds you well, I hope you are able to understand and absorb what is contained in it, and lastly I hope that (since I am writing this years before you will read it) I have been a good role model for you. I will leave Mr. Dawkins’ final paragraph un-edited because it is better than any I could come up with.
What can we do about all this? It is not easy for you to do anything, because you are only ten. But you could try this. Next time somebody tells you something that sounds important, think to yourself: ‘Is this the kind of thing that people probably know because of evidence? Or is it the kind of thing that people only believe because of tradition, authority or revelation?’ And, next time somebody tells you that something is true, why not say to them: ‘What kind of evidence is there for that?’ And if they can’t give you a good answer, I hope you’ll think very carefully before you believe a word they say.

Love your Daddy

Again to Merriam-Webster, revelation is the act of revealing to view or making known. Suppose I told you that Racer or Cleo (I do hope they are still around when you get to read this) had passed away. You would be upset but then you would ask questions; Are you sure? What happened? Where did it happen? When did it happen? If my answer was that I only had a feeling you would be skeptical and would hopefully know that a feeling is not good enough reason to believe. We all have feelings inside ourselves, but to be sure of something we require evidence. You may not actually want to see the body of our deceased cat but you would want to talk to someone who had and ask questions about their evidence.
An argument for revelation is that if you don’t trust any of the little feelings you have there is no way to be confident of concepts like love. I love you, your mother loves me, I love her, these are not merely little feelings we have deep down. When we are together many little happenings occur that can be backed up by tiny evidences that add up. That special look in your eye, little favors we do for each other, the soft touches we share, the way we speak to each other; these are all little pieces of real evidence that back up that feeling we have inside.
A scientist finds value in those feelings we all have as well, but only as a starting point. That feeling/urge/hunch is not a good reason to believe something, it can be a reason to spend time and resources on a particular experiment. Science knows that these feelings are worth nothing until they have been supported by evidence.
Many members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will stand and give testimony professing that they know the church to be true, the one and only, restored church of Jesus Christ. This is purely revelation. The plates that Joseph Smith reportedly “translated” are no longer available for critique. The papyri that reportedly contained the Book of Abraham have been found to contain none of the information that was “translated.” Many evidences have surfaced that are directly contradictory to the belief that Smith translated/wrote the Book of Mormon. Still, the members stand and give their testimony of their personal revelations. The children, too, are brought up before the congregation to profess that they know the truth of the gospel and that the church is the one true church. This is the link between revelation and tradition. In many of these cases they are brought up by their age group, being told the exact words to say, and have not read the holy books for themselves (if they can even read at that point). Please consider, do you think they truly believe this? Is personal revelation even a good reason to believe?

Merriam-Webster defines authority many ways the best for this discussion is power to influence or command thought, opinion, or behavior; a convincing force. In the Catholic Church it is the pope. In the LDS it is the prophet. In the Muslim religion they are the Ayatollahs. The followers of the religion are required to believe their respective leader in all things simply because of their authority in the church, no evidence is required and in fact is rarely available.
In science, most often, we have not seen the evidence for ourselves and we must take the scientists word for what we know to be true. I have not seen for myself that light travels at the speed of 186,000 miles/second; I believe the scientific publishing that makes this claim. This seems very much like authority but it is much better than that. Anyone can educate themselves on the subject, find the evidence and would most likely come to the same answer. A major difference is if someone came to a different conclusion, it would be investigated more in depth and if the new result was truer than the previously held belief, science would reevaluate its position.
In religion there is often no evidence available for review for the most remarkable claims. In 1950, the pope told the people of the Catholic Church that the body of Mary was taken into heaven, though there is no evidence in their bible that says anything of the sort. They believe merely because he is the pope. In the 1845, Joseph Smith found and translated the Egyptian papyri as the Book of Abraham. In his day it was a rare ability to be able to translate Egyptian and they had no way to disprove what he was saying. They believed his authority on the matter as the prophet of the church. The evidence that is available of his “translations” can now be examined by scientists and is actually evidence against the fact that he translated them at all. In one branch of the Muslim religion, the important people are old men with beards called Ayatollahs. Lots of young Muslims are prepared to commit murder, purely because the Ayatollahs in a faraway country tell them to.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”
-Seneca the Younger

