The question was put:
"This is a sincere question for those who left the church because you felt that the church hid something from you, or who advocate the church be more forthcoming about what you consider the negatives. Assuming you were able to learn these things sooner, what difference would it have made on whether you left the church or not. I don't see how it makes any difference if some of the things that turn you away from the church are learned earlier or later. Perhaps you can explain it."
To which I responded:
This would not directly apply to me because I have not left; I remain active but privately I have major disagreements. I am not so much bitter as I am saddened and highly disappointed that the world I grew up believing existed does not appear to really exist. I see this as partly due to the Church (in my view) concealing the real lives of members and leaders and giving ordinary members like me the impression that living Church standards can be reasonably expected of me and that there is something wrong with me if I don't manage to do it. I have now come to believe that some of the standards are simply based upon misperceptions about human nature.
Intellectually, I can reconcile the fact that the Church can have serious doctrinal errors and still be endorsed by God with priesthood authority. But in a day-to-day practical sense, it is awfully difficult to remain active and to give the false appearance of devoutness while privately having serious misgivings and not being permitted to voice them without being branded an apostate. When it comes down to it, I suppose I could say that the only thing that keeps me hanging on is the belief, or at least the hope, that one day, things will change, and the leadership of the church will have the foresight and the humility to be open to revelation from God to correct the serious errors. But I fear it will not be in my lifetime, so perhaps it is simply a cross that I and countless others will have to bear in silence.