Welcome. My name is Paul Reeve. I am an associate professor of history at the University of Utah. I am a Mormon, apparently being a Mormon at the University of Utah. Somehow situates me somewhere between the Religion Department at BYU and the American Atheists. So I am the moderator tonight. It's my pleasure to welcome you and particularly the Atheists who are here for your convention. Welcome to Utah. Welcome to Salt Lake City. We have a few housekeeping items to take care of in advance and then we will begin our discussion. First off, this panel discussion is being recorded. The recording is sponsored by the Mormon Transhumanist Association, an international nonprofit organization that promotes radical flourishing in creation and compassion through technology and religion. The recording will be available on the Association's YouTube channel on Thursday, April 17th. More information about the Association is available at transfigurism.org. Let's see. There are a few items that we also need to take care of. Please silence all cell phones, electronic gadgets, whatever else you may have in your pockets so that we aren't interrupted through the discussion tonight. Let me just explain briefly then the format tonight. There will be an opportunity to ask questions. The way that the questions will happen is I'm going to ask you now to raise your hand if you're interested in writing a question and Dave Moscato is going to distribute a card and collect those cards. At some point then during the night's discussion, I will transition from the questions that I have planned towards some potential audience questions. Okay, so we will try to facilitate some questions from the audience. David Silverman was also interested before we began in kind of getting a sense of the crowd we have here tonight. He's pretty enthused by the atheist turnout. So he asked me if those of you who are atheists would raise your hands and those of you who are theists and those of you who are theists so the Mormons are in the minority in Utah tonight. So let me briefly explain how this panel came about. Dave Moscato who is distributing these cards is a public relations director of the American Atheists and he came across JB Haas, Professor JB Haas book recently published by Oxford University Press. The Mormon image in the American mind, 50 years of public perception. And this is on sale in the lobby afterwards as well and JB will be available to sign copies. And Dave sent an email to JB floating the idea of a panel discussion that explored the public perception of Mormonism and of atheism and asked JB if he would be interested in participating in this. JB is a member of the Faculty of the BYU School of Religion at Brigham Young University in Provo and he then worked through channels to get permission and that was granted. So for you, atheist in the room, for us in Utah, this is evidence of that miracles do happen and I hate to destroy your convention before it even starts but you know that's empirical evidence that the short convention. The fact that we have a panel here tonight but we're glad that the Religion Department at BYU approved this and we're glad that this came about and JB sent me an email and asked if I would facilitate or moderate this and I didn't have to ask permission from anyone but my wife and she said we didn't have anything going on tonight so here we are. So I'm going to just explain the purpose of our discussion tonight. The purpose of the roundtable is to talk about how the public sees Mormons and how the public sees atheists, what types of mischaracterizations or stereotypes exist on both sides, what Mormons actually believe versus what people think they believe, what atheists actually believe versus what the public thinks they believe and let me be clear this is not a debate. It is a discussion with a goal of arriving at a greater sense of mutual understanding. It is an opportunity to break down stereotypes, not reinforce them. It is not about conversion or about who is right and who is wrong. It is about civil dialogue and attempting to look at theism or atheism from someone else's perspective. A debate seeks victory and discussion seeks understanding and we are seeking understanding tonight and that's the purpose for our panel here. So let me just briefly then introduce and I'm saying very briefly I have just sort of sentence introductions here to give you an indication of who is on the panel and then I'm going to begin by asking them to give a fuller introduction of themselves and in particular what I'm interested in is an introduction in terms of their relationship to either theism or atheism, sort of their doubt journey or their faith journey or whatever it may be so that we have a sense of where they're coming from and then I will begin with some questions for for the panel. So farthest to my right is David Silverman. He's the president of American Atheists. Next to David is Joanne Hanks. She is the author of It's Not About the Sex, My Ass. We can say that title at the U but not at BYU and Joanne I'm assuming you didn't get the BYU book started to carry your book. No, not surprising. I didn't even get to the the subtitle before the applause. The subtitle is Confessions of an Ex-Mormon, Ex-Polygamist, Ex-Wife and then we have Dr. Richard Holtapel. He's a professor of LDS Church History at Brigham Young University and then we have Dr. JB Haas who is a professor of church LDS Church History at Brigham Young University and the author of The Mormon Image in the American Mind, 50 Years of Public Perception. So David Silverman, I'm gonna begin with you and just ask you to give us just a short introduction how would how you explain yourself in terms of your atheism. So we have a perspective of where you're coming from tonight and we'll just go through the panel that way to begin with. Do you want me to talk about where I come from from a religious point of view? Okay, so I'm an atheist. I'm the president of American Atheists which means I am what's known as a firebrand atheist. I am the kind of atheist. Some people call us the new atheists but there's nothing new about us. I follow in the footsteps of Madeline Murray O'Hare. Religion is bad. Religion is a poison. Religion does not deserve to live. Now that does not mean religious people are bad. It means religious people are victims of a very bad thing that needs to be wiped off the face of the earth. This is what American Atheists is all about. It's blunt language. It's honesty. We do not worry about political correctness. However, we do worry about the perception that people have because a lot of people think that American Atheists is a mean organization, is a non-humanistic organization or it is an anti-religious people organization. None of this is true. It is also not true that we're trying to take religion away from the from people who want it. We are, however, trying to take away religious privilege from those who have it and make this country a fairer and equal nation. That's where we come to end Hanks. Well, I'm in between figuratively and literally. I grew up in a strict Mormon family. I graduated from Brigham Young University. I worked for the LDS Church in the temples department as an interior designer. I got married in the Salt Lake Temple to return missionary. And then five years and three children later we found ourselves in Manti in a polygamous cult and we lived there for seven years.  One quick example for the women here.  