I was LDS for 15 years, not all of them active. I was very gung-ho as a young Mormon. For me, it was all or nothing. All of it had to be obeyed, or none of it. That's how I saw it: as very black-and-white. Total honesty, and total commitment. I was shocked to see, over the years, that most Mormons didn't think as I did. Most Mormons were, from what I could see, "Pickers-and-Choosers". Most Mormon males, at least the ones I knew, loved the idea of becoming polygamists in the Celestial Kingdom, and having many wives. So, they believed that. However, they didn't like the concept of "no sex of any kind" before marriage. So, most of them just "ignored" that part. To me, that was like thinking one could become an M.D. without college or medical school. I mean, one could NOT become a God without being morally clean anymore than one could not become an MD without medical school. But, most of my male LDS friends didn't see it that way at all. For them, being morally clean had nothing to do with becoming a God. All one had to do to become a God is be an active member of the Church, go to the Temple, attend your meetings, pay your tithing, and "act" like you're worthy, and, if you acted like it, you were, and if you stayed active, God really didn't care what you did in the dark. That's how they thought. They believed that as long as you were "worthy" with your EC, the gal you took to the temple, it did not matter what you did with sluts. I didn't see it that way at all. For me, to be "worthy" meant no sex of any kind before marriage.
I came to see over the decades that Church leaders have a different standard of sexual conduct for themselves, and for the rank-and-file Members. Church leaders see themselves, and their families, as "The Church". Everybody else are just "The Members"; as if these are two differnet things. The Members are to be completely honest and sexually pure, but....for the Church there is a different standard. I first knew about this when I discovered the truth about Gordon B. Hinckley's son. In 1969-1970 he was a graduate student at Stanford University. He'd come back to Utah during the Summers to sell cars (great way to make residual income). He was married, and an RM. During this time, he had male lovers, and purportedly used underage male and female prostitutes. Well, of course, Gordon B. was an apostle by this time, and heard about this. According to the General Handbook of Instructions, Hinckley's son should have been excommunicated. At this time, 1970, everyone who was excommunicated had their names printed in "The Improvement Era" with the reason why they were excommunicated. It was also announced in Priesthood meeting. Of course, if Hinckley's son was excommunicated, that would have been very embarassing to the family, and probably caused a divorce. Well, Gordon B. was determined that was not going to happen, so he intervened, and there was no excommunication, no disfellowshipment, no probation. He swept it all under the rug (as Hinckley loved to do about many things). Hinckley's son later became a Stake President, mission president, and Seventy. Rumor is that Gordon B. wanted to appoint his son as an Apostle, but his counselors were so opposed to it that Gordon B. settled for his son becoming a Seventy. Gordon B. Hinckley was just a very dishonest man. He lied all the time, and I mean ALL THE TIME! He was an embarassment to the Church. He was called to be an Apostle thanks to Joseph Fielding Smith. Hinckley had once been Smith's "PA" (personal assistant) for many decades; basically like a gopher.
I know for a fact that my roommate in Bellevue, Washington, slept with a young LDS women who related by blood to an Apostle (my roommate had sex with dozens of young LDS women and girls I know of, and claimed many dozens more before I met him). The girl later confessed to the bishop, after being confronted, and the bishop ordered a Church Court. Soon afterwards, that bishop was released (only having served 8 months), and the old bishop was brought it, and he cancelled the Church Court. I've heard of many other stories of a similar nature; if it involves a blood relative of any Church leader, it's all covered-up and swept under the rug. I know of another incident, back in the early 1980s. In Lehi, an Apostle's daughter and her husband owned a child-care center, and at least the husband and his mother were molesting the children. Anyway, the Apostle pulled weight and the Utah county DA dropped all charges, but the couple had to move away, out of state. Also, I know that Carlos Asay's (former President of the Seventy now deceased) had a brother who apparently molested all sorts of children, but he was never exed although he was convicted. Again, being a blood relative of a Church leader, or Church VIP, like the Marriotts, has its advantages.
The Church was such a beautiful BIG LIE! It broke my heart to discover the truth about it.
What you are saying is all very true, and pathetic. I am sure many ex-mormons could give you a host of stories similar to what you are saying.
When I was divorcing my ex-huband and leaving the church at the same time I saw a therapist. Wonderful man who helped me more than I can say. He repeatedly told me that the LDS church was known for serious sexual issues that were swept under the rug and kept quiet. He had been a therapist for years and was always learning and researching, so I trusted his input more than some sick "ordained' leader who was on a power trip.
I was an active member of the LDS church for the first 26 years of my life. Just like you I can think of countless instances of men having sex with other women while married with a family at home, or high ranking stake officials having a history of molesting a slew of people, etc and the general feeling was "don't talk about it, sweep it under the rug".
Disgusting, completely disgusting to me. My mom was usually the one passing all this information to me but her disclaimer was always "the church is true, but sometimes people do bad things." OMG! We let psychos like this tell us what to do and council us in making life decisions??? No wonder I lived a complete disaster of an existence from 17 - 27 when I left the church.
Sickening and all the more reason for leaving the church and being honest about it when people ask why we have left.
There always seems to be "a family" in power and neopotism is rife. I have seen this all my life as a member and even today still although I am not that much in touch with members. Funerals are a good indication of how powerful a family is in the church by the size of the attendance. Just sayin'
Absolutely Enlightened! They is always a 'family in power', a morman dynasty if you will. I can think of several families that reigned in our stake.
As much as I don't want to wish ill will on others, one of the dynasty families in the stake suffered some serious misfortune in the past few years but I think they brought it on themselves by playing the part as 'righteously untouchable.'
And I agree, funerals always give insight into the state of the dynasty.