I am writing this letter to you to pass on information that is important to me and has proven useful in my life. I write to you in hopes that you find it useful and heed the information for your life. The inspiration of this letter, the very backbone of it, has been taken from a letter Richard Dawkins wrote to his little girl. In some places I even use his words. I do not see this as plagiarism as he has so eloquently described in a few paragraphs what would take me much longer than is feasible. I am using it to inspire and enlighten the next generation; I do not believe that Mr. Dawkins would have any problem with that.
Have you ever wondered how we know the things that we know? If two views of the world exist how are we to know which is correct? What makes something, anything, true? The answer to these questions is ‘evidence’. Merriam-Webster defines evidence as an outward sign or something that furnishes proof. Sometimes evidence is actually sensing (seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, or tasting) that something is true, this is called an observation. Other times evidence is the observations that lead to the answer. An eye on the stove turns red when it gets hot to warm your soup, but your soup can come out just as warm from the microwave which gives no outward sign of warming up.
How do we know, for instance, that the earth is in fact a sphere rather than a flat disk, as it was believed to be for so many years? How do we know, as opposed to the belief that the sun orbits the earth, that the earth orbits the sun (geocentric vs. heliocentric)? How do we know that the stars, which look like tiny pinpricks in the sky, are really huge balls of fire like our sun and are just very far away?
The evidence! Astronauts have traveled far enough from the Earth to observe with their own eyes that it is round. Often enough our imperfect senses require assistance. Scientific instruments have been invented to aid in the observation of our universe. The ‘evening star’ looks like a bright twinkle in the sky but with a telescope you can see that it is a beautiful ball – the planet we call Venus. The telescope has allowed scientists to observe the sun, the stars, other planets, other galaxies, etc. The microscope has allowed us to observe the very building blocks our bodies. Computers aid in solving complex mathematical equations and the storage of information we have gathered through previous observations.
Scientists – the specialists in discovering what is true about the world and the universe – often work like detectives. They make a guess (called a hypothesis) about what might be true. They then say to themselves: if that were true, we ought to see so-and-so. This is called a prediction. For example, if the world is really round, we can predict that a traveler, going on and on in the same direction, should eventually find himself back where he started.
When a doctor says that you have measles he doesn’t take one look at you and see measles. His first look gives him a hypothesis. Then he says to himself: if she really has measles, I ought to see… Then he runs through his list of predictions and tests them with his eyes (have you got spots?), his hands (is your forehead hot?), and his ears (does your chest wheeze in a measly way?). Only then does he make his decision and say, ‘I diagnose that she has measles.’ Sometimes doctors need to do other tests like blood tests or X-rays, which help their eyes, hands and ears to make observations. This is what I do as a Medical Laboratory Scientist. I use instrumentation to run tests to aid in making the diagnosis and ensuring the correct treatment is given and said treatment is working.
Be careful. A single piece of evidence can be misleading; many pieces that point in the same direction must be used for a reliable solution. For example:

​There is an old parable about six blind Hindus touching an elephant. One blind man touched the side of the elephant and said it was a wall. Another blind man touched the ear and said it was a large leaf of a tree. Yet another blind man was holding a leg and thought it was a tree trunk. Still another blind man took hold of the elephant’s trunk and said it was a snake. Someone else was touching the elephant’s tusk and believed it was a spear. Another blind man had the elephant’s tail in his hand and was calling it a rope. All of the blind men were touching the same reality but understood it differently. They all had the right to interpret what they were touching in their own personal way, yet it was the same elephant.

The way scientists use evidence to learn about the world is much cleverer and more complicated than I can say in a short letter. In fact most of it is much cleverer that I can even understand. I want to move on from evidence, which gives us the best reasons for believing something and warn you against three bad reasons for believing anything. They are ‘authority’, ‘revelation’, and ‘tradition’.