And you have to tell yourself this is God's will. So how would you handle that? Well, the way I handled it, which I thought was very mature, was I went to the middle of the room and I stomped on the floor as hard as I could. So I will tell you things that you will go home and tell your families and they won't believe. But they are true because I lived them. I'm a professor at BYU and got a PhD from the University of California, Irvine. So as you know, one of the premier Marxist schools in the country and Foucault and Marx were our theory models that we studied and so I encountered intellectually atheism there at the university with professors. It was a challenging time because obviously they were raising questions about faith and my own particular faith. And I came away from UC Irvine with a deep sense that I'm grateful that I live in a democratic, pluralistic society in which we not only tolerate different points of view, but we want and encourage pluralism or participation from many points of view. And so I guess my faith journey is my own personal faith has remained strong, but also has become more inclusive to allow other voices and such civil dialogues as we're having here tonight. I think only make our republic and our experience here more healthy and more engaging. Well, my name is JB Hawes. Thanks to Dave Moscato and to all those who facilitated this and this beautiful place. We're so grateful to the Salt Lake City Library for hosting us. I grew up in a small town in Northern Utah called Hooper, Utah. It's west of Ogden. It's on the shores of the Great Salt Lake. If you have any downtime in your conference, I encourage a road trip. You will never forget it. So the diversity in Hooper was between farmers who grew tomatoes and farmers who raised dairy cattle. So it was sort of a pretty homogeneous community. But I've appreciated since then, like Dr. Holstoffel said, I've appreciated the chance to live in different places around the country, to engage with different people. And I find that that has been a benefit for my faith to communicate with people from different viewpoints. And so I would say that that has been an enriching experience and has made my faith burn brighter, I think. Okay, thank you. So I'm going to start off with really a broad question that gets at the heart of what we envisioned this panel accomplishing tonight. So JB, because your book got us into this mess, I'm going to start with you. And the question and what I'm going to do is give JB a chance to answer this question and then give the atheist, either Duann or David or both, a chance to give us an assessment if they think this is a valid assessment of how others see Mormonism. Okay, so JB, what's the greatest misperception that exists in the public mind about Mormonism? The greatest misperception that exists in the public mind about your point of view, the Mormon point of view? Great question to start. I hope I can say this in the right way. I'm going to say that it is that I don't think people realize how inclusive Mormonism is. Now that may seem sort of strange to this audience and you may have a knee-jerk reaction to that. And I'm not talking so much about church structures, the church practices, but I'm talking about Mormon theology. I think one of the perceptions that Mormonism has is of being secretive, being exclusive, and I think what gets missed is just how expansive the salvation model is in Mormonism, maybe even a slightly different Christian paradigm. One of the things that I think and understandably so troubles a lot of people as they look at religion is this idea of whatever the faith group is, is somehow condemning a large segment of humanity for not being part of that faith group. And that's where Mormonism might be unique, is this idea that of a universal chance at salvation because of a theology that looks at more than just birth to death and that talks about even post-mortal chances to understand and accept the saving power of Jesus Christ. And I think that's probably not well understood. It gets on a level of theology which is sometimes hard to put into sound bites, but I think that makes Mormonism more inclusive than would be guessed at first blush. Okay. David and Joanne, you have a chance to give us your assessment. Is this a valid assessment of how others may see Mormonism or a response to JB's characterization here? Well I think his characterization is true. I think his defense is flawed. I think that yes the inclusiveness and the shunning and the outgroups of Mormonism is clearly what everybody thinks about. I think the fact that you defend that by saying well everybody can become a Mormon and everybody can get saved, that's not inclusiveness. Okay. Inclusiveness includes people who want nothing to do with you. Okay. And the idea that I would like to raise to you and maybe you could address it is well there's twofold things I'd like to push to you. Number one is when American atheists came here we tried to get billboards. None, none of the Utah based billboard companies would do business with us. They didn't care about the message. It wasn't about the message. They would not do business with us. The malls would not do business with us. This is not inclusiveness. This is not, that's the very definition of the outgroupness of exclusiveness. And the other side of the same coin is that one of the things that we're doing at this convention is we're raising money for a charity that helps children who have been thrown out of their Mormon houses because their atheists are gay. That's putrid. That's disgusting. It's barbaric. And it's the exact opposite of inclusiveness.  They want to live their lives. They want to be Jews. They want to be Catholics. They want to be atheists. Why are they not welcome to do business with some Mormons? Or I should say the perception is they are not welcome to do business with. They are not welcome to be friends with Mormons. And if they leave the Mormon fold, they're not supposed to even be involved with their own family anymore. That's what worries me. Well, maybe I can respond to that. I think that's really excellent.  I was 18 years of age. And from what were you raised as? Nothing. Atheists kick you out of? No, no, no. I didn't say they were atheists. Because that doesn't happen. Yeah, yeah. But what I've learned is that no matter what group it is, whether your parents are hardcore Democrat and you want to become a Republican or they're hardcore Republican, there's always individuals who make choices. Now, in my Mormon faith, I would never disown a child for whatever reason they chose. Because that would be putrid and barbaric, right? Right. But I do recognize that in all communities, whether it be in Moscow, Idaho, or Moscow, Russia, there are people who make their own personal choices. But I don't think you can make a group responsible for individual choices. Because I don't know anything in my Mormon faith that tells me that if a child chooses not to be a Mormon, I must throw them out. I don't know anything in my faith that teaches that. Joanne, would you like to talk about that? Yeah. Now, I'm not saying that there aren't Mormons to do that. It's just so widespread. It's just so widespread that we hear over and over again, I can't talk to my Mormon family anymore. I can't come out as an atheist because I'll lose my whole community. I can't come out as an atheist because I'll lose my job. This is the byline. This is the standard line that we get when we're dealing with people who are leading the Mormon faith. Let me just interject here and then, Richard, I'll give you a chance to also respond here. I think one of the points then is that maybe that's the only story you're hearing, right? You're not hearing the other stories. Joseph Smith articulates and position a faith claim for Mormonism. We claim the privilege of worshiping on Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience and allow all men, and I would say women, the same privilege, to let them worship how, where, or what they may, right? So let me just interrupt you and ask a question. Are you three saying to me that there is nothing in Mormonism that produces shunning? There's nothing in Mormonism that endorses an exclusionary mentality. Is there nothing there? Is that completely wrong? Well, I mean, again, we're talking about groups. I'm talking about Mormon faith, Mormonism. Okay. My experience at UC Irvine suggested that there were some professors when they found I graduated from BYU and that I was a person of faith, shun me. Did that mean every atheist was a bad person? No, that particular person chose that. So I'm saying in my faith, there's nothing that I've been taught or that I teach that says that we should shun. Now, your experience is your experience. I mean, that's legitimate, but I'm telling you my personal experience. And I know many people whose children have chosen other lifestyles and that they're part of the family. I've been on family reunions with them. I've been on family trips with them. And it seems to me they have very normal human family relationships. Does it mean that all Mormons do what they're told? Not all Mormons live to the ideal, but it's not a Mormon ideal to shun. Do you have anything more? Well, I feel like I was a victim of a Mormon doctrine from the start. If you look at a polygamist community, you'll see that they are trying to live the doctrine that Joseph Smith set up. And so the church has changed over the years greatly from what it was in the beginning. And so, for example, Joseph Smith taught that the priesthood was for blessing as well as for cursing. So in our group in Manti, our leader decided that since the end of the world was coming, we were the elect down there, and we were going to prepare for that. We sent out our 12 apostles on a mission across the United States. And as per Mormon doctrine, they cursed the state capitals, any Mormon temples they came across. They went out in the trees, put on their white robes, and in the tour of prayer asked God to seal up the government for destruction because it was so wicked. So I believe that because of my upbringing.  