" And young women, please understand that if you dress immodestly, you are magnifying this problem by becoming pornography to some of the men who see you."
H.
Well, this is true. Even Paul warned women about immodest dress. Would you want your daughter looking like a ho? I don't think so. Would you want her to dress like a skank? I don't think so. Young men have sex on the brain. When they see a young women dressed immodestly their brains begin to activate into overdrive. And of course this is normal. I have found that when women dress to kill they want to do just that: bring out the sexual in a man. And in my opinion there is nothing wrong in that as long as they do not look cheap. I can look at them all day. No problem. And would you want guys desiring your daughter in a certain way because of the clothes she is wearing? I don't think so.
Lets get real here. I have two daughters and I think that it is wonderful that they are modestly dressed. In fact modest dressed women have pride in themselves and look great.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
You had and have such healthy views of sexuality. Haven't you ever felt guilty for whacking off?
Have you? The point is that in western christian societies whacking off was not encouraged and guilt was the result. Now, churches can be more lenient with whacking off. But why the change of heart. In my day, churches did not encourage whacking off. It was a no-no. Maybe the LDS church should beome more worldly and encourage whacking off too. Right?
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
Your views on things LDS mean nothing to me. If you are or were a member you were clearly marginal at best. Lucky for you perhaps. Any one who thinks your oft vomited Mormon lay would gave been ok with LDS church restrictions and leaders is a liar. I have already shown you what Kimball thought of petting.
And yes why me I saw some youth ex'd for fornication.
And how up to date are you with the church and how it acts about this? Are you active now? Are you aware that premarital sex can forever prohibit even a repentant person from serving a mission? So much for the atonement and forgiveness.
I agree what i posted was nonsense. But it was nonsense from men claiming to be apostles and prophets and some if the comments were in a GC. But much of what they said was nonsense.
As for Kimball's book the man was a prophet and apostle. His words meant something and he was church president when I grew up. His book was used like Mormon doctrine was and often still is.
Buffalo wrote:I realize I stuck my neck out here, but there's no need for you to personalize this just because you can't seem accept anything that might be critical of your faith. Save your advice, please.
The fascinating thing about this is that the defenders are desperate to deny any and all errors of judgment made by church leadership regarding their advice on intimacy in marriage. At the same time, they are more that happy to admit judgment errors made by the same men regarding other issues. Why?!
We agree these men aren't perfect, right? Why is admittance of some error so damaging to you? Is your faith that shallow?
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
As for Kimball's book the man was a prophet and apostle. His words meant something and he was church president when I grew up. His book was used like Mormon doctrine was and often still is.
We need to look at the time frame and the cultrual pressures of the time. When kimball wrote his book we were in the waves of the sexual revolution. Men and women were becoming more free sexually. In fact, free love was the buzz word. So, he wrote a book about sexuality to fit that change in sexual standards. And was he wrong? Well, he was hard on young men especially but on young women too. But look at the time when it was written and the changes in sexual standards. And if we fast forward into the 70's we see herpes beginning to appear and eventually the aids virus. Sexually transmitted viruses are quite common and many young people have the sexual mores of a chimp.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
zeezrom wrote:The fascinating thing about this is that the defenders are desperate to deny any and all errors of judgment made by church leadership regarding their advice on intimacy in marriage. At the same time, they are more that happy to admit judgment errors made by the same men regarding other issues. Why?!
We agree these men aren't perfect, right? Why is admittance of some error so damaging to you? Is your faith that shallow?
Please tell where they were wrong? How would you want your daughter to dress? Like a ho? Would it be okay for your teenage daughter to wear a short skirt and tight shorts? Would you feel unfortable in her dress code? I think that you would zee.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
zeezrom wrote:The fascinating thing about this is that the defenders are desperate to deny any and all errors of judgment made by church leadership regarding their advice on intimacy in marriage. At the same time, they are more that happy to admit judgment errors made by the same men regarding other issues. Why?!
We agree these men aren't perfect, right? Why is admittance of some error so damaging to you? Is your faith that shallow?
I think the church's teachings on sexuality are a mixed bag, but there's too much emphasis on guilt and shame, and that really messes with people's heads. When I hear church members telling me that they didn't experience any such guilt over normal sexual urges, I wonder if they were in the same church I was.
It took quite a bit of therapy and drugs for me to finally decide I wasn't pond scum. Of course, I get reminded regularly here by a few people that I am a worthless dirtbag. :)
Runtu wrote:I think the church's teachings on sexuality are a mixed bag, but there's too much emphasis on guilt and shame, and that really messes with people's heads. When I hear church members telling me that they didn't experience any such guilt over normal sexual urges, I wonder if they were in the same church I was.
Yes, they were in the same church as you. They just handled it differently. They had no problem with noticing hot women and hunky guys walking down the street.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote:Yes, they were in the same church as you. They just handled it differently. They had no problem with noticing hot women and hunky guys walking down the street.
Which means they just didn't take the church's teachings seriously. I keep hearing that: if only I'd known I wasn't supposed to take the gospel seriously at all.
why me wrote: We need to look at the time frame and the cultrual pressures of the time. When kimball wrote his book we were in the waves of the sexual revolution. Men and women were becoming more free sexually. In fact, free love was the buzz word. So, he wrote a book about sexuality to fit that change in sexual standards. And was he wrong? Well, he was hard on young men especially but on young women too. But look at the time when it was written and the changes in sexual standards. And if we fast forward into the 70's we see herpes beginning to appear and eventually the aids virus. Sexually transmitted viruses are quite common and many young people have the sexual mores of a chimp.
If any thing sexuality is more liberal today than then. STDs are more common and the attitude towards free wheeling sex more open. If your rational is correct the church should be even more harsh today. So what you are saying is he was reactionary. Too bad. He messed with a lot of peoples heads in the process,