If you wish to counter any argument I have made thus far, please, email me at freethinker14@yahoo.com. I would do better debating topics with you by writing than in speaking. Harsh words and tones can influence what we hear and that is negated in text. I welcome debate, the only terms are; neither side will get emotional about the topics brought up, neither side will attack the other person, and neither side will present the same argument consistently, and if feelings are being hurt the debate will end with no hard feelings. I do not wish to lose any family or friends over this decision.

​The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a documented history of divine revelation being received after pressure is put on them from the government and from scientific evidence. If a doctrine were written from the knowledge of an eternal, all-knowing, “God” it would not contain ideas/practices that would eventually have to “reinterpreted” or wholly denounced by the religion and its followers. The Church of Christ of Latter-day Saints holds that the Book of Mormon is the “most correct of any book on earth.” Still, the church has been forced to make numerous revisions to the scripture and doctrine its members follow due to pressure from the public and from evidence against its claims. Revisions include blacks in the priesthood, the ancestry of the American Indians, and likely the most popular of these changes, polygamy.
In July of 1843, documented in D&C 132, makes his polygamy known to a close group of his followers. “if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified.” This revelation accepting the practice of plurality was received in 1843, but most of Smith’s wives were sealed to him before that, the earliest in 1833. Joseph was sealed to 34 wives in his life. Ten of these wives were part of polyandrous relationships that directly clash with his revelation about the wives needing to be virgins. Seven of Smith’s “wives” were under the age of 18 when they were espoused. In a letter to one wife, Sarah Ann Whitney, Smith says “I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now in this time of affliction…the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty…burn this letter as soon as you read it.” You can come see me but don’t come if my wife is around, oh, and burn this letter after you read it. That’s a little shady you can’t dispute that he wanted to keep this rendezvous quiet.
President Wilford Woodruff received revelation in Oct. 1890 to end the practice of plural marriage after the United States had laws against the practice since the 1860s. This revelation is recorded in Official Declaration 1.
​After plural marriage the addition of blacks into the priesthood is the most well known major change made to a doctrine. I understand that there is a dichotomy of people when it comes to who started the ban on the priesthood, Joseph Smith vs. Brigham Young, but the fact that a “prophet” of the all-knowing god made this revelation makes it relevant to this discussion no matter who started the practice. Elijah Abel is the most crucial story at the beginning and center of this controversy. A quote by Young in response to a question about negroes in the priesthood: “The Lord had cursed Cain’s seed with blackness and prohibited them the Priesthood.” President George Albert Smith, in 1949, reinforced this bigotry stating that it was divine commandment and not just a policy of the church. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended segregation in the United States, but the church did not reverse their position on the matter until 1978.
​President Spencer W Kimball received revelation in June 1978 to extend the priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members of the church. This revelation is recorded in Official Declaration 2.
​The most recent revision made to the doctrine of the church is to the introduction to the Book of Mormon. The church has taught in the past that the people in the Book of Mormon traveled from Jerusalem to the Americas and were the ancestors of the American Indians. The change has been made to make these travelers “among” the ancestors of the Indians. This change has been made in the face of undisputable evidence stating the Indians have no Hebrew ancestry. The fact that this one story is false sets precedence that other stories, including the entirety of the book, may be false.
​In talking about the acceptance of blacks into the priesthood, current public pressure may bring divine revelation recorded in Official Declaration 3 stating that females may hold the priesthood. Although, looking at how long the church took to integrate itself and follow the laws against polygamy, it may be a while still before the church changes this teaching.

​During his life, Joseph Smith Jr., made about 40 prophecies; the exact number is up for debate as not everyone will claim every prophecy he made was actually a prophecy. I believe when a self-proclaimed “prophet” says something is going to happen we can call that statement his prophecy. Some of the prophecies Smith made during his life can not be debated as to whether they occurred. Still others are debated as being metaphorical statements, not true prophecies. While others are clear statements about events Smith says will happen in the future that can not be debated. Many of the “prophecies,” that came to Joseph, came in his hour of need. The church needs someone to go on a mission; a prophecy about Elder Patten. The church is in debt; a prophecy about the riches of Salem, MA. The United States government is interfering with the practice of your religion; a prophecy about the downfall of Congress and the government. The church needs a temple to establish a “headquarters;” a prophecy about a temple in Missouri. What would a prophet be without a prophecy about the second coming? I understand that some prophecies that have been made in the past by other “seers” can be interpreted in very different ways depending on who interprets it. The only problem with this is that Joseph Smith was quite specific in his prophecies.

