Worst LDS talks ever

[_Hoops]

mock a husband's attempt to make life a little easier for a member of the family because it happens to be an LDS family.

Sounds to me like a guy who wants to make it easier to get his shirts ironed.

[_Simon Belmont]

While the talk may have been given in 2006, the Ironrite was discontinued in 1961. So we're talking about a Mormon family circa the 1950's. You do the gender equality math...

Yep. Times have changed. There is certainly more gender equality now than there was in the 1950s.

And this little anecdote from that era is an opportunity to mock and belittle the Church and an LDS family for thinking such obsolete things in the appropriate era, right?

Come on people.

[_Chap]

You don't need to make any assumptions about this story for it not to sound awful. Because of what is on the page and what isn't, it has a natural subtext. Your best case scenario is that author is obtuse to the implications of what he chooses to write about. That doesn't make the story not tragically funny.

We're talking about ironing. Ironing. There are plenty of other things a person can do. A woman isn't a vagina with an iron attached to it.

You are way way off base here. You need to think about what you are saying instead of just focusing on mocking, belittling, and attacking the Church.

You may find ironing a meaningless task, but I don't -- not when you have a family. I've certainly done my fair share. Ironing has nothing whatever to do with being a woman or having a vagina, and frankly what you said is more sexist than this particular talk in its entirety. You know nothing about the situations of this family, and yet you mock a husband's attempt to make life a little easier for a member of the family because it happens to be an LDS family.

Sickness or not, surgery or not, pain or not, ironing has to be done. Children have to be fed. Money has to be made. Clothes have to be washed. Little league games have to be attended. Automobiles have to be maintained. It is not for you to set the standards by which this family are to be judged.

Point radically missed. For all we know, this family never existed and the whole story was a piece of Dunnery. The real situation will remain unknown to us.

What matters, and what we know for sure, is that someone thought that this story, in the form we have it, was a good one to tell to illustrate just how a man should behave. And, evidently, it seemed just fine despite all the things that have been pointed out on this thread - like no-one saying ... well. let me see ... 'Mom, we'll do the ironing so you don't have to cry from the pain'.

[Guest]

Which talk is about the non-temple marriage being like a bargain basement or sales rack marriage?

That one was atrocious.

Here it is! http://LDS.org/general-conference/2008/ ... e?lang=eng

This thing is nasty. Read at your own risk.

Wise shoppers study their options thoroughly before they make a selection. They focus primarily on the quality and durability of a desired product. They want the very best. In contrast, some shoppers look for bargains, and others may splurge, only to learn later—much to their dismay—that their choice did not endure well. And sadly, there are those rare individuals who cast aside their personal integrity and steal what they want. We call them shoplifters.

The patterns of the shopper may be applied to the topic of marriage. A couple in love can choose a marriage of the highest quality or a lesser type that will not endure. Or they can choose neither and brazenly steal what they want as “marital shoplifters.”

The subject of marriage is debated across the world, where various arrangements exist for conjugal living. My purpose in speaking out on this topic is to declare, as an Apostle of the Lord, 3 that marriage between a man and a woman is sacred—it is ordained of God. 4 I also assert the virtue of a temple marriage. It is the highest and most enduring type of marriage that our Creator can offer to His children.

While salvation is an individual matter, exaltation is a family matter. 5 Only those who are married in the temple and whose marriage is sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise will continue as spouses after death 6 and receive the highest degree of celestial glory, or exaltation. A temple marriage is also called a celestial marriage. Within the celestial glory are three levels. To obtain the highest, a husband and wife must be sealed for time and all eternity and keep their covenants made in a holy temple. 7

The best choice is a celestial marriage. Thankfully, if a lesser choice has previously been made, a choice can now be made to upgrade it to the best choice. That requires a mighty change of heart 37 and a permanent personal upgrade. 38 Blessings so derived are worth all efforts made.

WTF?!?

