The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

[_just me]

why_me, you should really do some research about the history of the treatment of masturbation, homosexuality and other sexual topics in the LDS church and christianity.

There have been periods where masturbation is not mentioned. The Bible does not have anything to say about masturbation at all, good or bad. So, no, all christian sects in the past 2000 years have not taught it to be a sin. You are wrong.

Homosexuality has had periods where it has been largely ignored. People left to their own devices. Lesbianism is not condemned in the Bible and I'm not convinced that some of the anti-gay passages were originally intended that way-in the original language. A lot has been written on the topic and it is fascinating.

Fornication is not against the 10 commandements. In fact, adultery was the act of a man having sex with a woman who was married. That is all that adultery was. A man wasn't allowed to 'adulterate' the bloodline of another man.
Prostitution...not a sin to be one or have sex with one. They just decided that their temples wouldn't have them.

There have even been customs among certain religious sects where an unmarried couple would have sex until the woman became pregnant before getting married to make sure she could actually bear him children.

The way the early church believed and taught about marital and sexual relations is VERY, VERY different than that of today's Salt Lake branch.

So, please, before you say things like 'all christian sects were opposed to masturbation and told their flock that it was a sin' do some actual research.

[_Droopy]

Droop, mark it well. I'm happy and feel very fortunate to have been released from a marriage which trapped me for so long. Then I was able to get out of the church with ease. My xwife and I are still friends and I've even lended her money and got it all back!

1. You didn't clearly answer my primary question.

2. I had a sneaking - and a very strong sneaking - suspicion, that it was never really about the Book of Abraham at all.

It never is.

Interesting how, after all the intellectual posturing, and after all the long and loud text critical this and text critical that, the Great White Whale finally rises to the surface and spouts.

I wonder when Kevin Graham will finally, when all the foam and froth are finally exhausted and the tread finally worn bare, sally forth with the real reasons for his wild lurching departure from the church and his viscous hostility towards it and its people?

Truth and clarity are both liberating and cleansing to the soul.

[_Droopy]

Most religions don't have 50 year old men sitting alone in a room with a 12 year old boy asking the boy if he touches his peepee.

Based upon much of what you've expressed in this thread and elsewhere, I can hardly believe that you would find this problematic. After all, as you appear to have no consciousness of any concept of "sexual morality" at all (and who knows what other moral boundaries), attacking Bishops and Stake Presidents for counseling with other young males so that they might avoid becoming like Justme, and risking the separation of their souls from their Father in Heaven for eternity (not to mention the spiritual, psychological, and moral disintegration of the self that sexual licentiousness and perversity always constructs in the personality as it replaces morality (the structural integrity of relationship) with manipulative self indulgence), I can hardly see why you would find anything wrong with discussions of "peepees" between a mature male mentor and authority figure and a young boy who requires guidance and counsel regarding the "peepee's" proper meaning and usage.

Pansexual hedonists such as yourself have always and will always feel deeply threatened by the gospel and its boundaries, as you have no internal moral bearings that would allow you to know where those boundaries are, how they can be recognized, or whether they even exist at all.

You and Paul have now been fully initiated into the cult of Kinsey.

Try to enjoy the daylight.

[_Droopy]

why_me, you should really do some research about the history of the treatment of masturbation, homosexuality and other sexual topics in the LDS church and christianity.

There have been periods where masturbation is not mentioned. The Bible does not have anything to say about masturbation at all, good or bad. So, no, all christian sects in the past 2000 years have not taught it to be a sin. You are wrong.

Homosexuality has had periods where it has been largely ignored. People left to their own devices. Lesbianism is not condemned in the Bible and I'm not convinced that some of the anti-gay passages were originally intended that way-in the original language. A lot has been written on the topic and it is fascinating.

Fornication is not against the 10 commandements. In fact, adultery was the act of a man having sex with a woman who was married. That is all that adultery was. A man wasn't allowed to 'adulterate' the bloodline of another man.
Prostitution...not a sin to be one or have sex with one. They just decided that their temples wouldn't have them.

There have even been customs among certain religious sects where an unmarried couple would have sex until the woman became pregnant before getting married to make sure she could actually bear him children.