And so it's easy for me now to see how I was fooled and how silly it all was. And it was like dominoes falling. Once I first realized that these things were so ridiculous, then pretty soon, you know, in my book I say George Carlin was my savior. Because I had been thinking things after we left the cult and then I saw him on TV and the things he said were exactly what I was starting to think. And it made so much more sense than what I had been taught my whole life up to that point. Yeah, back to your point though. See, I think this is another characteristic where your experience, that's legitimate, it's your experience. But it's not my experience, it's not the larger Mormon experience. So with stories like this, the public perceives that that's my experience. That's simply not the case. I've never dressed up in white robes and cursed anybody. That's not my faith. My faith is to go do good to people, to help people, no matter what their faith is. As you know, we pay a fast offering every month. We give to humanitarian services. We give our time freely and we serve to all people. We don't ask them, what's their faith? Are they faithful or not? We send goods to Muslim countries and also to countries that are by and large non-religious. So your experience is a minority experience within a subgroup of my faith. So you telling that story makes people think that that's what I believe. It's simply not the case. I have never done anything you've said, not once. Could I jump into you, Paul? One thing that I appreciate about Joanne is I think she's careful to distinguish between this sort of extremist, fundamentalist type of polygamy and mainstream Mormonism. So I really appreciate that. I think that's one of the really common misconceptions that I think people like Joanne are helping to sort of correct because I think she's careful at that. And so I think that's a huge point. But a story comes to my mind and I think this captures well maybe the ethos of Mormonism. Jesus and two of his apostles were in a Samaritan village and the village rejected Jesus's message and sort of maybe a human, this rising temper sort of mentality they said to him, Lord, should we curse this village?  I come to save people, not to curse people. And I think that captures the way we feel as Mormons. So while I am always sad to hear about stories like this, one of our current apostles, Russell Ballard, from a general conference at a worldwide mean of Latter-day Saints, he spoke out explicitly and chastised any Mormon who has ever kept a child from playing with a friend who didn't share their beliefs or who has shunned a neighbor. I'm sorry we're not up to that standard, but there is nothing in Mormonism that would condone the type of behavior you're talking about. It is true. So where does it come from? Human nature? No, it seems to be much more often. Okay, seems to be. Yeah. Seems to be much more related to Mormonism than Catholicism or Judaism or Christianity. The stories that I get, and I get because I'm president of American atheists, I get all the stories.  That's what they do. But the shunning, I won't let my kids play with your kids. You can't stay here if you're not like me. Overwhelmingly is Mormon. Where does that come from? It may also just be a sociological sort of feature of being a dominant group. I think this is maybe a reflection more of a majority group. I would guess that especially from, you know, from if you take a survey around the country, people in Utah or just sort of Mormon corridor would have a different experience with their Mormon neighbors probably than outside of Utah. And I think it's important, just a sociological reality about the way dominant groups behave. So I don't think there's, there is nothing in Mormonism that would condone this, but in fact opposite. In fact, let me tell you what my Utah history class reads. The last day of class, an article given at General Conference by an LDS Apostle, just to deal with this very issue that you're talking about, David, sort of, it's sort of in a habit, sort of the elephant in the room, right? In Utah, sort of this cultural divide, are you or aren't you? And then people make up their minds about you, whether you are or you aren't Mormon, right? And there are all kinds of stereotypes from both sides. And one of the things that I try to get out of the last day of my Utah history class is that very cultural divide. And I allow students to share these stories. What's it like? Mormons who are outside of Utah love to tell stories about being the only Mormon in their high school, right? But Mormons don't stop and think what it's like being the only Catholic or the only atheist in all Mormon high school, right? What's it like? And sometimes the stories are barbaric. You're absolutely right. And I think it comes with sort of this, you know, majority mentality, right? The tyranny of the majority Alexis of Tocqueville called it. And you sort of see that playing out where you have one group sort of dominating the culture. But one of the things I haven't read, I have a read an article about, called Culture Shock, people coming to Utah and experiencing culture shock and feeling this sense of exclusion. But I also assign a talk that was given by an LDS apostle called the Doctrine of Inclusion. And he says explicitly, there is no doctrine of exclusion in Mormonism.  It's preached from the pulpit in general conference. And yet you still sometimes have Mormons who actually do it, right? So that's the disconnect that I think the panel is getting at. And that's my experience in the classroom with students who have grown up in Utah. And you're right. Some of these experiences are terrible. Absolutely. Say one more. I'm sorry to keep harping on this idea of inclusiveness. But I mean, just maybe a theological basis. In 1978, the church's first presidency, that's the highest council of church governance for Latter-day Saints issued a statement. So an official statement, highlighting, celebrating the fact that God has inspired humans throughout human history, Confucius was named by name, Muhammad named by name, Plato, Socrates, the founding fathers. And I think that is also something that maybe highlights and speaks to the inclusiveness of Mormonism is this idea that God is working through so many other faiths to improve the condition of humanity and that all goodness is there's in no way do Mormons have a corner on goodness. And so they celebrate officially celebrated God's inspiration and all of these other thinkers. Is there any sort of a penalty for breaking that rule? Because it seems to be, like I said, seems to be broken regularly. I mean, is there anything that says, Okay, well, if you don't do this, if you do this, bad things will happen. Anything like that. That's a really good question. Do you see how if there was, then the other stereotype that we're dominating, we don't let free thought see that by punishing somebody, then the other idea that Mormons are closed, and we all think the same way. So it's kind of a catch 22. How do you have openness yet and not dictate an individual conscience? All religions do that, though.  