“It does not pay a prophet to be too specific.”
-L. Sprague de Camp

• D&C 114:1 ​-April 1838
o “Verily, thus saith the Lord: it is wisdom in my servant, David W. Patten…that he may perform a mission unto me next spring…”
o David Patten was to serve a mission for the church in the spring of 1839. The thing is, the prophet, nor the “Almighty” see that Elder Patten was to pass away in October of 1838 before his mission was to begin.

• D&C 111:1-4​-Aug. 1836
o “I have much treasure in this city for you… I will give this city into your hands… and its wealth pertaining to gold and silver shall be yours.”
o With the church in debt, in July 1836, Joseph (along with Hyrum, Sidney Rigdon, and Oliver Cowdery) left Kirtland for Salem, MA. Joseph had only just been acquitted on charges of assault and battery in June. Joseph received revelation in Aug claiming his party would receive the wealth “pertaining to gold and silver” of Salem.

• D&C 84:2-5​-July 1831
o “for verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord.”
o The saints were then living in western Missouri, a plot of land for a temple has been bought in Independence, MO, no one alive in the generation when this prophecy was made is alive today and no temple has been built yet. Orson Pratt backed up this prophecy saying “all the people that were living thirty-nine years ago have not passed away; but before they do pass away this will be fulfilled (J. of D. Vol. 14, p. 275). Smith and Pratt were both wrong.

• History of the Church Vol. 5 p.394​-May 1843
o “unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted”
o The saints had been wronged by the U.S. government and Smith threatened the downfall of it if no apology and restitution was made. 170 years later the government stands as it has ever since and no redress has been made.

• D&C 130:14-15​-Dec. 1832
o “Joseph, my son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man; therefore alet this suffice, and trouble me no more on this matter.”
o Joseph was born on December 23, 1805, if he had lived until he was 85 it would have been 1890, even if you interpreted this as 85 years from the prophecy would be 1917. It really doesn’t matter where you begin the 85 year clock, the second coming has not happened to date, 170 years later.

​I am aware of the many alternate authorship stories that exist for the Book of Mormon. I am partial to the Spalding/Rigdon theory, myself, but for the sake of this letter I will assume Joseph Smith is the author. How could a verse or block of text from different languages, different time periods, and different authors be translated into text that is, in most cases, word for word the same paragraph? A list of the evidence:

• 1 Nephi 20, 21​ Isaiah 48, 49
• Mosiah 14​ Isaiah 53
• 3 Nephi 12-14​ Matthew 5-7
• 3 Nephi 24-25​ Malachi 3-4

