The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_just me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9070
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:46 pm

The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _just me »

It is often said by Mormons that they hold homosexuals to the same standard of chastity that they hold heterosexuals. This is only true in the most narrow way. There is a double standard in place that is rarely spoken of. I don't believe that most members even think twice about the double standard or realize it is there.

First, what is the law of chastity? We can find several different versions of it in the teachings of the church. In the temple it is very basic and straightforward, no sexual relations outside of a legal marriage. We shouldn't make the mistake of thinking that this is all the LoC entails, however. The LoC demands that members refrain from masturbation, viewing pornography, sexual touching the genitals of others and all sex acts. Kissing, hand holding, hugging and clothed massages (not of genital areas) are allowed. There does seem to be a gray area for some....over-the-clothes frottage is seen by some as very against the LoC and it is also engaged in by many unmarried members with or without guilt.

The church has set as a standard or goal for all its members to get married in their temple. That means heterosexually married. The church encourages dating or courting in order that members find a spouse.

In the past, homosexuals (the church likes to use the term same-sex attracted individuals) have been encouraged to excersize enough faith that they could be cured and marry heterosexually. This has had disasterous effects on many lives.
The church now is starting to recognize that homosexuality doesn't magically change and are encouraging a life of celibacy for its homosexual members.

The double standard:

A heterosexual unmarried member is encouraged to date and get to know those of the opposite sex in order to find a life partner. They are encouraged to enjoy a variety of activities together.

Image

A homosexual member is treated as though they have a disease or defect. They are encouraged to avoid being around others with their "problem." There is even a special recovery program run by the church (at least in my area) for homosexuals. You have to be carefully selected to be in it, though, so it doesn't lead to hook-ups.

Image

If they did the same type of dating activities, it would look a lot like the hetero version.

Image

It is acceptable for heterosexual couples to hug, kiss and hold hands. These acts of affection are not against the LoC.


Image
Image
Image

Now, I'm pretty sure that homosexuals can hug without serious repercussion. Kissing and hand-holding I think would not be looked upon kindly. Lesbians can probably get away with a lot more affectionate touching than gay men can. Droopy has called my pictures of men kissing "gay porn" and I am not sure how many members or leaders of the church would agree with him in that assessment. We all know that a gay couple who kissed in Salt Lake were detained for "inappropriate behavior." The irony is that couples kiss routinely outside the Salt Lake Temple for pictures.

Image
Image
Image

It is clear that there is a double standard in the law of chastity for unmarried members of the church. Everyone is allowed to show affection and date and choose a life partner of the opposite sex, but not everyone is allowed to show affection and date those they are attracted to and desire.

Marriage is viewed as one of the most important things someone can do in this life. However, homosexuals are not allowed, per doctrine, to marry those they are attracted to and fall in love with. They must live a life of celibacy in order to be a member of good standing.

If marriage is so good for people, why isn't it good for homosexual couples? Why can't all members practice the law of chastity within the framework of their sexuality?

Image

Image
Last edited by Guest on Wed Nov 02, 2011 12:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

Image
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _Darth J »

Clearly, you guys don't understand that same-sex marriage will destroy marriage.

Take, for example, Massachusetts. Now that they have same-sex marriage, straight people have entirely stopped getting married, and nobody is having children.

ETA: And let us not forget that once Massachusetts started legally recognizing same-sex marriage, armed government agents invaded the Boston temple and forced the LDS Church to start performing temple sealings for gay couples.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_karl61
_Emeritus
Posts: 2983
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 6:29 pm

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _karl61 »

I was checking the word chastity on LDS.org a while back. It seemed that when they spoke of it in the 19th century was when speaking about a woman. As the word being used in the 1940's and 50's it started applying to men too. Spencer Kimbell was starting to stress complete fidelity and chasity for both sexes.
I want to fly!
_LDSToronto
_Emeritus
Posts: 2515
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 2:11 am

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _LDSToronto »

A couple of years ago I posted a very similar thread over at MDD, asking the same questions. To make it more realistic, I asked the MDD'ers to picture an unmarried heterosexual couple, who recently started dating, sitting in church holding hands during sacrament. Then, I told them to picture a homosexual couple in the exact same scenario. Neither were violating the law of chastity. So what was the difference?

The usual suspects went nuts. Some suggested that the gay couple should be asked not to come back to church because their show of affection was most likely a disguised show of rebellion. Others suggested more forcible means of removing the couple. None made a case for equality amongst both scenarios.

The only conclusion that made any sense to me is there is some kind of unspoken, unjustified fear of exposure to homosexuals that many hardline Mormons hold onto.

H.
"Others cannot endure their own littleness unless they can translate it into meaningfulness on the largest possible level."
~ Ernest Becker
"Whether you think of it as heavenly or as earthly, if you love life immortality is no consolation for death."
~ Simone de Beauvoir
_just me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9070
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _just me »

Yes, the words chastity and adultery have changed through the ages. Adultery in the Old Testament just meant that a man could not have sex (and adulterate the seed) with the wife of another man.
Virgin was only a term applied to women.

When Mormons were practicing polygamy a married man could run around courting and wooing as many (usually single) women as he wanted.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _Droopy »

just me wrote:It is often said by Mormons that they hold homosexuals to the same standard of chastity that they hold heterosexuals. This is only true in the most narrow way. There is a double standard in place that is rarely spoken of. I don't believe that most members even think twice about the double standard or realize it is there.