Well, I mean, we obviously believe that if you're not a good person, doesn't matter who you are, if you're not a decent human being, you're in trouble. Well, that's that's what I mean. And you define what decent is. So if you're defining decent as being inclusive, as being really inclusive of everybody, and not shunning, is that a factor? Is that considered a factor? When you die, and you have this juxtaposition, you absolutely 100% interesting. Sure. Yeah. Okay, so I'm gonna then give the atheist a chance to either David or David, when we start with you. What is the greatest misreception that exists in the public mind about atheism? Oh, there's lots of them. That's, I would say the greatest misconception about atheism is that we're not nice people. I think that a lot of people think that morality comes from religion. Religion teaches that morality comes from religion. And therefore, if you don't have religion, you don't have morality. So I think the greatest misconception of atheism is that we're not nice and or immoral, which of course cannot be the case. It cannot be the case because all the data combats that the population of people who are non religious in this country, depending on your polls goes somewhere between 15 and 30% the population of atheists or non religious people in federal prisons is 0.07% 0.07 of 1%. So the amount of people the amount of atheists who are committing crimes is tiny compared to the amount of atheists out there. On the other hand, if you look at it from a morality perspective, from an from an outside perspective, you can see what's happening. People change churches for a reason. They change churches because they don't agree with the church they're in. If they don't agree with the church they're in, so they, they say, okay, well, this, this church isn't doing something. It's not striking my moral fancy. I'm going to go to this church over here because it does. Well, that means morality is independent of religion. And then what they do is they go to this church over here that says, okay, your morality is correct. And God says so.  Right. And that's that's it's kind of backwards. But that's how the that's how it works. The reality is that every single human picks their own morality. Morality is relative. And everybody picks it. Everybody chooses it. The only difference between an atheist and a theist is that an atheist will internalize it and say, this is my morality. And a theist will say, this is my morality because I get it from my religion. So from the other side, is this a valid assessment of how perhaps Mormon see atheists or outsiders see atheists? Is this something that inhabits your perception of atheism? Well, that's a good question. This is maybe a good time to interject, especially for the record that I do not speak officially for the church of Jesus Christ, I'm not saying stuff. So okay, we're going to take it like you do anyway. I'm glad. We may find out about shunning, won't we? So I, you know, I don't think so. I, especially about the part about kindness, I, I wouldn't guess that's the common. And you know, that hasn't been my experience. This may be one of those difficult things again, where it's based on anecdotal things. I wouldn't, I wouldn't say that about kindness. I think there probably is sort of an uncertainty about the, the moral basis, you know, the basis for moral judgments among atheists. But I, I don't think that people, maybe, you know, in my experience would paint atheists with a broad brush of saying unkind, that they're unkind. Because in, in, I would guess instead that they would feel like that, that maybe uncertainty is probably a better way of saying it, just an uncertainty about where they, where they, on what they base their moral judgments. I think your part point about maybe a militancy is, is probably that, and from my experience seems more valid. They would think that atheists generally speaking are, are a little more militant.  That might be a misconception. Yeah, I'm sure you do.  I'm sure you do. I'm sure you do. But I would say, I would think if we're talking. Firebrand. Yeah. Fervent. I would, I would think in terms of pride and of not militant. Conceptions, I would think that, that's probably a word that I would think a lot of people associated with atheists. I'd like to address this idea of militant. We're talking about, I think superficial things. Are we nice to each other? Do we misjudge each other? I think in the world, everybody is going to judge somebody for some reason. If it's not religion, it's going to be race. If it's not race, it's going to be income. What I'd like to point out is that if we go beyond the superficial and I think a lot of the problems in the Mormon church are based on the doctrine from the beginning, from Joseph Smith, Brigham Young. That's some things that I feel I know a lot about from being in this cult because we studied it inside and out and we tried to copy Joseph Smith's lifestyle. And if you study that, which most people don't, they talk about the superficial. Even Mormons don't know their own history. You get back, for instance, work for the dead. Now, there's something that probably brings up a lot of misconceptions about Mormons. Is there work for the dead? And I don't blame you. I think it's bizarre. I don't think that there are ghosts that come out of our body and float up somewhere and the death is not really death. And that you can talk to people. In Manti, we had prayer sessions. We called them. Really, they were seances. We'd get in a small room, pray. We'd call up people from the other side of the veil who had died. For instance, one time we called up Abraham Lincoln. And, of course, he showed up and we couldn't see him. But Jim's wife Elaine was voice and she said, you know, we call Abraham Lincoln through the veil. Are you there? And then she would say, well, yes, I am. Thank you for inviting me. And I was there. And he was so complimentary. He was so grateful that we had called him and given him an opportunity to become a member of our church. And an apologize for the things he did in history and that he wasn't more helpful to the Mormons when he was alive. So about misconceptions, those kinds of realities, those kinds of Mormon doctrine from the past that the current church doesn't want to talk about. They don't want to talk about polygamy.  Yes, I am. So the misconceptions come from the reality of the foundation of the church and they can't change that. And that's why I became an atheist because I learned that the foundations were ridiculously crazy. And everything was just a story, fantasy. And that's, you know, not what I believe anymore. Okay, so I'm going to give the BYU professor the chance to respond. Well, I'll just I'll just say, and boy, I'm sorry to this belaboring the point. But again, I think Joanne characterizes this really well. I mean, this is a very, very fringe group of a couple of hundred. I mean, she describes it really well. I mean, and just the bizarreness. You would have gotten the same reaction in a crowd this size of Latter-day Saints as you would have in this crowd. They would have shaken their heads. They would have laughed. And this is this is unfortunate and really bizarre. And so far from the the mainstream church, Christa Stendall, who is the the dean of the Harvard Divinity School and a Swedish cleric, he saw completely different.  He's a believer. But but he used the phrase Holy Envy to talk about Latter-day Saint baptism for the dead. He he saw this as as a beautiful expression of a desire to want to open the doors of salvation to to every person who had ever lived. And he said he felt Holy Envy that he wished that was part of his tradition because he thought it was motivated by the highest ideal. And so that's a much different picture from that in the mainstream view. Can I can we talk a little bit about baptizing dead people? You've got to put in a preposition in there. It doesn't work. So yeah. Well, okay, so I just want to make sure we are talking about Mormon doctrine when we are talking about baptizing dead people. Okay, but let's let's also be clear that we're breaking down stereotypes, right? And so the way that you're characterizing this is reinforcing stereotypes instead of breaking them down. How do I rephrase it? How do I rephrase it? So you sort of said that as a joke almost, right? So, well, no, I just want to make sure that we baptizing dead people, right? So it conjures images, right? So some of the images that come up in people's minds are Mormons are digging up graves. Okay, that's not where I'm going. That's not where I'm going. You know, exactly how does this take place?  What's the word, the process for what you do with dead people to save them in the afterlife? So it's baptism for the dead, or the dead's by proxy is how Mormons describe it. Okay, baptism for the dead.  