We, on this board, know why...

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _moksha »

If Utah courts do not enforce Church regulations, then who will?
- Rabbi Hillel the Elder
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_EmilyAnn
_Emeritus
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 2:07 am

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _EmilyAnn »

moksha wrote:If Utah courts do not enforce Church regulations, then who will?
- Rabbi Hillel the Elder


Well done!!!

:mrgreen:

Rabbi Hillel the Elder, may his memory be for a blessing, and wherever he might be right now, is nevertheless standing in your honor, moksha, and calling out: "Tov! Tov! Tov!" :biggrin:

["Good! Good! Good!"] :biggrin:
_EmilyAnn
_Emeritus
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 2:07 am

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _EmilyAnn »

Quasimodo wrote:We all know, EmilyAnn, that if a man is inappropriately attracted to a woman it's her fault for being cute. It's all about that Garden of Eden apple thing. :wink:

Maybe burkas are a good idea.

Image

Of course, this lady has sexy eyes. She should really wear sun glasses.


In a book I read, about what it was like to live in Iran after the overthrow of the Shah in 1979, the female author talked about herself and a female friend when they were in their late teens (after secondary school...struggling to get through college under the new, religious, specifically anti-female rules and regulations). One of the new rules said that females in public (outside of their homes) could not wear makeup (lipstick, eye shadow--anything with color).

She said that she and this friend went to the bank one day and they were accosted by the new religious police who were charged with seeing that the new, post-Shah laws were being followed by all Iranians. The religious police roughly ordered the two young women to scrub off the makeup they were wearing...but neither of them WAS wearing makeup. They told this to the police, but were again ordered to scrub off their makeup--right THERE! When they took the rough towels handed to them and scrubbed at their lips and eyes, nothing (of course) came off on the towels, because they were not wearing any makeup.

The police, once they finally accepted that there was no makeup on them to take off, then ordered them to USE makeup to cover their lips and eye areas, because their natural face colors were so fresh and vibrant. Standing in the midst of the bank during business hours, they had to take the proffered liquid foundation, in a [Iranian skin tone] neutral shade, and use it to blot out the features on their faces that the police said were violating the new national rules of proper appearance for females.

The religious police at work...and they obviously are now employed in parts of Utah, too: in the entrances to at least some courtrooms, and in at least one high school which recently became famous in the national news.
_Polygamy-Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8091
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:07 am

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _Polygamy-Porter »

This same reporter should go back in a low cut blouse, complete with caps sleeves and a pushup bra underneath.

She will not be turned away.

I saw this hypocrisy all the time in my local ward. The bishop's wife was the leader of what I called "the boob patrol".
New name: Boaz
The most viewed "ignored" poster in Shady Acres® !
_ldsfaqs
_Emeritus
Posts: 7953
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:41 pm

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _ldsfaqs »

Runtu wrote:
Quasimodo wrote:For me, false modesty is a much greater evil than bare shoulders. The hypocrisy of a religion that pretends to be more than moral and yet has a founding 'Prophet' who exploited young girls and married women for his own desires would be laughable if it wasn't tragic.


The irony is quite high and, yes, quite sad.


And you clearly show your level of intellectual and moral character to believe such crap.....
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro
_Res Ipsa
_Emeritus
Posts: 10274
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:37 pm

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _Res Ipsa »

sock puppet wrote:
Quasimodo wrote:For me, false modesty is a much greater evil than bare shoulders. The hypocrisy of a religion that pretends to be more than moral and yet has a founding 'Prophet' who exploited young girls and married women for his own desires would be laughable if it wasn't tragic.

I don't find bare shoulders evil in even the most minor degree. I'm wondering, however, which one of the FP/12 gets a woody when he sees bare shoulders.


I don't find bare shoulders evil, but I do find them sexy. :wink:
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
_ludwigm
_Emeritus
Posts: 10158
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:07 am

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _ludwigm »

Brad Hudson wrote:I don't find bare shoulders evil, but I do find them sexy. :wink:

As one of the commenters said:
TJ Young · Top Commenter · Los Angeles, California
There must be a bunch of 13 year-old Mormon boys out there masterbating to shoulder porn or something...