[_jon]

While the talk may have been given in 2006, the Ironrite was discontinued in 1961. So we're talking about a Mormon family circa the 1950's. You do the gender equality math...

Yep. Times have changed. There is certainly more gender equality now than there was in the 1950s.

And this little anecdote from that era is an opportunity to mock and belittle the Church and an LDS family for thinking such obsolete things in the appropriate era, right?

Come on people.

Simon, did you miss the bit where it says the anecdote was given in 2006? So it was given to help the men folk in 2006 to know how to behave as "men". It wasn't really espousing gender equality now was it...

[_LDSToronto]

While the talk may have been given in 2006, the Ironrite was discontinued in 1961. So we're talking about a Mormon family circa the 1950's. You do the gender equality math...

Yep. Times have changed. There is certainly more gender equality now than there was in the 1950s.

And this little anecdote from that era is an opportunity to mock and belittle the Church and an LDS family for thinking such obsolete things in the appropriate era, right?

Come on people.

Wait, wait, wait... Didn't DeTodd's dad hold the Holy Priesthood of the One True Church? I'd imagine he would have been at least a level 40 priesthood holder, with some of his sons holding a form of the acolyte priesthood. Shouldn't their combined priestly powers and authority of god have allowed them to reveal truths heretofore unknown to 1950's era MadMen, namely that gender equality needs to exist in this home so that Mother can get better? Isn't there some incantation that high-level priesthood holders can invoke that let's them see truths that others can't see?

(or maybe that whole priesthood thing is just a word for 'damn, remember the good ol' days when men slapped their secretary's asses and Mother made sure their collars had enough starch')

H.

[_Darth J]

I notice this recurring theme of not taking what General Authorities say at face value, but instead adding any number of contrived, self-serving assumptions and arguments from ignorance to make the plain meaning of their words more palatable.

It's really too bad that words are only about 30% of communication, or you might, for once, have a valid point.

Yes, if only I could see Todd Christofferson's facial expressions and hand gestures so I could pick up on his non-verbal cues. I bet that somehow that would have made this story less hilariously sexist and based on a misguided premise of letting this woman suffer for a year instead of the husband just doing the damn ironing himself.

[_LDSToronto]

It's really too bad that words are only about 30% of communication, or you might, for once, have a valid point.

Yes, if only I could see Todd Christofferson's facial expressions and hand gestures so I could pick up on his non-verbal cues. I bet that somehow that would have made this story less hilariously sexist and based on a misguided premise of letting this woman suffer for a year instead of the husband just doing the damn ironing himself.

You would have loved it, DJ. During this talk, deTodd was making a back-and-forth ironing motion while grimacing in pain.

H.

[_Simon Belmont]

Yes, if only I could see Todd Christofferson's facial expressions and hand gestures so I could pick up on his non-verbal cues. I bet that somehow that would have made this story less hilariously sexist and based on a misguided premise of letting this woman suffer for a year instead of the husband just doing the damn ironing himself.

Yeah, just like if the spouse who chooses to focus on her or his career gets sick or has surgery but has no accumulated vacation times should just insist that his or or her partner just go to work for her or him, right Darth J?

What's really sexist is you believing that the woman in the story is so weak and incapable that she is unable to do the ironing while in pain. I commend this person for her strength and honor.

So instead of using every opportunity to blindly attack the church, you and your buddies here should think about what you're saying lest you expose your foolishness.

[_LDSToronto]

Yes, if only I could see Todd Christofferson's facial expressions and hand gestures so I could pick up on his non-verbal cues. I bet that somehow that would have made this story less hilariously sexist and based on a misguided premise of letting this woman suffer for a year instead of the husband just doing the damn ironing himself.

Yeah, just like if the spouse who chooses to focus on her or his career gets sick or has surgery but has no accumulated vacation times should just insist that his or or her partner just go to work for her or him, right Darth J?

We're talking about ironing, you idiot.

H.