DiscussMormonism.com

I am just wondering if the LDS Church has taken a stand on the TSA. I mean look at it this way, a lot of LDS parents believe that if you catch junior touching himself by the computer then he has committed a horrid sin, but if junior goes through airport security in the good 'ol US of A he might get his thingy felt by some fat stranger with blue glove over his bulging hands.

And if you catch little Molly borrowing a sleeveless dress from her friend many a parent will chastise her for immodesty but she goes through the airport she gets to be leered at by a few TSA as she goes through the porno scanner.

Seems like something should be said.

So how does Mocking the Church enhance the purpose of the supposed idea of this website, "Mormon Discussions".

What is the proposed discussion?

JMS

jskains wrote:So how does Mocking the Church enhance the purpose of the supposed idea of this website, "Mormon Discussions".

What is the proposed discussion?

JMS

Last time I was accused of that was when I made a Mormon joke and my non-member friend said she thought it was mean.

I am just saying that I am not in any way anti-Mormon. I do think there are issues relating to things like sex that get treated weird in our church but I doubt Joseph Smith or Brigham Young would have supported what sometimes becomes a hysteria.

No really, I am seriously asking if the Church has taken a stand. I am sure there have been a few LDS children who have had the TSA treatment and I know an LDS Sunday School teacher who posted an attack on the TSA due to their molestation of her a couple of weeks ago. And as for members, if they aren't taking a stand against the TSA but still talk about modesty then their words are sort of ironic, huh?

Fiannan wrote:No really, I am seriously asking if the Church has taken a stand. I am sure there have been a few LDS children who have had the TSA treatment and I know an LDS Sunday School teacher who posted an attack on the TSA due to their molestation of her a couple of weeks ago. And as for members, if they aren't taking a stand against the TSA but still talk about modesty then their words are sort of ironic, huh?

I don't know that the Church would. I stand against TSA molestation. IMHO it violates the 4th Amendment and illegal searches. TSA is in fact a government agency.

JMS

Tagg Romney has spanked his little factory into producing 3 kids.

I hope there was no porn involved because that would be wrong.

lulu wrote:Tagg Romney has spanked his little factory into producing 3 kids.

I hope there was no porn involved because that would be wrong.

It's funny when perceived cleverness is actually just pathetically lame attempts at humor.

JMS

jskains wrote:

lulu wrote:Tagg Romney has spanked his little factory into producing 3 kids.

I hope there was no porn involved because that would be wrong.

It's funny when perceived cleverness is actually just pathetically lame attempts at humor.
JMS

If this is the heights of Mormon internet apologetics, the church is in trouble.

jskains wrote:So how does Mocking thes Church enhance the purpose of the supposed idea of this website, "Mormon Discussions".

What is the proposed discussion?

JMS

Im with you here, jskain. Not understanding this thread.

jskains wrote:

Fiannan wrote:No really, I am seriously asking if the Church has taken a stand. I am sure there have been a few LDS children who have had the TSA treatment and I know an LDS Sunday School teacher who posted an attack on the TSA due to their molestation of her a couple of weeks ago. And as for members, if they aren't taking a stand against the TSA but still talk about modesty then their words are sort of ironic, huh?

I don't know that the Church would. I stand against TSA molestation. IMHO it violates the 4th Amendment and illegal searches. TSA is in fact a government agency.

JMS

I am interested in your legal reasoning for your stance. What case would you use to support your position? Metal detectors became acceptable to the Courts in the 1970s and random screening at the boarding gate has also passed a Constitutional challenge.

I am interested in your legal reasoning for your stance. What case would you use to support your position? Metal detectors became acceptable to the Courts in the 1970s and random screening at the boarding gate has also passed a Constitutional challenge.

So what is the legal precedent for them to fondle your breasts or reproductive organs?