harmony wrote:What I find so funny is that the LDS ideal marriage/family is as far from a 50's family as could be.
Please elaborate. I might be missing something here as a foreigner, but I've always been under the impression that a 50's American family was much like what is depicted in The Stepford Wives, which is actually the standard for an ideal marriage/family now, at least from the leaders' point of view.
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
Belial wrote:In hell the going price for a woman is as follows:
Adulteress: One Hell Hound Murderer: Two Hell Hounds Gossip: One lb of sulfur (supply and demand) Whore: Two obsidian bars Liar: Five Hell Bunnies Vain Woman who looks good: One Cockatrice Vain Woman who looks hideous: One Dragon Relief Society President: 50 lbs of jello Single Mothers: Free Divorced Bitter Women: Unknown, no one has ever tried to buy one.
We don't use cows here.
LOL! This is classic! I'm really starting to like your humor. You should start a blog.
I think Zoidberg, that harmony is refering to the concept of the true and everlasting convenant, a.k.a., "celestial" marraige, a.k.a. massive eternal polygamy and its on again/off again practice by mortal Mormons.
How things will change in the future is an interesting speculation. I'm not sure what my guess would be other than whatever happens in the world, on pretty much every more-or-less progressive front, will be resisted by "the church" who will sink their heels in and only be dragged into acknowledging basic human decencies long after the fact and only when they have some personal motive for doing so (as in the "black" issue and the potential embarassment in Brazil).
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
harmony wrote:What I find so funny is that the LDS ideal marriage/family is as far from a 50's family as could be.
Please elaborate. I might be missing something here as a foreigner, but I've always been under the impression that a 50's American family was much like what is depicted in The Stepford Wives, which is actually the standard for an ideal marriage/family now, at least from the leaders' point of view.
The ideal LDS marriage is one of a man with several wives. Not exactly the 50's standard, is it?
harmony wrote:What I find so funny is that the LDS ideal marriage/family is as far from a 50's family as could be.
Please elaborate. I might be missing something here as a foreigner, but I've always been under the impression that a 50's American family was much like what is depicted in The Stepford Wives, which is actually the standard for an ideal marriage/family now, at least from the leaders' point of view.
The ideal LDS marriage is one of a man with several wives. Not exactly the 50's standard, is it?
I suppose in this sense it isn't. Of course, the mainstreaming efforts have been made lately to make us forget it's the ideal. Kind of hard to forget it with current sealing policies, though.
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
So in the future, the family model they worship will either change (to include gay couples, for instance) or they'll abandon all this family worship? Which do you think it will be? I'd say the former, what with eternal marriage and all. Of course, the eternal marriage doctrine might also change.
Blixa beat me to it. I guarantee that whatever the larger culture eventually embraces and accepts as moral and "normal" is what the LDS church will also eventually do..... a couple of decades later, of course.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Zoidberg wrote:I suppose in this sense it isn't. Of course, the mainstreaming efforts have been made lately to make us forget it's the ideal. Kind of hard to forget it with current sealing policies, though.
It was brought to my attention again just a couple of weeks ago, when one of my friends ex-husband announced he was getting married again in the temple, and was being sealed to his 2nd wife. I had my hands full with my friend's upset. Somehow she hadn't realized that was still doctrinal. Imagine her surprise... that he didn't have to ask her first, since that's what Sex 132 says.
Zoidberg wrote:I suppose in this sense it isn't. Of course, the mainstreaming efforts have been made lately to make us forget it's the ideal. Kind of hard to forget it with current sealing policies, though.
It was brought to my attention again just a couple of weeks ago, when one of my friends ex-husband announced he was getting married again in the temple, and was being sealed to his 2nd wife. I had my hands full with my friend's upset. Somehow she hadn't realized that was still doctrinal. Imagine her surprise... that he didn't have to ask her first, since that's what Sex 132 says.
That is actually interesting because I believe that there is a "sealing clearance" required for sealed divorced men who remarry. Nobody would ask for your friend's permission, but she would probably at least be contacted by the Church reps who would ask her probing questions about her husband's worthiness (or so say the accounts of several people online), so in case he's a scumbag she could probably tell them that and create some problems for him. Or have they contacted her already?
She could probably apply for a cancellation of sealing; of course, I've heard it's hard to get unless a woman wants to remarry in the temple.
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
Zoidberg wrote:I suppose in this sense it isn't. Of course, the mainstreaming efforts have been made lately to make us forget it's the ideal. Kind of hard to forget it with current sealing policies, though.
It was brought to my attention again just a couple of weeks ago, when one of my friends ex-husband announced he was getting married again in the temple, and was being sealed to his 2nd wife. I had my hands full with my friend's upset. Somehow she hadn't realized that was still doctrinal. Imagine her surprise... that he didn't have to ask her first, since that's what Sex 132 says.
That is actually interesting because I believe that there is a "sealing clearance" required for sealed divorced men who remarry. Nobody would ask for your friend's permission, but she would probably at least be contacted by the Church reps who would ask her probing questions about her husband's worthiness (or so say the accounts of several people online), so in case he's a scumbag she could probably tell them that and create some problems for him. Or have they contacted her already?
She could probably apply for a cancellation of sealing; of course, I've heard it's hard to get unless a woman wants to remarry in the temple.
She heard about it through the grapevine. No one ever contacted her about it officially. She would take a cancellation in a heartbeat, she hates him that much. But she has no intention of getting sealed again, she's that bitter (and her current husband is already sealed to his first, now divorced from, wife, so it's so complicated it's insane).
harmony wrote:She heard about it through the grapevine. No one ever contacted her about it officially. She would take a cancellation in a heartbeat, she hates him that much. But she has no intention of getting sealed again, she's that bitter (and her current husband is already sealed to his first, now divorced from, wife, so it's so complicated it's insane).
The insane complexities of the afterlife of eternal gender, eternal marriage and eternal unequal sex ratio that is the opposite of the sex ration on Earth in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom. Gotta love it.[/quote]
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney