My Wife's Take on the New Mormon Media Blitz

[_stemelbow]

Stem, how would you define the following statement?
''If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are''
Which comes from the official statements of the Church with regards to piercings, including ear piercings.

I think you're playing a little fast and loose. surely women are encouraged to wear one set of earrings. Body piercings too are strongly discouraged. That's not to say a man who gets a pierced ear is of the devil, of course. you see I'm going with perception among LDS in this discussion. I am suggesting if a man comes to church with a pierced ear people aren't going to immediately jumpt Old Testament he conclusion that he's of the devil, or evil, or bad in any way. The earring thing came up because people here are telling me if I showed up to church with a pierced ear the ward would gossip really badly about me. Whatevs. I disagree. and in response you post this quote? you guys...

[_jon]

Stem, how would you define the following statement?
''If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are''
Which comes from the official statements of the Church with regards to piercings, including ear piercings.

I think you're playing a little fast and loose. surely women are encouraged to wear one set of earrings. Body piercings too are strongly discouraged. That's not to say a man who gets a pierced ear is of the devil, of course. you see I'm going with perception among LDS in this discussion. I am suggesting if a man comes to church with a pierced ear people aren't going to immediately jumpt Old Testament he conclusion that he's of the devil, or evil, or bad in any way. The earring thing came up because people here are telling me if I showed up to church with a pierced ear the ward would gossip really badly about me. Whatevs. I disagree. and in response you post this quote? you guys...

I merely quoting the official statements Stem...

Latter-day prophets strongly discourage the piercing of the body except for medical purposes.

Also from LDS.org - Piercings

So if you get anything pierced that isn't for medical purposes (what on earth get's pierced for medical purposes?) you are going against the Prophets 'strong discouragement'.

[_stemelbow]

So if you get anything pierced that isn't for medical purposes (what on earth get's pierced for medical purposes?) you are going against the Prophets 'strong discouragement'.

Fine. Thanks for pointing out something that has nothing to do with my point.

[_just me]

If this is a big deal to someone, please explain the appropriate amount of emotion that they can validly react with. A valid reaction and a warranted reaction mean just about the same thing in my mind.

When we validate the feelings, emotions and experiences of others we don't tell them that they are overreacting nor do we tell them stories about all the other LDS women we now who have had jobs outside the home.

If your wife were to have this reaction and tell you and you then responded to her the way you did in this thread I promise you she would feel a lack of validation.

I'm not quibbling about what I perceive as your effort to mislead regarding my thoughts. I'll leave it as I said and let you all over-react to it. I've said my piece on it. I think you all will over-react to my comments and suggest things I never said, implied nor intended. I've already offended Consig, somehow, I won't continue.

I am always disappointed when I try to engage in a thoughtful conversation with you. You say something, I tell you what I heard, you tell me I'm wrong, I try again, you tell me I'm wrong but refuse to tell what you DO mean. Consig and I both have tried to explain how your post was offensive and you STILL are claiming not to understand what you said that could be offensive. Why is that? Are you having trouble understanding our posts? That is why I am trying to open up a dialogue with you.

If you are uninterested in having thoughtful discussion, why are you here, stem?

I am making no effort to mislead. I am repeating, for clarity, what you typed. You are dodging.

[_MsJack]

Having a pierced ear or a woman having a job is hardly along the same lines of drinking, smoking and sleeping with someone outside of marriage for LDS folks.

I do not think they are "along the same lines" in terms of severity of disobedience in Mormon thought, but they do all fall into the category of "Mormons do this even though the church teaches against it." If the purpose of these ads is to showcase real Mormons regardless of whether or not their lifestyles are in harmony with what the church teaches, then I would expect to see a much wider spectrum of people disobeying what the church teaches.

I think what has really happened with the ads is that the church would very much like to appeal to and attract women who work outside the home, therefore it has showcased some of them in its advertisements. It won't change its official party line on the subject, but it will look the other way when women do it. The same cannot be said for the other things on my list, so the church isn't showcasing those.

