LDS Church: Sexist?

[_Gazelam]

Q: refrences?

A: Well for starters, D&C 132:19-22

...... and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.
21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.

Notice the plural there, they. You have to be married. A continuation of the seed. The same sociality that exists among us here will exist among us there only coupled with glory.

Gaz

[_Gazelam]

This is a bit of an odd comparison, but I think the point is made.

How far can a ship go with just the captain? How far will it go without one?


Gaz

[_Jason Bourne]

May I ask if the one pursuing the masters is married? All of the women that I knew in my past wards that pursued education and careers were socially ostracized after a few years and branded as being selfish. Comments like "Still looking for that righteous man?" were common.

yes married and she is considering a PhD. Imagine that!

The structure of the YW program creates this by the fact that most LDS girls are married before age 21. Those that do not get married by 21 stick out like a sore thumb.

Hardly. My other daughter is 22 and not marrried, though she is chasing a dude pretty actively.

Encourage development of personal skills that do not relate to being a good Mormon wife? NO

No, my ward is.. my wife confirmed this several months ago while helping out in YW one Sunday..

Confirmed what?

Really? All of the RMs I have know for the past 20 years have all had the same advice from their MPs.

This just has not been my experience.

quote]
One of the worst lessons that they teach was the chewing gum one.
- They hand out sticks of gum to all of the girls in the class. Being typical teens, the girls immediately start chomping on the free chewing gum.
- After a minute or so, the instructor passes a plate around the room and instructs the girls to deposit the gum into one big pile of spit covered gum.
- The plate is passed up to the instructor who then places a fresh stick of gum next to the disgusting pile of post masticated gum.

"IF you were a worthy priesthood-holding returned missionary male, which would you choose?" "SISTERS, Keep yourselves clean and worthy to be TAKEN to the holy temple of GOD by one of his faithful servants"

UN-f'cking-believable. Even if I were still a member, my daughters would NOT be forced through that kind of immoral mind control.

While this unfortnate and awful way of teaching has been used here and there I guess it was more common 30 years ago and rare. It certianly is rare today if ever. Personally I would have great issues with someone using this today.

Wow, glad to see a forward thinking Mormon. Coggy probably thinks it is a great lesson though

..


I believe that the issues of sexuality and how the Church has taught about it has been poorly handled. In this topic I am more a Sustone Mormon. I recently listened to a podcast from Sunstone on this where five people that seem to know about human sexuality discussed this. They made great points.

LDS Apostle Erastus Snow preached the following on Sunday, Oct. 4, 1857:

Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands?... Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? "What!—my husband to be my lord?" I ask, Can you get into the celestial kingdom without him? Have any of you been there? You will remember that you never got into the celestial kingdom [during the temple ceremony] without the aid of your husband. If you did, it was because your husband was away, and some one had to act proxy for him. No woman will get into the celestial kingdom, except her husband receives her, if she is worthy to have a husband; and if not, somebody will receive her as a servant. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 291)

Right from the horses mouth, and still in publication today, Answers to Gospel Questions by Joseph Fielding Smith:[/quote]


Ok ya got me there. 1857!!!!

I have tried to be a good church member and have a strong testimony of the gospel, and the older I get the stronger is my faith. I am married to a non-member. We have three children…..My husband does not show the slightest interest in the church; in fact, he shows some resentment against it….I can live my life out this way, but what will happen to me and my children, who are faithful members in the resurrection?

Answer:

This is one of the saddest conditions that we are confronted with in the church. The Lord has revealed that the marriage covenant should be eternal….. In answer to this sister’s question we can say to her, and to the many others in like circumstances: If you remain faithful and true, the Lord will take your faith and devotion into account and reward you according to your works….It is a deplorable matter when a husband and wife are married for time only which according to the covenant they have taken must end at death, and then to have the wife wish and long for the blessings of husband and children in the eternity. When the wife if faithful and desires to obey the divine law and the husband is rebellious, or unwilling to obey the will of the Lord, if she maintains her integrity to the best of her ability, she will be given to another husband in eternity and will receive all the blessings of the celestial kingdom.

Smith meant that no blessing would be denied her. I agree though the term "given to another" sounds pretty crummy.

Look in the mirror fool, who is wearing the funny underwear? You or I? You fool, therefore you are the idiot.[

I do not wear funny inderwear. The fact that you cannot look tothe symboloc nature of a religous garment reflects your level of immaturity. The fact that you mock other for it relfect on it further.

[_Jason Bourne]

Hey Jason,

I think you are presenting a picture that is not reality. ;-)

Things are certainly changing and yes I do hear of situations where young women are encouraged to get an education IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THEIR HUSBANDS. Education is great just don't get a job.

It was only, what a year or so ago, GBH said, something to the effect that "too many women are working... it is unfortunate." I have never, ever heard a case where a woman was encouraged to follow her dreams concerning a career. Never. Contrariwise, I have been told over and over again, the desire to work is of Satan; to work is to destroy the family, to work is to not follow the prophet.

I had a HP member in my ward a few months ago, tell me that by working I'm hurting my family. Of course he is not the church but certainly the idea of women working outside the home is one criticized by leaders and condemned by most believing members.

I understand that more and more women are working and not following the prophet. This has to do with women choosing what they feel is best for themselves and their families over what they hear from the leaders of the church.

~dancer~

I do not disagree that this element still exists but I see it changing more and more.

[_Gazelam]

The only thing we take with us into the next life is progeny.

A mother raiseing her children in righteousness is exalting.

Think about it.

Gaz

[_Runtu]

The only thing we take with us into the next life is progeny.

A mother raiseing her children in righteousness is exalting.

Think about it.

Gaz

What about the father? Is it not exalting for fathers to raise their children in righteousness? I've never understood why people are so quick to exclude the father from parenting.

[_Gazelam]

A Father is to care, protect, and provide for. And place his name upon

helping to raise could be lumped under careing, yes?

Gaz

[_Runtu]

A Father is to care, protect, and provide for. And place his name upon

helping to raise could be lumped under careing, yes?

Gaz

So, then, what's the big difference here? If it's supposedly a blessing of womanhood, why is it that the man is supposed to do it too?

[_Mercury]

They are Gods together.

Gaz

Don't you remember? "We don't teach that, its joust a couplet".

Jesus chriiiiiiist! I'm starting to think your a fundie.

[_Gazelam]

Go back to my post at 6:13

Its not just a couplet

Gaz