being brought up the first nineteen years in the Church it seemed as though immorality only had to do with sex. If you had sex prior to marriage then this was immoral, you were immoral. The person could be filled with shame which could multiply quickly and spiral out of control.
Today one hears thoughts such as the war is immoral or this or that is immoral.
could you explain what you think is immoral and is there a good objective definition.
is withholding truth immoral.
let me add this further: I have read posts about and talked with one person who came back from South America with some bug. One person wrote about this having a daily consequence to his health and activites.
Since young men and women are coming back sick, some not coming back at all, and some losing their high school sweet heart to their best friend while they are on a mission(others laugh at them when they get the Dear John letter in the misson field). If the person who is affected by all this (the missionary) would never have gone in the first place had they known the whole truth is it immoral not tell them the whole story about the Church - good and bad.
is something immoral only when it is sexual in nature
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 2983
- Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 6:29 pm
is something immoral only when it is sexual in nature
Last edited by Guest on Fri May 22, 2009 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I want to fly!
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1630
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:12 pm
Re: is something immoral only when it is sexual in nature
"You clearly haven't read [Dawkins'] book." -Kevin Graham, 11/04/09
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 2983
- Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 6:29 pm
Re: is something immoral only when it is sexual in nature
is what is ethical and what is moral the same thing: Today, I don't think so.
I need to address the issue or moral and immoral.
I think I under the issue of ethics infact, recently, I got an A
in a legal ethics class.
I think I do know why I never heard the words unethical in the LDS church.
It is TOTALLY unethical to not bring the full history of the church to the attention of the missionary and the investigaor. It is like not disclosing certain defects in a part of a house when you are selling it.
I need to address the issue or moral and immoral.
I think I under the issue of ethics infact, recently, I got an A

I think I do know why I never heard the words unethical in the LDS church.
It is TOTALLY unethical to not bring the full history of the church to the attention of the missionary and the investigaor. It is like not disclosing certain defects in a part of a house when you are selling it.
I want to fly!
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1630
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:12 pm
Re: is something immoral only when it is sexual in nature
Oh, I see what you mean now. Yes, for some reason "morality" usually refers to religious prescriptions and proscriptions, even though there's nothing definitional in the word to make it so. I suspect that the religious right does this so they can emphasize their favorite parts about the Bible: the parts that tell other people what to do.
There are actions that typically fall under "immorality" that don't have to do with sex, though. Most Christian denominations would say that lying is immoral, and Mormons would also say that consuming alcohol and tea are immoral.
There are actions that typically fall under "immorality" that don't have to do with sex, though. Most Christian denominations would say that lying is immoral, and Mormons would also say that consuming alcohol and tea are immoral.
"You clearly haven't read [Dawkins'] book." -Kevin Graham, 11/04/09
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 18195
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am
Re: is something immoral only when it is sexual in nature
JohnStuartMill wrote: Most Christian denominations would say that lying is immoral, and Mormons would also say that consuming alcohol and tea are immoral.
That's because we have a prophet who really knows what's important.

(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Re: is something immoral only when it is sexual in nature
Us missionaries never doubted what the mission president meant when he asked, "are you morally clean?". We knew he wasn't asking "how many little old ladies did you help across the street last week?".
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 18195
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am
Re: is something immoral only when it is sexual in nature
Ray A wrote:Us missionaries never doubted what the mission president meant when he asked, "are you morally clean?". We knew he wasn't asking "how many little old ladies did you help across the street last week?".
And yet that is exactly what he should have been inquiring about... the old ladies, I mean.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.