Okay, I think we both agree with that. But the relatives do. And when when atheists have funerals, when people die, we have a funeral, we have a morning session, but it's for the living. Okay, nothing's for the dead person. The dead person's dead. Nothing can be done for the dead person. But the memorials are for the living. So I'm thinking, all right, I die, and then somebody performs a baptism for me, if I'm using the correct term, and I won't know and I won't care because I'll be dead. But everybody, just about everybody in this room because they're all atheists, but certainly my family would be appalled. Would be appalled that somebody would take my memory and say, okay, he's now a Mormon in the afterlife. So my question is, do you understand how awful that is for the survivors? And at the same time, would you accept it if, let's say, the Catholics were to baptize Brigham Young as a Catholic after he died? Oh, you bet. You'd object. Oh, no, no, I would accept that. No problem. You would accept that. Oh, yeah. Oh, sure. But this is this is the difficulty. This is difficulty. I'm in the vein of Krister Stendall. As a believer, and as seeing this as a beautiful thing, and I can see why it's offensive to you. Please don't misunderstand. But from a believer's standpoint, I think that's a beautiful sentiment that they think that they care enough about people that I care about that they want the best possible future for them. So to me, it's motivated by beautiful sentiment. But I can see, I certainly can see why it would be offensive to you. Let me clarify just a couple things. First of all, there is a policy that I can't, if you died today, I couldn't be baptized for you. Why? Because you just died, and I'd have to have your family's permission to do so. You'd have to have my family's permission. Yeah, I'd have to have your family and Frank. Again, you're not helping the situation here because that's against church policy. That was a rogue Mormon doing it. But that was not the church's position. Okay. Church position is you have to have family permission. But see, I see baptism of the dead get away from the kind of strange idea proxy baptism. Simply, I'm having a party and I'm going to turn 60 and I want to invite everybody to come. So I'm going to send out an invitation to everybody. Hopefully you wouldn't be offended getting an invitation for me. But you have the choice to accept that invitation to come to my party. So Mormons are somebody inviting everybody to come to this party in the world to come. If you don't want to come, that's your choice. But don't be offended I've sent you an invitation. But you're saying that you're saying for dead people that they've accepted the invitation. You are saying for the dead, aren't you? No, no, no, not at all. Not at all. It's not a Mormon position. We have, this is simply an invitation. Anybody can choose to accept it or reject it. Okay. So, so the point is this, the point is I'm inviting you. Don't be offended by invitation. I'm going to accept the fact that you choose not to come to my party. And that's fine. How many dead people do not choose to come? When I turn 60 and we're at the party, we'll find out how many people show up. Now you're avoiding the question, though. I mean, you're implying that there's an option for dead people to withdraw to say no.   And they, and you say they all say yes. No, we did not say that. Okay, good. Tell me more. We don't know who accepted it. You don't know who we have. No idea until the party comes until you die. Yeah, that's right. So the point is this is that there are rogue Mormons who do things and doing those baptisms is wrong. That's wrong. That's not our policy. Okay. So we don't bat.  But the point is that our baptisms are really an invitation. So we start off this discussion by you saying that everything you've heard about us is that we're exclusionary, that we're we're we stay to ourselves, that we shun people. Now you're arguing that because we invite everybody to join us, we're somehow bad. So we're either or we shun or we are open. No, I'm not saying that it's an invitation. What I'm saying is that you're going off and assuming that people are accepting and accepting dead people and saying okay, those people are now Mormons. We've never, we've never assumed that. Good. So now you understand this a little bit better. Yeah, I'm trying and I'm asking. That means I'm asking hard questions, but I'm not accusing, I'm asking. Yeah. So we are inviting everybody to join the party. We're not we're not focused on ourselves. We're not exclusionary. We're open to everybody. Well, that's that's still exclusionary because your inclusionary means you're open to non Mormons forever. You don't try to change them. That's inclusionary. But what I'm saying for as far as the baptism for the dead, you're not performing a baptism for a dead person. And then assuming and moving forward that that person has accepted Mormonism and calling that person a Mormon retroactively. No, we don't. And they don't they're not included in our membership rosters. So I've seen some newspaper reports. Well, no, there's no wonder so many Mormons. They don't all these baptisms. They're not counted in any number as members of our church. Good. I'd like to make a point on that. I worked in the church office building in the temples department as an interior designer. And I had one experience where we bought a chandelier for the Denver Temple. We got it from Lalique crystal in France. And I found out that it costs $200,000 just for a chandelier. And the comment at the time was the best for the Lord. And I agreed. And the interior designers loved working there because they got to spend billions of dollars. Since then, and since my experience in this polygamous group and since becoming an atheist is it's really upsetting to me to think of all the time and all the money that's wasted on things that aren't real. This conversation about did the person accept the baptism or not. There is no person like he says. My parents are temple workers or they were before they got too old.  There's so many things in the world that you can do to help people. And I know Mormons give a lot to recovery after disasters and things. They also put their name on the side of the box. Everybody knows, you know, who it's come from. But the millions and billions of dollars spent on something meeting houses on every corner that aren't necessary. Think of what we could do in this world for poor people, for single mothers with that kind of money and that kind of time. I think it's important to maybe make this point that while you believe that that service they give in the temple doesn't have an effect because people don't survive death is your opinion. That's fine. But there's also some of the fact that Mormons live a temple life that can be very enriching and rewarding. A temple can be a place where I can go and meditate about important things. I've often felt compelled after temple worship to want to give more in fast offerings to want to do more service. So in that sense, I'm not so sure it's a waste of time, at least for my experience of being there and just being quiet, away from the world, away from televisions, away from radios and jet planes. And I've walked away literally saying I need to do more. So in that sense, I'm not so sure you can quantify the effect of that investment. If it does help people to want to look out beyond themselves to help give more to help to be more involved. I simply believe that at least in my own Mormon experience that I feel compelled. And and I know that your little comment about we put a name on it. I think almost anybody who's donating to anything, it's whether to be the Red Cross or any type of outreach will often identify who it is that's giving it to them. But I do know that there are in certain countries, particularly Muslim countries in which we absolutely don't. We don't put Bibles in. We don't put Book of Mormons in. We're giving it to them because we want to help them, not to evangelize them. And that's very good. Yeah, thank you. It's good work. It's right. It's the right thing to do. So again, while you think it's a waste of time for the dead, that can be your opinion. I think you might misunderstand that for some worms, obviously not for yourself, but for some Mormons, the temple is a place to contemplate, to think and actually as an enriching experience. And it's caused me to want to give more.  