Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion

No - I commented on what appeared to be a trivial post. I agree.
"Club" was a poor choice of word. You start off with the definition I quoted. And then you rapidly abandon it by adding your own extra criteria.
Perhaps you should be discussing this with yourself as you seem very keen to put words in my mouth. Why would I consider something is trivial simply because it is associated with women?
I assume you must be projecting. If a religion claims to serve a particular purpose and an adherent finds that it doesn't - then yes.You seem disproportionately upset at having your point commented on.
Bad day at work?

Hi, arach. Very Mormon. I'm not from Utah, but I'm a fourth- or fifth-generation Mormon, no matter which line you trace my ancestry through. We went to church every Sunday, read from the Book of Mormon every night, and were always supposed to be doing everything in our power to live up to the standards of the Church.I don't have the stamina for it anymore, but my parents still do. I still don't drink alcohol or coffee or tea, because I'm completely uninterested in starting now.----- Naturally, I counter with a "Lord's timeframe" argument and you're supposed to melt away under my masterful logic. And then, if you question the validity of the test or the falsifiability of God, I'm supposed to act like I don't know what falsifiability means and/or just feel sorrow for the fact that your skepticism is preventing you from enjoying the Celestial Kingdom.I then thank you for your time and go knock on the next door. Oh, but not before telling you with lots of conviction that I know the Book of Mormon to be true, because testimonies can be a very powerful way to bring the Spirit.When I was a missionary, we had to role-play scenarios like this all the time. But, being able to "bring the Spirit" into a fictional role-play made it hard for me to believe it was genuine.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Seriously? How interesting. ...and a bit sad.

interesting. did you share a deconversion story over in the other thread? i might have to go look for it... in any case, yeah. i find certain varieties of certain religions quite oppressive. they can really eat up a lot of your time and energy, just in feeling guilty for not being perfect. it's really quite a drain, and strikes me as very cult-ish. this is not every mormon church, or every christian church, of course. but the mormon missionaries that come are girls shipped out from utah. they wear full length skirts, and aren't really allowed to do anything. they send them to florida, and they aren't even allowed to go to the beach, lest they be ogled. they can't enter a house unless a woman is also there. etc.i do not think that religion was meant to be a burden; certainly not christian religions. not big on alcohol myself, but i can't go more than a few days without caffeine before massive withdrawal migraines set in. well, i've heard the second part before, yes, but i'm not sure about the first one. usually they jump right to "sorrow for skepticism" as by that point i've already laid out enough textual issues that would make any sane person go, "okay, this book is completely fictional." there's no converting the missionaries, but it sure is fun to try. yes, well, like i said, it's at this point they generally move on and i don't hear from them again. i know this, so i only bring out when i actually want them to go away. i kind of keep it secret, and we discuss other matters until that point. see, i have been an exceptionally religious person myself. i know those seeds of doubt are there, and there are things that people find just downright silly about their religions, and this whole "we know it to be true" inerrancy nonsense is really just overcompensation.just once i'd like to get the missionaries (of any variety) up to a level where we can actually discuss my doubts without them simply waving them off with platitudes and standardized dogma.

---

אָרַח

oh, yes. my ex-girlfriend was part of a trial family. they would play the hopeful converts, to the missionaries in training. of course, it never really goes down like they role-play, so when i was there a number of years ago, i decided i would give them something they wouldn't expect.of course, that was my initial exposure to LDS, so i wasn't quite as critical of the text at that point.

---

אָרַח

This topic's roots were in the Deconversion experiences topic. I insisted that Dawn Bertot get out of that topic and suggested that he start what came to be this topic.In skimming the rapidly accumulating pile of messages, my impression is that the message quality and relevance to the topic theme is all over the place.Members need to review message 1 and truly strive to keep their messages in explicit contact with that theme.Or something like that.If this topic doesn't come around, I'm probably going to give it a short term closure (maybe up to 24 hours or more) to let things cool off and straighten up.Please, no replies to the message at this topic. You know (or should know) the drill of where such should be done.Adminnemooseus

Hi Dawn.My individual justification for letting go of God began with recognizing how well people can delude themselves, including myself. I got on a kick of looking into commonly held myths - things that most people think are true, but aren't. You know, stuff like "Shaving makes hair grow faster.", and "The moon is magnified by the atmosphere when it's low on the horizon."Then I looked into things like OBEs and NDEs too, that seem to support the existence of a soul. I found no trace of it, but learned a lot about the trickiness of human mind. This led me to James Randi, Michael Shermer, and the skeptic crowd; and the amazing variety of delusions that humans are capable of embracing.I got it into my head that I could understand the world better, and live a more honest and less confusing life, if I didn't accept anything as true unless I had very good reason to, and I also faced the fact that truth is rarely black and white except when it's perceived by a human mind.Like the Creationists' God of the gaps, my god was always being chased into the narrowing cracks of my understanding of the world and the human condition. Ultimately, He became just some vague cosmic guy in the sky who (maybe) lit the fuse for the (maybe) big bang.From there it was a small step to saying "Goodbye".

quote:

---

If a religion claims to serve a particular purpose and an adherent finds that it doesn't - then yes.

