Mormon, Porn, and Masturbation. (Easy now, Paul)

[_Morrissey]

Assuming your analysis is correct....the temple rites were changed because it served the Prime Directive of the Church to do so. The survival, growth, and power of the Church is funded on members wanting to attend the temple. When there was enough disgruntlement that the endowment ceremony was too cult-like for members to feel comfortable, it became a concern. After all, why should I pay 10% of my income to have the ability to attend a service I don't really want to attend in the first place?

The temple ceremony was changed out of an attempt to motivate members to attend more frequently, by shortening it, among other things. The change had nothing to do with the needs of the members but everything to do with the needs of the institution in that temple worthiness is a way of controlling members and temple attendance is a way of binding members more strongly to the institution.

Similar reason why the Brethren won't change the policy on temple marriage; if it allowed a civil marriage first, immediately followed by a temple marriage, or encouraged couples to get married where the whole family could attend, this weakens or takes away the power of the temple, and ideal of temple marriage, as a method of controlling the members. The Brethren are afraid that if they open the door even a small crack, members will push it wide open, and the Brethren will lose control as a result--all the detriment of what they perceive the institutional interests of the Church to be.

[_The Nehor]

The temple ceremony was changed out of an attempt to motivate members to attend more frequently, by shortening it, among other things. The change had nothing to do with the needs of the members but everything to do with the needs of the institution in that temple worthiness is a way of controlling members and temple attendance is a way of binding members more strongly to the institution.

Similar reason why the Brethren won't change the policy on temple marriage; if it allowed a civil marriage first, immediately followed by a temple marriage, or encouraged couples to get married where the whole family could attend, this weakens or takes away the power of the temple, and ideal of temple marriage, as a method of controlling the members. The Brethren are afraid that if they open the door even a small crack, members will push it wide open, and the Brethren will lose control as a result--all the detriment of what they perceive the institutional interests of the Church to be.

Wow, you can read the minds of Apostles back that far?

Atheists don't believe in God because they all secretly worship Satan and are plotting to kill us all.

See, I can create baseless assertions without evidence too.

[_Morrissey]

The temple ceremony was changed out of an attempt to motivate members to attend more frequently, by shortening it, among other things. The change had nothing to do with the needs of the members but everything to do with the needs of the institution in that temple worthiness is a way of controlling members and temple attendance is a way of binding members more strongly to the institution.

Similar reason why the Brethren won't change the policy on temple marriage; if it allowed a civil marriage first, immediately followed by a temple marriage, or encouraged couples to get married where the whole family could attend, this weakens or takes away the power of the temple, and ideal of temple marriage, as a method of controlling the members. The Brethren are afraid that if they open the door even a small crack, members will push it wide open, and the Brethren will lose control as a result--all the detriment of what they perceive the institutional interests of the Church to be.

Wow, you can read the minds of Apostles back that far?

Atheists don't believe in God because they all secretly worship Satan and are plotting to kill us all.

See, I can create baseless assertions without evidence too.

I don't see that anything I've stated is unreasonable or remotely of the nature to merit your stupid analogy.

I think it's well understood on issues like this that one speaks one's own opinions, in my case drawing from observations of LDS Inc., observations of how power relationships operate, and friendship with a person who helped LDS Inc. carry out focus group discussions with members on the temple ceremony.

Decision like this are not made by revelation, but, in many cases, on the basis of market research. In this case, a concern, in part, about declining temple attendance. The argument viz how temple attendance and the temple recommend process are strategies to tie membership to the institutions are evident to anyone with an inkling of understanding of how power relationships operate and how organizations seek to get members to identify more strongly with the institution.

[_The Nehor]

I don't see that anything I've stated is unreasonable or remotely of the nature to merit your stupid analogy.

To quote Yoda, "That is why you fail."

I think it's well understood on issues like this that one speaks one's own opinions, in my case drawing from observations of LDS Inc., observations of how power relationships operate, and friendship with a person who helped LDS Inc. carry out focus group discussions with members on the temple ceremony.

What is this LDS inc of which you speak? I'm talking about my faith's church.

Decision like this are not made by revelation, but, in many cases, on the basis of market research.

A guess.

In this case, a concern, in part, about declining temple attendance.

Another guess.

The argument viz how temple attendance and the temple recommend process are strategies to tie membership to the institutions are evident to anyone with an inkling of understanding of how power relationships operate and how organizations seek to get members to identify more strongly with the institution.

Bad argument. If the temple was able to bind members to us and our main interest is in making people identify with us through the temple we'd lower the standards for temple attendance. Then you see how few go to the Temple and realize that if this is their strategy our leaders are morons.

[_Morrissey]

I don't see that anything I've stated is unreasonable or remotely of the nature to merit your stupid analogy.

To quote Yoda, "That is why you fail."

No, that is why your are a clueless homophobic bigot and I'm not.

Decision like this are not made by revelation, but, in many cases, on the basis of market research.