You are exposed.

.
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco
- To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei
_Bazooka
_Emeritus
Posts: 10719
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:36 am

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _Bazooka »

Are Church dress standards about modesty and preventing the opposite sex from falling into pornography addiction, or are they designed simply to hide sacred (embarrassing) underwear?
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
_DrW
_Emeritus
Posts: 7222
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:57 am

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _DrW »

EmilyAnn wrote:
In a book I read, about what it was like to live in Iran after the overthrow of the Shah in 1979, the female author talked about herself and a female friend when they were in their late teens (after secondary school...struggling to get through college under the new, religious, specifically anti-female rules and regulations). One of the new rules said that females in public (outside of their homes) could not wear makeup (lipstick, eye shadow--anything with color).

She said that she and this friend went to the bank one day and they were accosted by the new religious police who were charged with seeing that the new, post-Shah laws were being followed by all Iranians. The religious police roughly ordered the two young women to scrub off the makeup they were wearing...but neither of them WAS wearing makeup. They told this to the police, but were again ordered to scrub off their makeup--right THERE! When they took the rough towels handed to them and scrubbed at their lips and eyes, nothing (of course) came off on the towels, because they were not wearing any makeup.

The police, once they finally accepted that there was no makeup on them to take off, then ordered them to USE makeup to cover their lips and eye areas, because their natural face colors were so fresh and vibrant. Standing in the midst of the bank during business hours, they had to take the proffered liquid foundation, in a [Iranian skin tone] neutral shade, and use it to blot out the features on their faces that the police said were violating the new national rules of proper appearance for females.

The religious police at work...and they obviously are now employed in parts of Utah, too: in the entrances to at least some courtrooms, and in at least one high school which recently became famous in the national news.


In D'hahran, Saudi Arabia, a few years before the First Persian Gulf War, I had the opportunity to see the religious police in action against the wives of newly arrived Aramco and University of Petroleum and Minerals contract employees, mainly from the US, UK and Canada.

They would literally walk up to (normally unaccompanied) females with bare arms or legs in the local souks (even on a day when the temperature was 110 - 120 degrees or so) and spray the improperly covered portions of the body with black paint, often ruining the clothes the woman was wearing. For Muslim females improperly covered, they would sometimes use a cane to repeatedly strike the improperly covered parts of the body.

When the US and coalition forces moved into the Eastern Province to re-take Kuwait, the religious police complained bitterly about the female troops being unaccompanied by males and wearing sidearms in public.

Rumor has it that the local coalition public affairs and Llaison officers let it be known, through their Saudi counterparts. that since they were in a combat zone, the American troops (females included) were authorized to draw their firearms if they felt that they were being threatened, and had authorization to fire if they were attacked. The religious police were advised that assault with a paint can or cane could be definitely be considered as an attack.

A Saudi colleague told me that the religious police became apoplectic at the sight of young American females with guns walking around town. He said that these unholy manifestations of Satan got so bad that the religious police eventually disappeared from the streets until the coalition forces left town. (This friend was US educated and was himself embarrassed about the actions of the religious police.)
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."

DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
_Quasimodo
_Emeritus
Posts: 11784
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:11 am

Re: We, on this board, know why...

Post by _Quasimodo »

DrW wrote:
Quasimodo wrote:
We all know, EmilyAnn, that if a man is inappropriately attracted to a woman it's her fault for being cute. It's all about that Garden of Eden apple thing. :wink:

Maybe burkas are a good idea.

Image

Of course, this lady has sexy eyes. She should really wear sun glasses.

Since it is always a good idea to have Islamic female head coverings properly designated, please see below.

Image

As you can see, a Burka would in fact obviate the need for sunglasses.


Thanks Doc!

My education in Islamic fashion has been sadly neglected.

Hardly a day goes by when I don't learn something from this board.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
Post Reply