​

You seem disproportionately upset at having your point commented on.
Bad day at work?

---

Except that you didn't comment on the point. Your response was based on a word and made no point.I don't think a religion has to claim to serve any particular purpose to serve a purpose in an individual's life. It may serve a purpose other than what it claims.Individuals usually have reasons for being part of a group. When those reasons change they tend to leave the group.My choice of the word club was not a poor choice. I was making a point. Whatever we are a part of usually serves a purpose in our lives. When it no longer serves a purpose, it usually doesn't stay a part of our life.This thread is about valid, supportable reasons for deconversion. My post showed a reason that is valid for any group an individual belongs to, not just religion. It still has to serve some purpose, real or imagined, in our lives to remain a part of it.

quote:

---

Why would I consider something is trivial simply because it is associated with women?

---

Why did you consider it trivial at all? Why bother commenting on the word choice? Why not address the point of the post instead?

quote:

---

You seem disproportionately upset at having your point commented on.

---

Why do you assume I'm upset?I simply pointed out your post was useless concerning the topic. Considering my alter ego, the object is to address the point of the post, not waste a post because you don't like or understand the word choice. You've put more energy towards my choice of words than the point of my post. Enlarge upon the argument presented.Can you enlarge upon the argument I presented or are you going to continue trying to defend your useless post?

And you have put more energy towards my reply than the point of the topic."Physician, heal thyself."

I think it all boils down to how you define "valid, supportable".
If anyone no longer wants to be part of a religion - surely the mere fact that they 'want' to leave makes it a valid reason to leave.
And if a reason is valid: it is supported. (The validity is the support.)But maybe 'Supportable' has a bit more meat on it worth picking at.I'll explain a little of the reasoning behind my previous answer:

quote:

---

If a religion claims to serve a particular purpose and an adherent finds that it doesn't - then [it is a valid reason]

---

If you became a catholic and then said "This religion does not give me enough chocolate - I am leaving" - then I would say that your reason for leaving is 'unsupported'. You would be abandoning your religion because of unreasonable expectations.
But if you became a Catholic and then said "I am recieving no spiritual support - I am leaving" - this would be a 'supported' reason.Granted: this whole line of argument is semantic.
But I think that if you leave a religion solely because you want more from the religion that it ever promised to give, then I think it would be fair to say that your reason for leaving is unsupported.

Hi, arachnophilia.See Message 226.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Sorry, real world stuff, ill try and get caught up as soon as possibleDawn Bertot

Ive read the entirity of the posts and I have failed to see a valid 'reason' offered as to why I should deconvert from the things I have studied and been taught through the years.If I have missed something in its exactness and someone feels that it should be offered again in argument form, I would be willing to address it, without hesitation.I believe someone asked why I did not accept the "other testament" of Jesus Christ. Simply because it cannot be supported or sustained in even the slightest fashion from a historical or archaeological standpointNot that some things are in question or debatable, but nothing can be confirmed independantly What specificallly bothers or concerns you about its doctrine.? Why does its teaching conflict with reality?Dawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This is simply a denominational misunderstanding of how the Holy Spirit operates and what the scriptures teach about his influence in our affairsSince you cited no passages, Ill wait to see what your understanding is exacallyDawn Bertot

If you want a reason to deconvert from your PRIVATE beliefs you will haveto provide your PRIVATE anwsers to why.I can only suggest you start with anwsers to why you do not believe in Allah, To why you do not believe in Buddas teachings, To why you do not believe in hindu, the greek gods, the norse gods and as many others as you can find. And when you are done compiling the list apply the same anwsers to your god. You will see they fit really nicely.Or you can apply the same logic to why you believe in god to a milk carton if you aply the same logic you use to support your god. The milk carton will be as powerful as god.Example:
- God sometimes anwser prayers, sometimes he does not, and sometimes he makes you wait. Well the milk carton does the same.- God is invisible and undetectable and can bend the universe to his will, Well the milk carton is visable tough his powers are as invisable as your god and he can bend the universe to his will.-God loves me. Well the milk carton loves you too and it is sad because you do not believe in him.And any other reason you have for believing in god apply it to the milk carton with the same logic as you apply it to god.