A guess.

No, not a guess. As I said, I am friends with the person who frequently carries out market research for LDS Inc., including focus groups on the temple. We've had several discussions.

In this case, a concern, in part, about declining temple attendance.

Another guess.

See above.

The argument viz how temple attendance and the temple recommend process are strategies to tie membership to the institutions are evident to anyone with an inkling of understanding of how power relationships operate and how organizations seek to get members to identify more strongly with the institution.

Bad argument. If the temple was able to bind members to us and our main interest is in making people identify with us through the temple we'd lower the standards for temple attendance. Then you see how few go to the Temple and realize that if this is their strategy our leaders are morons.

This only goes to show how clueless you are. You do not bind people to an organization or ideal by making it easy on them, but quite the reverse. This strategy is recognized and used by military organizations, cults, and other organizations throughout the world.

[_Gazelam]

Paul,

Teachings against masturbation in the church are the commandments of men. If the brethren want to put their money where their mouth is let the prophet stand up and add to the Doctrine & Covenants. Otherwise, let them hold their peace.

We clearly see that the brethren choose not to add to the D&C. Why? Because they are not inspired to do so. Let every man govern his own body in his own way. It his between himself and God.

Paul O

I refuse to believe you are this ignorant. It is not possible that you could have been involved with the church as long as you have and still be this breathtakingly oblivious to the doctrines involved.

Why do we fast? Why do we practice chastity? Why do we pay titheing? Each of these things teach us to overcome base matter and carnal desires and put first in our lives the things of God.

Our temporal bodies produce carnal cravings that can be very powerful. Part of the purpose of this life is to show that we can excercise control over this base matter, that we can be proper custodians over this small amout of matter that makes up our bodies, that we can fill it with the light of Christ through the sanctifying power of the Holy Ghost. When we fast we pray, we take control of our senses and focus on our spirit. We pray for help in keeping the law of Chastity, asking for the Spirit to purge our unjust passions. In titheing we set aside the temporal things of this world and control our cravings for the things of this world.

A religion that does not require sacrifice, a religion that does not demand physical control over carnal desires, is incapable of producing faith enough to lead a person to salvation. Moral purity, chastity and virtue, are the two most important things in our lives. A person who is a slave to his body, a person who would debase himself through self abuse, is incapable of finding salvation in Christ.

[_Brackite]

A person who is a slave to his body, a person who would debase himself through self abuse, is incapable of finding salvation in Christ.

Gaz,

This Quote of Yours is Bogus, Garbage, and Totally NOT true. Is it any wonder why a lot of Mormon teenage boys engage in Pre-marital sex, when this kind of bogus information and garbage is taught to them within the walls of the Mormon Church? These Mormon teenage boys get taught how "evil of a sin" Masturbation is, so they reason that if they have already committed the "sin of Masturbation" then why not commit the sin of Pre-marital sex. The God of the Universe has Never declared Masturbation to be a “sin” and something you shouldn’t do within the Scriptures. A Person who Masturbates is Capable of finding Salvation in Christ.

Gaz, if you are actually teaching teenage boys that bogus information and garbage within the Church, I Call On You now to Stop teaching it and Repent of it before God.

[_Paul Osborne]

Gaz,

I don’t want to talk about masturbation in this post but will touch on another subject.

If a couple engage in oral sex it is their business and the Church has no business in telling members that they shouldn’t have oral sex. Letters produced by a previous First Presidency about the evils of oral sex were a disgrace. That was a prime example of the First Presidency exercising unrighteous dominion through their priesthood callings. They never should have counseled members of the church to not have oral sex and refer to it as immoral. The First Presidency needed to repent for that! Well, it appears that policy has been pretty much been withdrawn. Church leaders have no business in the private beds of members of the church. They need to keep their personal opinions about sex to themselves and not coin them as doctrine or binding on others. My understanding is they now pretty much do that. That's an improvement in the world of Mormonism.

Church leaders are wrong about masturbation. They were wrong about the so-called evils of birth control too.

Paul O

[_Yoda]

Amen, Paul!!!

[_harmony]

Amen, Paul!!!

I'm chiming in here with Liz and Paul and Brackie.

And I'd like to understand why there is no public repentence shown, no public retraction made, when mistakes like these are made? All we see is pride personified in our leaders. BKP and the rest of our leaders have harmed lots of people with their bad advice couched in official pronouncements and publications, and yet they continue to lead the church astray on these matters.

I sat in Sacrament Meeting the day that original letter was read in church. I knew when the retraction came, but there was no letter read in SM, and there was certainly no apology or public retraction of it. For one thing, such actions magnify the leaders' pride and lack of humility, and for another, it shows a complete lack of showing the proper example of what to do in the repentence process. If our leaders can't repent of their wrongdoing, how can we expect the members to do so? Or are the members more righteous than the leaders?

No wonder the church is under condemnation. ETB was right, if for the wrong reason.