And it's important to do that. And the temple has brought me to that in many times in my life. Could the temple do that without a $200,000 chandelier? You know, kind of coming back to a circle and back around where we started, I think we one thing that we've done here, and I really appreciate that we've had the time to talk about this is is deep seated beliefs are hard to capture in short quotes in media pieces. And that's what makes this valuable because what I hope happens in terms of misconceptions and misperceptions is to see to understand maybe a little better the Mormon world view. And for someone for whom this is just is absolutely real. And they believe that this is real that that this this corresponds well with their worldview and is driven by compassion. And so while you may disagree with the worldview, I hope that what happens tonight is there's a great understanding that okay, this makes sense for someone who views the world this way. This is driven by deep compassion about what they feel is the ultimate reality. Yeah, but that's hard to put into sound. I understand, but you're avoiding the question. I mean, when we talk about the Mormon church, and we talk about the Catholic Church is the same way. I'm not just picking on the Mormons now. There is this level of opulence. There is this level of opulence beyond beyond ridiculousness. When you have the kind of money that these organized mega churches, the organized Mormon church, the organized Catholic Church has, and you spend, again, I'll go back to the example, a couple hundred thousand dollars on a chandelier when that couple hundred thousand dollars could buy a half way house for homeless people. And then when you defend it saying, well, if I go to this, it's part of my worldview and I can meditate easily. I'm not I'm not here in the link here. Yeah, I think it's a good point. But you know, it's like anybody, you know, we live in in a in a advanced Western society. I've lived in non Western societies. And the average home United States seems opulent to somebody in West Africa. Yes. Okay. Yet that person could be giving time and money. Now, for the person in West Africa say, yeah, but look at this big house you live in. According to our standards, a below average home size. So that's going to be a relative issue about funds. From what I do know about the the Latter Saint faith is that we give a significant amount of money. And that if you compare us to almost any other group per capita, we give a lot more to the poor. So, you know, we could, we could, we could do something really fun and say, let's show our income tax from this week. Yeah, that would be a great idea. What we did. And I think you'd be surprised about how much we do give. Also, I would love to see that I would love to know how much money the Mormon church actually gives to charity. I would love to know that specific number. This, this is a, this is a tough issue that they've wrestled with. I mean, we have, you know, and, and, and we take our cues from, from Jesus Christ. And, and so on the, on the one hand, he says, you know, don't do your alms to be seen of men and women. And on the other hand, let your light so shine. So I know the church has wrestled with this, but I think because of conversations like this, they actually have released this. So if you go to mormon.org, you can now see statistics on humanitarian relief. And it's, and I think total given now goods and services and actual cash donations are well over a billion dollars. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, it's about, it's about percentage. Yeah. It's about percentage. I mean, obviously there's some dissatisfaction here, but I think that that is something you can see. That is something you can. But I, but I know as an individual Mormon, I can't talk about the church or the atheists, I can simply talk about people. I do know that I am compelled because of my faith to reach out and to give, to help. And that's one of the major things that drives my life. Now I don't know because I don't compare with everybody else, but I have a sense for my other family members that that on the average, we're probably doing more service and more giving in our lives. First of all, that's great. That's wonderful. And especially the service. And I really commend that. I just want to ask you one quick question, Richard. And then I'm sure we have another question. And I know, but when you say, and this is quite an important question, when you say, we give, and I'm talking about you specifically personally, when you say you give, do you give to Mormon, the Mormon church, Mormon charities, or do you actually give to secular charities to very good question? One of the reasons I do give to Mormon charity is that our monthly fast offering are humanitarian. There are no administrative costs.  The church covers all the administrative costs. So that's why I do donate very heavily once a month to our fast offering, which is to feed the poor, to take care of people with immediate needs, and our humanitarian, which goes around the whole world, despite religious faith or non-faith, it doesn't matter. I like to give them because they're zero overhead. Because of the way that we work, that's all covered. But I also give to other organizations. And the list is quite long because I feel compelled. I'm interested in American Leprosy Foundation because I'm concerned about what's happening in Bombay. I give to Free the Prisoners, which is a political organization, an arm of Amnesty International, because I believe that we need to help these people. So it's not just the Mormons, but I freely admit I like giving to our church because there's zero overhead. Where even these other wonderful organizations have administrative costs and not all of my dollar gets to where it needs to go. So yes, I do give to the Mormon, but I also give to others. Thank you. Okay, so that was basically the first question. So I'm going to turn to some audience questions here, at least so the audience feels like they get to participate. And I just like to say I'm having a wonderful time. I hope you guys are too. Amen. Thank you. So this question. Do you feel that religion is here to stay? And this seems more directed toward the atheist side of the equation. And the vast majority of questions here are directed towards the BYU side of the equation here. So I'm choosing this one first and then I'll choose one towards the BYU panelists here. Do you feel that religion is here to stay? And if so, is it more important to seek converts to atheism and prove religion wrong or to find a way to work with religion? You want to talk about it? You want me to do it? Go ahead. All right. No, religion's going to die. The reason that atheism is exploding and growing and that all religions are shrinking is because of the knowledge that is provided through the internet, the conversation that is happening, the debate that is happening, the internet is making people more skeptical. And as long as the internet exists, that's going to continue to happen to the point where religion, it may not vanish from the world, but it'll become a non-factor like it is in many countries in Western Europe. Now, we do need to worry about religious people, though. And when I say worry about them, I'm talking about from a humanitarian perspective, religion is a poison of the mind. People become... It makes people do bad things. It makes good people do bad things.  And it doesn't make them bad people. It just makes them victims. And so, yes, I believe that the conversation does have to happen about should we, for lack of a better word, proselytize atheism. There's a humanitarian argument there. And I'm not sure how far that goes, but I think, yeah, you are helping a person when you're trying to convert them out of religion. I certainly think that's true. And it feels bad because it feels like religion, but it's still true. So I think the two-part answer to that question is, yes, religion's going to go away. And yes, we should do everything we can to help it along the way. I'm not a prophet, so I can't tell you what's going to happen. But we do know from all studies that religion is actually having a resurgence, maybe not in the West, Western Europe, Great Britain, Canada, United States, New Zealand, Australia. But in Africa and in China, religion's growing. So at least for the foreseeable future, the numbers are for increased religious belief, not decrease. Now, if you look at United States, you're right. But if you look at worldwide, people who are accepting religious belief are out-distancing those who are rejecting it. So again, I'm not a prophet. I don't know where it's going to end. But right now, the numbers are against you. Religion is growing. Joanne, it looks like you wanted to have a comment. I was going to say, as far as converting somebody in or out of religion, in my experience, you can talk to your blue in the face. But until I went through what I went through, I didn't understand how bad religion was. And that's why I wrote my book is to get out to people somewhat if they can empathize somewhat with what I went through, what with a lot of people who are dissatisfied with their religion. They're feeling bullied. When you go