The way the early church believed and taught about marital and sexual relations is VERY, VERY different than that of today's Salt Lake branch.

So, please, before you say things like 'all christian sects were opposed to masturbation and told their flock that it was a sin' do some actual research.

I doubt it even worthwhile to deconstruct this miasma of wild revisionist history and sexual revolution bluster, as what we're up against here is not intellectual seriousness or a honest search for truth, but an agenda driven by an all-consuming drive for self justification.

Against this, honest, critical reasoning and serious historicity is out of the question.

[_Buffalo]

Most religions don't have 50 year old men sitting alone in a room with a 12 year old boy asking the boy if he touches his peepee.

Based upon much of what you've expressed in this thread and elsewhere, I can hardly believe that you would find this problematic. After all, as you appear to have no consciousness of any concept of "sexual morality" at all (and who knows what other moral boundaries), attacking Bishops and Stake Presidents for counseling with other young males so that they might avoid becoming like Justme, and risking the separation of their souls from their Father in Heaven for eternity (not to mention the spiritual, psychological, and moral disintegration of the self that sexual licentiousness and perversity always constructs in the personality as it replaces morality (the structural integrity of relationship) with manipulative self indulgence), I can hardly see why you would find anything wrong with discussions of "peepees" between a mature male mentor and authority figure and a young boy who requires guidance and counsel regarding the "peepee's" proper meaning and usage.

Pansexual hedonists such as yourself have always and will always feel deeply threatened by the gospel and its boundaries, as you have no internal moral bearings that would allow you to know where those boundaries are, how they can be recognized, or whether they even exist at all.

You and Paul have now been fully initiated into the cult of Kinsey.

Try to enjoy the daylight.

I always enjoy prudish rants from Droopy, defending a church that puts grown men in a position to grill young children about their genitals, and founded by a man who made a religion of sleeping with other men's wives.

[_Droopy]

I always enjoy prudish rants from Droopy, defending a church that puts grown men in a position to grill young children about their genitals, and founded by a man who made a religion of sleeping with other men's wives.

I just have to wonder when many of the anti-Mormon's here will finally graduate from the implicit to the explicit and start wearing white sheets.

Hear that engine roar? Yes, that was another drive-by posting by Buffalo, the Tookie Williams of Shady Acres.

[_Darth J]

I just have to wonder when many of the anti-Mormon's here will finally graduate from the implicit to the explicit and start wearing white sheets.

It will probably be right around the time when Mormons finally graduate from the implicit to the explicit and start amputating the hands of thieves, publicly flogging people for breaking religious taboos, and calling for holy wars against the infidels.

[_Buffalo]

I always enjoy prudish rants from Droopy, defending a church that puts grown men in a position to grill young children about their genitals, and founded by a man who made a religion of sleeping with other men's wives.

I just have to wonder when many of the anti-Mormon's here will finally graduate from the implicit to the explicit and start wearing white sheets.

Hear that engine roar? Yes, that was another drive-by posting by Buffalo, the Tookie Williams of Shady Acres.

Droopy loves to pretend Mormons are persecuted. But another foundation of your religion is persecuting Protestants and Catholics. Oh, and killing Methodists.

[_Droopy]

I just have to wonder when many of the anti-Mormon's here will finally graduate from the implicit to the explicit and start wearing white sheets.

It will probably be right around the time when Mormons finally graduate from the implicit to the explicit and start amputating the hands of thieves, publicly flogging people for breaking religious taboos, and calling for holy wars against the infidels.

Darth, you can't, just can't be this wildly ignorant and this disengaged from reality.

Or...?

[_Darth J]

I just have to wonder when many of the anti-Mormon's here will finally graduate from the implicit to the explicit and start wearing white sheets.

It will probably be right around the time when Mormons finally graduate from the implicit to the explicit and start amputating the hands of thieves, publicly flogging people for breaking religious taboos, and calling for holy wars against the infidels.

Darth, you can't, just can't be this wildly ignorant and this disengaged from reality.

Or...?

Of course that is hyperbole, Droopy. Mormons are nowhere near as important as they desperately want to portray themselves, and thus could never actually set themselves up as an American Taliban---even in the quasi-theocracy of Utah.