The LDS Church is destructive dangerous.

[_Buffalo]

by the way, Kimball is saying that it is better to die struggling against a rape than it is to live and not have struggled because the sex is just that bad. He also implies that not struggling if you can is tantamount to the act being voluntary, which is ill-thought out as can be, but then again this is the man who argued that masturbation was a slippery slope to circle jerks and eventually a bad case of the gay. It's the sort of opinions that should be regulated to your crazy uncle whose ignorance simultaneously causes you to be amused and find pity, but it's a more unique circumstance here because his position makes some people think it wise.

It's too bad the Mormon succession method doesn't have any method for filtering out such ignorant people - this kind of ignorance is funny normally, but when found in someone in a position of power suddenly it's not so funny anymore.

[_Jason Bourne]

Not really. In two instances it does suggest that death is preferrable to parents whose kids are unchaste. I disagree with both of those.

Stop being a fool and a dope. The words say what they say. McKay says that chastity (yes he uses vritue but he means virginity) is more precious than life. Other apostles-McConkie, Romney, Grant, Clark all say similar things as well as a parent should rather see a child dead than lose their virginity. You take this theme that is delivered relatively frequently and the message is it is better to die pure than to be alive and unchaste.

You cannot get around it. So why not just stop it and admit it?

[_stemelbow]

by the way, Kimball is saying that it is better to die struggling against a rape than it is to live and not have struggled because the sex is just that bad.

It appears you agree with me, then. That's what I've been saying. The others here disagree with you vehemently, or they did with me when i said it. We'll see.

[_Ceeboo]

Well goodies...I Guess I'm not in danger then.

Stem,

I am not sure why you always seem to be so flipant, childish, and completely unable to have a dialouge that has some value/meaning to it.
(I am left wondering why you are here?)

Against my better judgement, I attempted to answer your questions of me (perhaps I should have simply passed).
You may want to consider pausing, relecting, and/or at least considering what people type before responding as you do.

An utter waste of opportunity and time, would you agree?

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_stemelbow]

Stop being a fool and a dope. The words say what they say.

I'm just happy you agree with me on that.

McKay says that chastity (yes he uses vritue but he means virginity) is more precious than life.

He does say virtue. If you care to show that he meant chastity, i'm all ears. I have yet to see his quote in context.

Other apostles-McConkie, Romney, Grant, Clark all say similar things as well as a parent should rather see a child dead than lose their virginity.

I agree...and that's what I've said. Unfortunately critics here are arguing that that's not what they said, but they said that dying is better than having sex before marriage. While I agree these all seem quite similar, its not quite an accurate depiction. Its a view from parents perspective--which of course we all disagree with.

You take this theme that is delivered relatively frequently and the message is it is better to die pure than to be alive and unchaste.

I have yet to hear it be delivered. It I have read these messages, and see how they are mistaken...but then again, I don't agree with these few random quotes that most LDS would consider quite obscure.

You cannot get around it. So why not just stop it and admit it?

I've admitted plenty. I do believe people have misunderstood me, and mis-represented the ideas expressed to some extent.

[_Buffalo]

Who are you going to believe? Stem or your lying eyes?

[_stemelbow]

Stem,

I am not sure why you always seem to be so flipant, childish, and completely unable to have a dialouge that has some value/meaning to it.
(I am left wondering why you are here?)

I'm not sure why you are categorizing my response to you as "flipant, chidish , and completely unable to have a dialog that has some value/meaning to it"? I asked you a question. You chose not to divulge too much but gave me a piece of your thoughts--which I thanked you for. I listened, well read, to your response, understand the issues involved and from my perspective realize the danger you describe doesn't really apply to me. You see the point of my initial question was to see what dangers or destructions I'm facing.

Against my better judgement, I attempted to answer your questions of me (perhaps I should have simply passed).
You may want to consider pausing, relecting, and/or at least considering what people type before responding as you do.

Thanks for the advice. I appreciate it.

An utter waste of opportunity and time, would you agree?

Peace,
Ceeboo

Not at all. I was hoping to see what people would tell me is destroying me, or damaging me, if they so felt the religion does/can damage and destroy. If they have essentially nothing that applies, then I take their opinion and note the positives, as in those that curb destruction and damage, for me far outweigh the negatives explained. I guess it wasn't so beneficial to you, but this thread was strictly for me. I wish to understand the perspectives better. I thanked you for your response, graciously. I'm not sure what else you had hoped to receive. I continue to search for those who do not wish to demonize stem too, but I fear your post doesn't provide much hope. I wonder why?

[_Runtu]

Not at all. I was hoping to see what people would tell me is destroying me, or damaging me, if they so felt the religion does/can damage and destroy. If they have essentially nothing that applies, then I take their opinion and note the positives, as in those that curb destruction and damage, for me far outweigh the negatives explained. I guess it wasn't so beneficial to you, but this thread was strictly for me. I wish to understand the perspectives better. I thanked you for your response, graciously. I'm not sure what else you had hoped to receive. I continue to search for those who do not wish to demonize stem too, but I fear your post doesn't provide much hope. I wonder why?

If your religion makes you a better person and blesses your life, it is not destructive to you. If it is a negative influence in your life, then it is destructive and potentially dangerous. For some of us, the LDS church has not been a net positive. For others, it has.

[_stemelbow]

If your religion makes you a better person and blesses your life, it is not destructive to you. If it is a negative influence in your life, then it is destructive and potentially dangerous. For some of us, the LDS church has not been a net positive. For others, it has.

I see that. Thanks for the comment.

[_Themis]

Can you read and comprehend?

I'm at a loss as to why he's still insisting these statements don't mean what they say. Having grown up during the SWK era, I know what he taught repeatedly, and it was exactly what beefcalf stated. And then you have these clear statements (honestly, who doesn't know how "virtue" and "chastity" can be lost in an LDS context?).

I have no idea where stem is coming from on this one. I guess I'm just bound and determined to see the worst in innocent and uplifting statements. ;-)

I haven't read past this post, But stemelbow reminds me of the people Erik the Viking was trying to help when the Island was sinking(I realize many may not know what I am talking about).