through those experiences, that's when you really can make an intelligent decision about whether you believe or you don't believe. So is the atheist position that all religious people are simply just not aware that religion is such a bad thing and there will be a point of enlightenment and atheism is the answer? Or can religious people actually be satisfied in religion? OK, so there is no one atheist position. That's one misconception that I want to make sure. I speak for American atheists, which is an organization of atheists. I do not speak for all atheists. It's certainly my position that religious people need the help out of it. Can religious people be wonderful people and be part of the society? Of course they can. Can they be satisfied in their religious lives? In fact, live an entire life of religion and be satisfied as a religious person? I think the data behind that is undeniably true. I mean, there are people who do that. So there is no way around that data. Our position is that they would be more satisfied if they were leaving a life of intellectual honesty. So bound up in that response is an implication that religious people are intellectually dishonest. And so I'm going to let the BYU crowd to say that. Well, religion is intellectually dishonest. Not religious people. Religious people are victims of a brainwashing. And I just want to make that and I just want to make that clear.  I'm saying that they're victims. And that religion is the intellectually dishonest thing. OK. So David, I'm going to let the BYU group respond to that. And a part of this panel's whole idea is to tear down stereotypes. And your comments in the Salt Lake Tribune today suggested that Mormon's it's a system of indoctrination and brainwashing. And so we're going to let the BYU crowd respond to that because that could be seen as perpetuating stereotypes rather than staring at that. So I said it was an example of it.  They all do. Right, right. It's just an example. You seem to suggest that Mormonism was particularly good at it, I guess. Apparently they are, yeah. So we're going to let the BYU crew respond to that. I let me make a recommendation for a book that if you just have an hour or two. And if you want a delightful read, just simply because it's as beautifully written as almost anything I've read. And of course, you may not agree with it. But Terrell and Fiona Givens wrote a book recently called The God Who Weeps. They're Latter-day Saints philosophers and English professor at the University of Richmond. And it's short, 100 pages. And I really appreciate their candor, the way they approach it. And their opening page, they deal with the reality that we are presented as humans, evidence on both sides of this faith question. That you can find evidence for skepticism. And you can find compelling evidence for belief in God. And so what they posit is, that therefore faith is a choice. And so I think any sort of comment or denigration of religiously minded people as being brainwashed denies what I think the Givens are getting at, which is to me is truer to life, is that all humans make a choice about what they want to believe, even if that choice is disbelief. And so that there's evidence, good evidence on both sides. But I would respectfully disagree with anyone who says that a religious belief is a belief that is devoid of evidence or is intellectually dishonest. I think it's choosing to take the evidence that points in that direction. Please tell me the evidence. Oh. Well, it's the evidence that's almost transcendent. And that's what makes it difficult. No, no, no.  So what is if you're if you're going to say, no, if you're going to say that I'm being that I'm saying the wrong thing. When I say brainwashed, I say indoctrinated. You say, no, it's not indoctrinated. It's a choice because there's evidence on both sides. I say the only reason you say this evidence on your side is because you've been indoctrinated. And I challenge you to give me the evidence. I think I think maybe for, you know, for in the spirit of our panel, I think though that that that is that discounts the evidence that that I have experienced in my life. What is the evidence? Well, it's it's just because it's difficult to put into words does not mean it's real. I'm going to guess and I'm going to guess that that all of us in this room believe things that are hard to believe based on sensory data. I think love is one of those. I think a sense of wonder at the at the universe that the order that they see. I think sort of those moments when when you feel that you are part of something larger. And so your personal experience, your personal emotions are evidence for a man in the sky. Or you know, that doesn't make sense. Now, I would say this though, I would say that I've had experiences. And and while you may discount them to me, they are as real as anything where I know independent of myself that I have experienced these things. And those become so compelling that nothing can shake me from that. Nothing can shake you from it. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. But this is this is not because let's let's get through this. Let's get through this. No cheering. Nothing can shake you from it. Doesn't that sound like brainwashing to you? Oh, no, because because this is based on my own experience. This is not because of things I learned from my parents. This is not because of things that I that I was taught in a Sunday school class. These are things that have happened to me personally. Now, while you may not have experienced these or you may discount that, what cannot be denied, this is where I would say is that for me, those are real. And so to call that brainwashing, discount something that's happened to me and that realm of personal experience is sort of the province where I think that's those lines that we cannot cross and to tell someone else what has happened to them. It's not your experience that I'm discounting. It's your interpretation of your experiences that I'm discounting. When you look at a sunset and you feel awe, I'm not discounting that you felt awe. I'm discounting that you said, I feel awe. Therefore, God. OK, that's not evidence. And that's that's a link. That's a link. That's a leap that you're making because you were taught to do that in church or by your family. And. And atheists feel awe too. You know, I was I was giving I was talking earlier today that, you know, I feel I'm a very emotional person sometimes. OK, people who know me well know that I can get emotional, not just angry emotional, but I can get weepy. I can get emotional. I have a deep love for my wife and my daughter. And I look at a sunset and I'm awed by it. But I don't take the leap you do with saying that's God. And this is and I think you have underscored that point. The key is the verb. And this is what I love about the givens position is that it is a choice. And I have chosen to believe based on that evidence and you have chosen not to. And I think that's a place where we can respectfully disagree. I don't think when I was seven years old and I was being prepared for my baptism that I was making a choice. So, so, Joanne, when you move to Manti as an adult and you left mainstream OK, so you made a choice, right?  Right. And that was because of my indoctrination growing up.  