A question I won't put in the Subject box....

[_beastie]

It's all about control. If you can control sexuality - even the most private act of masturbation or marital sex - you can control everything.

[_The Nehor]

Wool, c'mon... you are still in the guilted clutches of the cult, so since you cannot do much, much more , dry humping is about all you can get, no?

Has anyone ever told you you are disgusting? I would never discuss my sex life with you. You seem bound and determined to take that which is beautiful, fun, and exciting and make it as crass, cheap, and tawdry as you possibly can.

[_asbestosman]

It's all about control. If you can control sexuality - even the most private act of masturbation or marital sex - you can control everything.

I agree. Once one can excercise that sort of self-control one has taken the hardest step in self-discipline.

[_beastie]

I agree. Once one can excercise that sort of self-control one has taken the hardest step in self-discipline.

I'm not talking about control as in self-discipline. I'm talking about the leaders who dictate the terms of morality having control over the lives of their followers.

[_Polygamy Porter]

It's all about control. If you can control sexuality - even the most private act of masturbation or marital sex - you can control everything.

I agree. Once one can excercise that sort of self-control one has taken the hardest step in self-discipline.

Beastie is not taking about staying power...

[_Polygamy Porter]

Wool, c'mon... you are still in the guilted clutches of the cult, so since you cannot do much, much more , dry humping is about all you can get, no?

Has anyone ever told you you are disgusting? I would never discuss my sex life with you. You seem bound and determined to take that which is beautiful, fun, and exciting and make it as crass, cheap, and tawdry as you possibly can.

HUH

I'm not pro-masturbation or homosexuality but have no problem with everything else you've listed.....and much, much more :)

[_asbestosman]

I'm talking about the leaders who dictate the terms of morality having control over the lives of their followers.

While perhaps some leaders do not follow their own advice, I believe that by and large most do. I certainly believe that while there are power-hungry hypocrites among most or all religions that by and large religious leaders are as convinced about their religion as their followers.

It may be that Joseph Smith made it all up. While I doubt that, I would still think it unlikely that the current apostles are merely trying to control people. I'm certain that even if they are not truly called of God that they nevertheless sincerely believe that they are. Besides, I didn't know Joseph Smith to say much about homosexuality, masturbation, or those sort of things. I think he pretty much stuck with discussing adultery, monogamy, and polygamy.

[_beastie]

This doesn't have to do with hypocrisy in leaders. It has to do with the nature of organized religion. It is about power - obtaining power over people's lives and keeping that power. It doesn't matter if every leader believes in it as whole-heartedly as their followers (and I agree that they do). Leaders are, whether instinctively or by training, behaving in ways that allow them to have control over the lives of their followers.

Sexuality is a "core" issue, in that it is part of the very basic core of "who we are", how we see ourselves. So if a follower can be convinced to allow their religious leader to control their sexuality, that follower is going to be willing to allow their leader to control everything else about his/her life.

Mormonism is even more effective in implementing this than most mainstream religions, due to its heavy emphasis on banning masturbation. Masturbation is a very normal, universal behavior, particularly among teenager boys. So if teenage boy has been taught that God doesn't want you to masturbate, a significant amount of that young man's efforts and mental energies are going to be vested towards NOT masturbating. It will take a inordinate amount of attention to prevent this behavior, because it is instinctual and universal. So when the young person's mind is preoccupied with not masturbating, that mind is not free to deeply explore other issues INDEPENDENTLY. That young person is ripe for "training", and being controlled by the leaders.

Today, Mormon leaders are tame, and don't require outrageous things from their followers, so todays' Mormons, other than spending ten percent of their income and living a certain dictated lifestyle, aren't at risk to be told to do dangerous or seriously unhealthy things. It was not always so, of course.

Yes, I know that internet Mormons insist that Mormons do not automatically obey their leaders. But in the real life of chapel Mormons, that obedience is expected, and guilt is experienced when it is defied.

[_asbestosman]

This doesn't have to do with hypocrisy in leaders. It has to do with the nature of organized religion. It is about power - obtaining power over people's lives and keeping that power. It doesn't matter if every leader believes in it as whole-heartedly as their followers (and I agree that they do). Leaders are, whether instinctively or by training, behaving in ways that allow them to have control over the lives of their followers.

IF all religion is made up, then what you say makes sense. I find reading it in that light much more realistic than those who believe that the first presidency and apostles are all in cahoots to make us their slaves. If indeed religion is made up, then it seems natural that religions most effective at getting followers to act in a particular way would the ones to survive the longest.

All that said, if making masturbation a sin is a big thing for teenage boys, how do they keep teenage girls or indeed adults in check? It seems that at this stage in life control over my sexuality is done more with my spouse than by the church.

But in the real life of chapel Mormons, that obedience is expected, and guilt is experienced when it is defied.

I would say the same is true of me. If there is a difference, it is perhaps in how much I ponder over commands before following them and perhaps the ultimate likelihood that I would (although I think chapel Mormons just as likely to refuse similar things as me). I'd make a terrible soldier for such reasons.

[_moksha]

If they had called the man-on-top position something other than The Missionary Position, I doubt so many religious people would adhere to it. Perhaps we should rename the doggy position, The Prayer position. That way the rate of prayer would increase dramatically.