​Joseph claimed to find the urim and thummim in the pit with the golden plates, and that they would allow for the translation of the plates. Many members are taught that Joseph wore the urim and thummim, read the golden plates, and dictated the translation to his chief scribe Oliver Cowdery. The church has never printed a depiction of Joseph wearing these “stones, fastened to a breastplate,” and in fact one of its own “Three Witnesses,” David Whitmer, described how Joseph would actually translate the plates.
Mr. Whitmer describes how Joseph would “put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light.” Joseph would look through the stone, see the translation of the characters on the golden plates, and dictate the meanings to his scribe. (sounds so similar to his seer stone that he testified about in his trial in 1826) This account of the translation of the golden plates is the account that is portrayed in the pictures printed by the church in its many publications, Why is this not the story that is told to investigators? There is one account that the plates weren’t even in the same room as Joseph and Oliver. So what, you may say, it doesn’t matter how he did it, he did it. I say, why the blatant fraud? Teach what actually (might have) happened.
Joseph Smith claims to have translated an Egyptian papyri scroll; he purchased using the funds from families in the community, from a traveling mummy show. He claimed the scroll contained the writing of Abraham, in the ancient language of Reformed Egyptian. In addition to the text three facsimiles, or pictures, were translated. Of course no such language has ever been reported by credible Egyptologists. The scroll, after being apparently lost in the great Chicago fire, was found, studied, and contained none of the “translations” reported by Joseph Smith. The Egyptian language had only been cracked using the Rosetta Stone a few years prior to Smith finding, buying, and translating the scroll so no other translations or critiques of his translation could have been made in his day. Today, anyone can go to the internet or a library to get a basic Egyptology guide and make the translation themselves and none would come up with a translation with any similarities to Smith’s.
​Word spread of Smith’s ability to translate ancient languages and so six more plates were brought to him to be translated. He found they were the history of a descendant of Ham through the line of the Pharaoh. The only problem with the translation of these plates is that Wilbur Fugate and two of his friends admitted to forging the plates themselves. They made the plates to test the validity of the claims of the purported prophet and seer. Obviously they found him to be a fake, though some LDS members still hold the translation of the Kinderhook Plates to be true.
​I have attached pictures which contain a depiction of the facsimiles, the translation by Joseph Smith, and the current Egyptologist’s translation.

​The story of the first vision that we have all been taught is but one of at least four distinctly different accounts. The official first vision distributed by the church is quite different from the hand written account by Joseph Smith. He recounts, in 1832, hosts of angels and only one personage (one account names him as Jesus Christ while another says he was unnamed) appearing. Also, there is no evidence of the revival Joseph mentions happening in 1820. No revival of note in the recorded year and a description of the first vision not recorded for 12 years, questionable at least.
​Joseph is known to have used “folk magic” and a seer stone (see the Translation section of this letter as well). Smith would sell his time and ability to the farmers in the area that he lived to find buried treasure on their lands. In March 1826 Joseph was brought up on charges of being a disorderly person and an imposter. He claimed to have a stone he could look through to see treasures that were hidden in the earth, but he had given it up as it has injured his eyes.
Francis W Kirkham states, “A careful study of all facts regarding this alleged confession of Joseph Smith in a court of law that he had used a seer stone to find hidden treasure for purposes of fraud, must come to the conclusion that no such record was ever made, and therefore, is not in existence…. had he [Joseph Smith] made this confession in a court of law as early as 1826, or four years before the Book of Mormon was printed, and this confession was in a court record, it would have been impossible for him to have organized the restored Church.” Kirkham says that if the court case and confession of Smith were true the church could not be.
Multiple stories surround the actual plates as well. We do not know what they were made out of, what language they were written in, if the entirety of the Book of Mormon could fit on one-third of the actual plates, nor if they even existed. The only people to witness the plates have conflicting stories of the size and how they saw them. The dimensions of the plates are similar in size so I can see past that little inconsistency. Some of the witnesses state that they saw the plates in a vision and never actually saw the physical plates even though the official testimony of the witnesses is about the physical plates.