First, what is the law of chastity? We can find several different versions of it in the teachings of the church. In the temple it is very basic and straightforward, no sexual relations outside of a legal marriage. We shouldn't make the mistake of thinking that this is all the LoC entails, however. The LoC demands that members refrain from masturbation, viewing pornography, sexual touching the genitals of others and all sex acts. Kissing, hand holding, hugging and clothed massages (not of genital areas) are allowed. There does seem to be a gray area for some....over-the-clothes frottage is seen by some as very against the LoC and it is also engaged in by many unmarried members with or without guilt.

The church has set as a standard or goal for all its members to get married in their temple. That means heterosexually married. The church encourages dating or courting in order that members find a spouse.

In the past, homosexuals (the church likes to use the term same-sex attracted individuals) have been encouraged to excersize enough faith that they could be cured and marry heterosexually. This has had disasterous effects on many lives.
The church now is starting to recognize that homosexuality doesn't magically change and are encouraging a life of celibacy for its homosexual members.

The double standard:

A heterosexual unmarried member is encouraged to date and get to know those of the opposite sex in order to find a life partner. They are encouraged to enjoy a variety of activities together.

Image

A homosexual member is treated as though they have a disease or defect. They are encouraged to avoid being around others with their "problem." There is even a special recovery program run by the church (at least in my area) for homosexuals. You have to be carefully selected to be in it, though, so it doesn't lead to hook-ups.

Image

If they did the same type of dating activities, it would look a lot like the hetero version.

Image

It is acceptable for heterosexual couples to hug, kiss and hold hands. These acts of affection are not against the LoC.


Image
Image
Image

Now, I'm pretty sure that homosexuals can hug without serious repercussion. Kissing and hand-holding I think would not be looked upon kindly. Lesbians can probably get away with a lot more affectionate touching than gay men can. BCSpace has called my pictures of men kissing "gay porn" and I am not sure how many members or leaders of the church would agree with him in that assessment. We all know that a gay couple who kissed in Salt Lake were detained for "inappropriate behavior." The irony is that couples kiss routinely outside the Salt Lake Temple for pictures.

Image
Image
Image

It is clear that there is a double standard in the law of chastity for unmarried members of the church. Everyone is allowed to show affection and date and choose a life partner of the opposite sex, but not everyone is allowed to show affection and date those they are attracted to and desire.

Marriage is viewed as one of the most important things someone can do in this life. However, homosexuals are not allowed, per doctrine, to marry those they are attracted to and fall in love with. They must live a life of celibacy in order to be a member of good standing.

If marriage is so good for people, why isn't it good for homosexual couples? Why can't all members practice the law of chastity within the framework of their sexuality?

Image

Image




As taking you seriously is now quite beyond the realm of possibility, I'll just leave you and the other liberals here to wallow in the productions of a mind saturated with exhibitionistic Gay camp and a kind of cultural necrophilia that revels in perversity and sociocultural degeneration for the sake of its own aesthetic value as a poke in Jesus' eye.

Beyond that, there's hardly anything here worth responding to at all.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _Shulem »

just me wrote:Image


What a nice pic. This is beautiful expression of effection between two men. Homosexual relations can be wonderful and beautiful to the extreme. I think being gay is a great blessing for men. I'm glad to be gay! I feel sorry for straight people who are clueless about how wonderful it really is to be gay.

It's sad that straight people have spent so much energy trying to get gays to be straight. Well, then, maybe it's time to push straight people to be gay! But no, that wouldn't work too well. And why? Because they weren't born that way.

Paul O
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _Droopy »

Shulem wrote:
just me wrote:Image


What a nice pic. This is beautiful expression of effection between two men. Homosexual relations can be wonderful and beautiful to the extreme. I think being gay is a great blessing for men. I'm glad to be gay! I feel sorry for straight people who are clueless about how wonderful it really is to be gay.

It's sad that straight people have spent so much energy trying to get gays to be straight. Well, then, maybe it's time to push straight people to be gay! But no, that wouldn't work too well. And why? Because they weren't born that way.

Paul O



I see you're still as mentally unstable as you were just a couple of years ago. Very similar to Mr. Graham's rapid intellectual deterioration over a relatively short span of time.

Almost Lovecraftian in proportion.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_LDSToronto
_Emeritus
Posts: 2515
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 2:11 am

Re: The Double Standard in the LDS Law of Chastity (pic heavy)

Post by _LDSToronto »

Droopy wrote:
As taking you seriously is now quite beyond the realm of possibility, I'll just leave you and the other liberals here to wallow in the productions of a mind saturated with exhibitionistic Gay camp and a kind of cultural necrophilia that revels in perversity and sociocultural degeneration for the sake of its own aesthetic value as a poke in Jesus' eye.

Beyond that, there's hardly anything here worth responding to at all.


How do you distinguish what you call 'sociocultural degeneration' from what most call 'progress'?

H.
"Others cannot endure their own littleness unless they can translate it into meaningfulness on the largest possible level."
~ Ernest Becker
"Whether you think of it as heavenly or as earthly, if you love life immortality is no consolation for death."
~ Simone de Beauvoir
Post Reply