What do LDS men think of non-virginal women?

[_Coggins7]

It is important to remember that one stake president with a personal "agenda" can have quite an influence on a given area.

So can exmormons with an agenda, and individuals like D. Michael Quinn.

[_The Nehor]

I will never forget the brief fad on MAD of declaring one's IQ. It was one of the funniest things I'd ever seen.

Remember "The Glory of God is Intelligence", and that intelligence come from the quickening effect of the Holy Ghost. That's why believers score so high on online IQ test.

I supposedly had an IQ of 85. I also supposedly had an IQ of much higher. Honestly, I think IQ is mostly bunk.

I thought it was bunk and then it rated me as a genius. I'm now undecided. ;)

[_beastie]

Quote:
It is important to remember that one stake president with a personal "agenda" can have quite an influence on a given area.




So can exmormons with an agenda, and individuals like D. Michael Quinn.

Is this supposed to refute my point, or were you just pointing out, once again, the LDS are no better or worse than any other nonHG possessed person?

[_Coggins7]

actually - I think I am the last person known to lie on this board. The whole thing just shows what a scam the church court system is because it has nothing to do with the person's attitude but has to do with the personality of the stake president or the bishop. There are those that excommunicate, those that disfellowship and those that tell the person not to take the sacrament for six months like my RM cousin did after he and his girlfriend confessed to having sex, but she was not pregnant.

I don't think you understand style. This is either a defamatory story about the Church of the kind regularly circulated around the Internet on boards and list mail groups such as this, or it represents the utter retreat from Priesthood responsibility by this individual. I cannot imagine, after a lifetime in the Church, of an SP getting away with something like this for very long.

If its true, its so far outside of his authority and Church policy (it is logically impossible, given the doctrine, to rebaptize someone who has already been baptized unless they were "un-baptized" by being excommunicated).

The impresssion you have left is that this was somehow a common idea in the Church in the seventies and eighties, a recent era in which I lived in Southern California and was very active. My dad was a Bishop for ten years, in Maryland and in San Diego, and no such policy ever existed, period.

[_Coggins7]

The whole thing just shows what a scam the church court system is because it has nothing to do with the person's attitude but has to do with the personality of the stake president or the bishop.

But in arguing this with someone who understands neither the court system or Church doctrine in general, where can this go? Excommunication has much to do with the attitude and circumstances of the sin, not just the sin itself. I've been intimately involved with this process and I'm telling you, in all candor, that you do not know what you are talking about.

The disposition of a church court case is mediated by the Spirit. Without that, and Priesthood authority,the church court could not exist at all.

[Guest]

The whole thing just shows what a scam the church court system is because it has nothing to do with the person's attitude but has to do with the personality of the stake president or the bishop.

But in arguing this with someone who understands neither the court system or Church doctrine in general, where can this go? Excommunication has much to do with the attitude and circumstances of the sin, not just the sin itself. I've been intimately involved with this process and I'm telling you, in all candor, that you do not know what you are talking about.

The disposition of a church court case is mediated by the Spirit. Without that, and Priesthood authority,the church court could not exist at all.

Hi Coggins, maybe you could start a thread on this subject? Copy and paste some of the remarks and start a new discussion? It would be an interesting topic and it may be lost in this thread. :)

[_Coggins7]

Is this supposed to refute my point, or were you just pointing out, once again, the LDS are no better or worse than any other nonHG possessed person?

Better in what way? Having the Gift of the Holy Ghost makes all the difference in the world, especially with respect to human potential.


But I continue to argue with people who simply do not understand the Spirit. Spiritual things are "foolishness"; they're dumb, they're a joke; a source of consternation and hostility.

Those who have the Spirit, however, do not see things in this manner.

[_Moniker]

Is this supposed to refute my point, or were you just pointing out, once again, the LDS are no better or worse than any other nonHG possessed person?

Better in what way? Having the Gift of the Holy Ghost makes all the difference in the world, especially with respect to human potential.


But I continue to argue with people who simply do not understand the Spirit. Spiritual things are "foolishness"; they're dumb, they're a joke; a source of consternation and hostility.

Those who have the Spirit, however, do not see things in this manner.

Coggins, could you please look to my last post? Thanks! :)

[_beastie]

Better in what way? Having the Gift of the Holy Ghost makes all the difference in the world, especially with respect to human potential.

Why of course we could never forget this, what with you as such an exemplar of human potential.

[_Jason Bourne]

Hey Beastie,

I don't doubt that the anti-masturbation theme is harped on more strongly for girls than for boys. I've never seen a pamphlet "For Young Women Only" about their "little factory" or equivalent....

As to young women being told they needed to be the ones to set the limits, this is reported from the perspective of having been in the young women's classes. How do you know the same burden wasn't placed on the young men? It was--at least when I was in young men's. In fact, it was part of the curriculum--straight from the manual. There's a particular quote that was frequently used to drive this home--I think from Spencer W. Kimball. It cites the popular belief that young women should set the standards while the boys should just take them for as far as they'll go, and then says that a young man who does this is unworthy--that it's his duty to set limits, and that if he doesn't, (and here it's chauvinistically framed) he isn't honoring his priesthood.

I suppose that the reference to the double standard shows that the standard was not alien within LDS culture. But I can tell you that I grew up believing that I was held to the same standards, and just as accountable for hewing to them, as the young women. The only way I knew there was a traditional double standard was by reading--I didn't experience it. I would have expected to be (at least) as socially and ecclesiastically punished for premarital sex as an LDS girl would have been.

Whatever the vices of the LDS system, I don't think the promotion of a double standard of sexual behavior is one of them.

Don

Ditto!