It has nothing to do with what "real" Mormons are like.

I know you promote having a good to great understanding of LDS but his is a classic fail on your part.

I do have a great understanding of what the LDS church teaches for a never-Mormon. You're just being rude.

I'm sure your partners can even agree with me on that--well not publically as they don't do that here, but intheir head they will.

I have no idea what you're talking about. What "partners" are these?

[_Cardinal Biggles]

I see nothing wrong with showing women working and still raising their children in the I am a Mormon series. IIt is based in todays realities.

I guess you see the series as showing people doing things that COJCOLDS would really rather not have you do, but will tolerate.

Is it your perception that Mia Love HAS to be a mayor? Do you think that her children would be better off if she stayed at home instead? It seems to me that, right now, on another thread, you're taking the stance that children are better off with SAHMs.

I'm looking forward to an ad that showcases an LDS mom working as a masseuse, oiling up some naked male clients, and one that showcases an LDS mom working as a bartender while she isn't dealing cards at a casino.

[_consiglieri]

I've already offended Consig, somehow, I won't continue.

I think this makes the third time you've said that, Stem.

But don't worry. You haven't offended me. Please continue to contribute.

I am surprised to come back to this thread and find it has mushroomed to 12-pages.

Looks like WhoMe can take most of the credit for that.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_stemelbow]

I am always disappointed when I try to engage in a thoughtful conversation with you. You say something, I tell you what I heard, you tell me I'm wrong, I try again, you tell me I'm wrong but refuse to tell what you DO mean. Consig and I both have tried to explain how your post was offensive and you STILL are claiming not to understand what you said that could be offensive. Why is that? Are you having trouble understanding our posts? That is why I am trying to open up a dialogue with you.

If you are uninterested in having thoughtful discussion, why are you here, stem?

I am making no effort to mislead. I am repeating, for clarity, what you typed. You are dodging.

I encourage you to read my response in the other thread that jon started. I don't think I'll have anything more to say on the matter.

[_consiglieri]

I think what has really happened with the ads is that the church would very much like to appeal to and attract women who work outside the home, therefore it has showcased some of them in its advertisements.

I think this is spot on.

It is simply a method of proselytizing, which is to broaden the gate for investigators while still forcing the members through the eye of a needle.

But in doing so, they are showcasing actual Mormons who are don't fit in the needle's eye.

And in this particular instance, throwing under the bus all the women who did what the prophets directed and quit their education and/or careers to get married as young as they could, and start having babies as soon as they could.

I see in this ad campaign the potential for "millions of mischiefs."

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_stemelbow]

I do not think they are "along the same lines" in terms of severity of disobedience in Mormon thought, but they do all fall into the category of "Mormons do this even though the church teaches against it." If the purpose of these ads is to showcase real Mormons regardless of whether or not their lifestyles are in harmony with what the church teaches, then I would expect to see a much wider spectrum of people disobeying what the church teaches.

I think you're taking it far too literal. The Church is demonstrating that different types of people can be LDS. Surely, that doesn't mean the Church has changed its view that its most ideal that a mother be in the home while the kids are young. Surely, that doens't mean the Church advocates body piercings and tattoos. But it just so happens some LDS have tattoos, and with tattoos they can be fine LDS, faithful people.

I think what has really happened with the ads is that the church would very much like to appeal to and attract women who work outside the home, therefore it has showcased some of them in its advertisements. It won't change its official party line on the subject, but it will look the other way when women do it. The same cannot be said for the other things on my list, so the church isn't showcasing those.

It has nothing to do with what "real" Mormons are like.

Fine. You take a less charitable view of the church's intention. I won't. I think the Church readily acknowledges there are exceptions to the rule that women should stay home with children when they're young. The Church clearly leaves it up the individuals anywho.

I do have a great understanding of what the LDS church teaches for a never-Mormon. You're just being rude.

i'm not being rude. I'm just pointing out where you have come up short. Its helpful, or should be seen as helpful.