And I can't and I can't speak. But I would say the same thing is for people who lived in the GDR, who grew up in an atheist's state, who were taught from when they were young that there was no God and read anti-religious propaganda, that they were being taught. Now, as they became adults, then as they started using their mind, they could sort that out. And that's why that many people in the GDR or the Soviet, former Soviet Union, have chosen faith now. Even though they were raised atheists were taught, you could use the word indoctrinated, brainwashed, whatever you want to put. But as we grow older, we have the tools in a Western society to learn to think logically. And that's when we start making choices. So you made a choice. I make a choice. And I just hope that we will live in a world in which you are allowed to make your choice and I'm allowed to make my choice. And I think that's one of the amazing things about this current pluralism that we're experienced in America, that you have a choice to believe or disbelieve, that I also have a choice to believe or disbelieve, and not to demonize one another, not to categorize, not to say that all Mormons are this way. I know one Mormon who was shunned, therefore all Mormon shunned, or I know one atheist who was a leader of a regime in Cambodia that killed everybody, therefore all atheists are meaning to kill everybody. Hopefully we're beyond that and that we can't take these soundbites and that we try to talk to one another and to understand one another and respect adult choices. OK, so I'm going to give one last question here. I promised we have to be out of here by 9 o'clock. Whether you're an atheist or a theist. So the one last question is question number three. Am I understanding that? That's exactly right. The last question is question number three and I promise to give people a chance to buy and get JB and Joanne to sign their books. And so those are available out in the lobby afterwards. Just sort of a survey of the questions that are coming in from the audience, Richard and JB, there seems to be a lot of concern about how the Mormon Church teaches its history. And so as church history professors at BYU, do you feel the Mormon Church correctly teaches its history to its members? That's the most concise enunciation of this question. Some of them are going over, you know, two cards, but they're interested in they're interested in the ways that the LDS Church teaches its members its history. There seems to be a suggestion that there are problems there. I'll go first on what you join in. You know, this is one where if you haven't tuned in recently, I would encourage you to tune in recently. I think this is an area where the LDS Church institutionally is getting much, much better. And I think it does as much about professional tools as anything. The Church History Department in the last decade, so this is the institutional arm of the church that helps in disseminating history and in doing historical research has just really beefed up its staff. Hundreds now work in the Church History Department. The church is producing and a Joseph Smith papers where everything that Joseph Smith had his hand on that he dictated, that he wrote, that he collaborated on, that dealt with his legal cases that is being published in book form and on the internet. And if you haven't read recently, some of the statements on the topics page of LDS.dog.dog, I think you'd be surprised at the candor and the openness of the church. And so I would say this is something that, that yes, it is getting much better. Now, I think- You know where the questions that I'm gonna ask, so just go ahead and answer them. Yeah. As much as anything, I think this is a reflection of a willingness and an understanding of bringing professional historical tools to bear in analyzing documents and situations. So that's why I said, if you haven't tuned in recently, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. And I see this getting better and better. You know, we lived in Jerusalem and my kids went to a Anglican school, British school, and they were really surprised when they had their chapter on World War II because it told from a British perspective instead of a US perspective. And we started to have really interesting discussions about that. Then we moved us to the South. Instead of talking about the Civil War, we talked about the War of Northern Aggression. So communities tell their story in a certain way. But like JB, I would say, what the church is doing institutionally today, today is they're hiring people with PhDs who have been trained in specific areas. And there's an openness. This Joseph Smith Papers project is unprecedented. Everything he's written, every talk he gave, everything that he touched will be printed, not edited. The original manuscript will be published and a transcript. And then of course there'll be efforts to try to put it in a context of 19th century. So we're at the, right now we're living in a time of great openness and a great future. We feel like we need to embrace our past. We need to understand our past and we must do it with compassion. Not to judge people in the 19th century based on 20th century world views. So I think we're living in a great time in Mormon history. Okay, that's good. That's good. You know, openness is good. So the question that everybody, and I'm using my psychic powers now, everybody in this audience, does the church teach about the Mormon massacre? Yes. What do you see? What do you teach about it? Does the church teach that Joseph Smith had a 14 year old wife? What do you teach about? What do you teach about the bad stuff? Good question. So one of my colleagues, Dick Bennett is here. He teaches a LDS church history course. Dick, what did you take? Where did you take your students this last semester? Mount Meadows. Mount Meadows. Why did you take them there? Yeah, to learn about the horror that happened there. To explain how regularly decent people who love their children, who love their wives, who are building community could do something so awful. So that's a religion professor at BYU, BYU students on site, reading the documents. So that answers your question. That does answer my question. A BYU professor of history wrote an article called Joseph Smith's Youngest Plural Wife. It was a BYU professor who wrote that article, telling the life story of Helen Marrow. Don't heckle, folks, don't heckle.  No, that was just the two examples that you raised. So that is, yes. So the question here I think is legitimate. What about Sunday School? We are moving in a direction in which we are professionalizing our history and telling our story. Does that mean the farmer who taught Sunday School, who didn't go to college in his Sunday School class in a small town in Utah, is still telling old stories? Certainly that would be the case. But from a institutional position, the church is telling a story in a way it's never told before and it's open. And quite honestly, I'm very proud of what the church is doing in opening the archives, telling the story, allowing historians to look at it. Might I digress, Virgil, go ahead. If I might digress, I'm hearing a recurring theme and that is kind of a no true Scotsman theme that you have this Mormon church, you have this part, and then you have the polygamists and then you have these people who are baptizing Anne Frank. And when I hear things like, when you hear things like that, you always say, well, they're not real Mormons, they're not part of the church. And it seems to me that there's a lot of people who call themselves Mormons that you wouldn't call Mormons. And what I'm wondering is, if, and this is a big question, is the preponderance of misconceptions about Mormonism due to people who call themselves Mormons, but you don't? Good question. That's a really good question. I think this again brings us back to where we started with this idea of misconceptions. And so an easy answer is that's a big part of it. One of the big battles that I think to understand and get a sense of where the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are is things like the raid at the FLDS Ranch in Texas and saying Mormon polygamists raided because that's an unfair characterization. Those people wouldn't self-identify as Mormons. I think generally speaking, Mormons typically, those that self-identified, few did a study of Mormons nationwide, 99% of them who identified as Mormons used that term were members of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But I can see why it's difficult for those in the media and those who just sort of have kind of a superficial knowledge to not see some of these offshoot groups as mainstream Mormons. So that is a big part of the misconception that definitely is a very stewed observation. So what are you gonna do about that? We're trying to tell our story. And today we've come and accepted your invitation to help us tell that story. Yeah, that's right. So we're engaged. Yeah. All right. Yeah. That sounds good. Yeah. Okay, we are going to end our discussion. I wanna thank all of the panelists. I wanna thank the audience. I want to, once again, welcome the atheists to Salt Lake City and to Utah and hope you enjoy your convention. Can I do one more thing before I go? Wait. Yeah, gotta do a photo. Yeah. Okay. Everybody, raise your hand if you're an atheist. Yeah. Twitter right there. Could we give Paul Reeve a round of applause? He's been wonderful. To Paul. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. There's a chance to meet JB and Joanne out in the four year and buy their books. And we do have to be out of here by nine. And don't forget the American Atheist National Convention this weekend at the Hilton. Got one day tickets and full passes on set.