This is my letter to the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to any member of said church, to my friends and family, and to anyone who will read it with an open heart and more importantly an open mind. To follow the thought process of the church I will give the “Milk” before the “Meat.” I do not write this letter with the intentions of enraging anyone, I write this letter to inform the masses about the Church. I will warn you that there will be errors, I am human and aint much good with the laws of English. I hope you understand the majority of the information in the face of these errors. If you think I have made a mistake on something: investigate it for yourself and when you find out either way let me know. I will include contact information for friendly debate at the end of the letter.
I was introduced to the church in the summer of 2007. I met a lovely girl, now my wife, who wanted to share her religion, community, and family with me; they accepted me fully, green hair and all. I informed her that I was not a religious person and had not been in quite a while. I began “investigating” the church and its teachings quickly, looking back now it was too quick of a conversion to be believable. During my investigation I was advised to learn from the missionaries and other members and to pray about the truth of the gospel, the church, and its leaders.
The missionaries that I had, although not by name I can still remember, were two great guys. They did their duty as best they could to ensure I knew the most basic principles of the church’s teachings; the preexistence, the trueness and fullness of the church and its gospel, the spirit realm, and the kingdoms of heaven. None of these topics were “deal breakers,” I had thought about the possibilities of each of these things before I knew anything of the Mormons and their teachings, so, I continued through learning the basics of the faith. My, now, wife’s family were excited to be able to teach and convert a new person to the faith and made sure we made it to church when we were able. I was also advised to avoid the “bad press,” the nay-sayers, and most especially… the internet.
Avoid the internet. Why? I made my way through college at Austin Peay using the internet to study. I met my wife, the person who was to introduce me to this religion, on the internet. Why suddenly am I being told to not use the internet to study this religion? My only thought is that they must be hiding something. Through quick internet searches I found that most people thought the church was trying to hide some of its stranger beliefs from new members to avoid scaring them away. Most of these (becoming a god yourself, blacks/Indians being cursed, Masonic-like temple rituals, and more) seemed wrong and actually scientifically inaccurate but actually did not scare me so I felt they were off base on telling “investigators” to not use this technology. I did not necessarily believe or agree with what I found but it didn’t immediately deter me from the church. I have come to see why they warn the use of the internet, more on that later in this letter.
​I have very few quarrels with the lifestyle of the members of the church, but I have been battling issues. My issues surround the founding of the church, the teachings (and the changes to said teachings), and the treatment of women in the church. I have not been wronged by a member or leader, nor do I have hurt feelings.
To church members: please think and act for yourself. Blind faith and obedience is no way to live your precious life. If you look to the evidences I bring forward and still believe in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Joseph Smith, Jr., I will say thank you for at least looking at the evidence presented and be on my way.
To the family and community that accepted me, please think and act for yourself. I love you all and I am grateful that you took me in even though I was different. I will still love you that has never changed.
To my dearest wife, I love you. Through all of this, I love you. I will say it once again, please think and act for yourself. Blind faith and obedience in the face of evidence to the contrary is no way to live. I will not shun you if you decide to remain in the faith you were raised, just think, it was the faith in which you were raised. You didn’t choose the religion. It was chosen for you. You were taught it since before you knew what was right and wrong.
I do not believe Joseph Smith, Jr. or any of his following “prophets” of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints had any power greater than a power with words. I believe he was an intelligent man who used his abilities of fraud and deceit to gain his following. I do not believe human beings born with dark skin are a cursed race. I do not believe men have any dominion or power greater than women. I do not believe there are people living on the far side of the moon (dressed in the style of the Quakers, no less). I do not believe the American Indians are in ANY way the descendants of a group of travelers from Jerusalem. I believe the church has been forced to change the introduction to the Book of Mormon because of the scientific evidence against this claim.
There has been, to my knowledge, zero evidence found to support any claim in the Book of Mormon. Although, actual evidence has been found to suggest Joseph was deceitful in his life before “finding” the golden plates, in his ability to translate (the golden plates, the Egyptian Papyri, and the Kinderhook plates), and in his prophecies. I will present as much evidence as I can to support my decision and to answer questions for anyone else who has doubts about the ever changing “eternal” doctrine of the church. I will offer this quote to those who wish to not see any evidence against their beliefs.

​“If a faith will not bear to be investigated; if its preachers and professors are afraid to have it examined, their foundation must be very weak.”
-George Albert Smith, 1st Counselor to Brigham Young

Answer this question truthfully, to yourself if you must; If Joseph Smith Jr. were proven to be a fraud and a liar, could the church he founded based on that fraud ever be considered true? As the founder, translator, writer of doctrine, seer, and revelator of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I say that he is the very foundation of the church, and if he were found to be false so to would the church be false. I submit, in this letter, that there is evidence against him.

I am going to take one a day for the next year, I am sure some of them are actual contradictions but I am going to look at the verses around each one also to make sure they all are. I have o problem with some of these verses not being contradictions, I will try to post one every day with my decision on if it is a contradiction or not.