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
_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 »

Yahoo Bot wrote:
Darth J wrote:I wonder if Emma ever got lonely or wondered where her husband was when Joseph Smith was out having sex with his concubines.


Diversion.


Dear Yahoo Bot:

In a thread about a double standard in Mormonism regarding the law of chastity, Joseph Smith's sexual behavior is not off-topic.

Thanx.

Divorce and abandoning your kids is evil, much the more so to do boys. If he excuses his conduct because your hero Joseph Smith did it, he is much more the evil one.


Aside from you getting the facts about Paul wrong, I find myself compelled to disagree with your assertion that he is more evil than a purported prophet systematically violating the conditions of a claimed revelation (D&C 132) in the course of his serial adultery.
_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 »

Darth J wrote:
Yahoo Bot wrote:You ask why it is the LDS faithful aren't here to defend their religion.

I don't care who is gay and who is not. But there is so much reprehensible about Paul and his defender friends here that a decent person would want to hurl. I wonder where Paul's kids are while he's doing boys. I suspect the answer. Some other guy is raising them.


I wonder if Emma ever got lonely or wondered where her husband was when Joseph Smith was out having sex with his concubines.


I seriously wonder if the prophet Joseph Smith ever engaged in oral sex. Don't forget, that works both ways. I trust Joseph was an animal! LOL!

If only Spencer W. Kimball could have watched Joseph's sex acts! Wow!

Paul O
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

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

Post by _why me »

Churches that have promoted same sex marriage and the gay lifestyle are in decline. The more conservative churches are becoming larger. People in general do not want churches to be jellyfish in the world, being swayed here and there on the ocean of life until they end up on the beach taking their last breath.
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
_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 »

Actually... you don't know anything about the hereafter. No one does. You don't know if there even IS a hereafter. You just hope there is, and that is conforms to whatever you've been taught.

Another one of those not "knowing" things.


Somehow, I think I always suspected that you would eventually sink all the way into full blown secularist skepticism (if not a kind of solipsism) and hold forth with logically convoluted statements such that you "know" certain ontological and metaphysical truths (that others don't know any of them) while at the very same time claiming that no one can know such things.

Such, alas, are the further bitter fruits of apostasy, and low hanging fruit at that. Intellectual deterioration follows spiritual and moral deterioration in a process of cascading debasement.

Why not turn back, Harmony, and reenter the light?
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
_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 »

Is this all to imply that you, Paul, are a male homosexual? I'm asking this to make sure you are not just being your usual, provocative self, and are being serious in making these claims publicly about yourself.

For future reference, I don't want to make any such assertions about you that you would not accept as accurate.
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 »

Droop, mark it well. I'm happy and feel very fortunate to have been released from a marriage which trapped me for so long. Then I was able to get out of the church with ease. My xwife and I are still friends and I've even lended her money and got it all back!

The law of chastity does have valid points. I think couples in a marriage should remain faithful to each other unless the kids are grown and the couple agrees to have an open marriage to add a little spice into the mix. The feelings of young children need to be protected.

I strongly reject the view the church has on masturbation whether one is married or not. The church has no business telling someone to keep their hands off their crotch. There is nothing on this earth more natural and more ready available then for a man/boy/woman/girl to touch his own crotch. It's so well put together (hand/crotch) that it's like two puzzle pieces meant to be joined. Of course, you already know this! But the church wants obedience and in so doing it's much easier to collect tithes.

Paul O
_Some Schmo
_Emeritus
Posts: 15602
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm

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

Post by _Some Schmo »

Ahhhh, yes. Here's yet another thread where LDS can come to obliviously embarrass themselves, and do so with enthusiasm.

This is one of those threads you should ignore, however, if you'd like to maintain the idea that LDS aren't complete morons.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
_Hoops
_Emeritus
Posts: 2863
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 5:11 am

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

Post by _Hoops »


I might add that one who leaves his wife and children to have sex with another person or group of persons is a fraud and a mountebank.

How do you know he left his wife? Maybe she left him?
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

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

Post by _Chap »

Hoops wrote:

I might add that one who leaves his wife and children to have sex with another person or group of persons is a fraud and a mountebank.


How do you know he left his wife? Maybe she left him?


Have you got Shulem on ignore because he says rude things? Or is your attention span too short to read the preceding posts in a thread?

See his post viewtopic.php?p=506546#p506546

Shulem wrote: I was faithful to my wife and church during my 20 year marriage. I lived in the closet. But it was my wife that left me. I would probably still be with her today had she not divorced me. I'd be living a lie, in the closet.
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
_Hoops
_Emeritus
Posts: 2863
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 5:11 am

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

Post by _Hoops »

Have you got Shulem on ignore because he says rude things? Or is your attention span too short to read the preceding posts in a thread?
It's neither. Or... wait.... maybe my attention span is too short. But in this case, I missed his post and made a mistake.

But thanks for showing us, yet again, how generous you can be.
Post Reply