I take issue with your points because you make it seem that teenage boys are generally out of control like Joseph Smith was. I disagree.
Ok, let's just scrap that argument exercise for another day. What about the other two questions? When did the no masturbation thing become the subject of every interview and general priesthood session? Men do have a drive to reproduce as well, even when they're getting it every day from many sources. Just look at the kings of the earth.
I had a crush on a girl or two in high school (never >1 at the same time!)
What do you mean by crush? You never were attracted to more than one girl at one time? I find most women physically attractive enough.
It is possible for a boy to be in more control than Joseph Smith without g***d*** religion.
Possible yes but what would motivate them to do so? Most boys I grew up with in high school who had no deep religious beliefs (which was most of them) didn't seem to much on repressing their sexual urges.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
ajax18 wrote:Possible yes but what would motivate them to do so? Most boys I grew up with in high school who had no deep religious beliefs (which was most of them) didn't seem to much on repressing their sexual urges.
Are you suggesting that non-religious boys tend to be more sexually deviant and promiscuous? They were more likely to rape or become sexually active with other kids?
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
ajax18 wrote:Possible yes but what would motivate them to do so? Most boys I grew up with in high school who had no deep religious beliefs (which was most of them) didn't seem to much on repressing their sexual urges.
Are you suggesting that non-religious boys tend to be more sexually deviant and promiscuous? They were more likely to rape or become sexually active with other kids?
Deviant? no. Promiscuous? definitely. Rape? No (rape is not about sex). Sexually active? definitely.
(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.
Are you suggesting that non-religious boys tend to be more sexually deviant and promiscuous? They were more likely to rape or become sexually active with other kids?
I don't know about rape, but being more likely to become sexually active with other kids, definitely. I certainly would have been sexually active if I weren't Mormon, heck even if I were just Baptist. And yes they were a lot more sexually deviant. Perhaps there are atheist young men with a peculiar set of ethics that motivated them to instant celibacy and monogamy but I haven't met any yet.
What are you talking about anyway? Weren't you raised BIC like me? Have you ever lived outside of UT? Maybe that's why we're not understanding each other. I grew up being the only member in my school.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
zeezrom wrote: Who knows, it might be a good thing for the Church to confront and accept the post-mos.
harmony wrote:Confront? Yes. Pity? Yes. Mock? Yes. Accept? Never. That will not happen. Ever. At least not in the foreseeable future. In order for this to happen, the church would have to change so radically, it wouldn't be recognizable.
blixa wrote:It would at least mean a big historical shift. There is a long history of the demonization of dissent in Mormonism.
Yes, it is a long and storied history of demonizing dissent. Still, my favorite episode is the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor. That was truly a watershed moment in tolerance of dissent and free speech. And it is so fun to see the lame defenses TBMs give for what is about as anti-American conduct as there is.
edited by harmony. I fixed your quote. You had the authors backwards
sock puppet wrote:Yes, it is a long and storied history of demonizing dissent. Still, my favorite episode is the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor. That was truly a watershed moment in tolerance of dissent and free speech. And it is so fun to see the lame defenses TBMs give for what is about as anti-American conduct as there is.
Putting the episode into context would help. Here are the saints in Nauvoo, building a successful city to live in peace after years of persecution. In Warsaw there is an antimormon press igniting mob justice and a constant threat to the Mormons of nauvoo. Nothing wrong with freedom of the press here to incite people against a specific group. I do believe that that paper just may be closed down if it existed today.
But here comes william law the former member who disagrees with Joseph Smith adding to the hatred and incitement. After years of persecution Joseph and town council with the support of the citizens of nauvoo decide to close down the press. And they did.
Afterwards Joseph attempts to make amends but to no avail. However previously, Mormon presses and homes were destroyed without a problem. No conviction there.
The hypocrisy of the event is there for all to see.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote: I do believe that that paper just may be closed down if it existed today.
Surely you jest.
(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.
Ajax wrote:What are you talking about anyway? Weren't you raised BIC like me? Have you ever lived outside of UT? Maybe that's why we're not understanding each other. I grew up being the only member in my school.
Ajax--there were just as many sexually promiscuous Mormon teenagers as non-Mormon in my high school in Utah. Horny teenagers are horny teenagers. It's up to the parents to decide how to teach a child regarding pre-marital sex or lack thereof. You're dreaming if you think Mormon kids aren't doing the same things their non-religious friends are. It's just the amount of guilt and fear that comes after that's the difference. Just my opinion.