bcspace wrote: This board is not a fair sampling of LDS. However, I think many of you probably gave off signals that you have a problem, hence, you got asked.
There is an appearance of such because this board is filled with chronic masturbators who've had encounters with their Bishops. You probably get a few dozen Church-wide and when they are all in one place, see sampling above....
This is classic BC. It demonstrates why he is such a poor apologist. Simply dismiss and discount the experiences of those here because they are apostates and flawed. I mean really....you were asked because you gave off signals? And keep in mind some stated they were not asked.
The reality is some bishops ask and some do not. But the ones who ask are not a few. I have been a bishop. I have discussed with other bishops what they ask. Again a number of them do ask the question. Some stuck to the general law of chastity question like I did.
BC if you really dispute that the anecdotes here are not a fair sampling then go read the study that corpse grinder linked to in his thread on that confirms the comments here. I know you have a great need to devalue people here as flawed and somehow apostates in making even when they were solid TBMs. Otherwise it threatens your narrow views of the world and might unravel your testimony. I think at times you are close to that really. To admit that the LDS Church teachings and culture does and can result in some areas that are really harmful to people is more than you can take.
Dr. Shades wrote:I was never asked this question by a bishop, ever. Not even once.
I was, however, asked twice by one of my mission presidents. The exact words he used were, "Are you masturbating?"
I should've responded by saying, "No, I'm sitting here talking to you!"
LOL! I literally laughed out loud at this, Shades! :-)
As far as the poll goes, I answered, "I am a girl and was never asked."
I have never been asked about masturbation. However, I know that several guys in my ward were asked about it, and had to stop for 3 months before being able to turn in their mission papers.
Jason Bourne wrote:BC if you really dispute that the anecdotes here are not a fair sampling then go read the study that corpse grinder linked to in his thread on that confirms the comments here. I know you have a great need to devalue people here as flawed and somehow apostates in making even when they were solid TBMs. Otherwise it threatens your narrow views of the world and might unravel your testimony. I think at times you are close to that really. To admit that the LDS Church teachings and culture does and can result in some areas that are really harmful to people is more than you can take.
That's quite a condemnation of BCSpace. Sadly what you go after him for seems to be the corrolary of how many posters here treat LDS--just read the responses, particulary the initial responses, to Mattie in this thread. Then go and see the other thread started directed at her.
If there were more of a balanced view on this type of thing I'd be much more willing to sit idly by and let these comments directed at BCSpace, but since its clearly an effort to complain about LDS posters while letting the critics go without comment, I feel obligated to say something.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
For some reason I think BCspaces thinks we are lying when we say the bishop asked me if I masturbated. Lets see if most people got asked or just a few of us.
This board is not a fair sampling of LDS. However, I think many of you probably gave off signals that you have a problem, hence, you got asked.
I don't get the LDS leadership obsession with masturbation by Mormons.
There is an appearance of such because this board is filled with chronic masturbators who've had encounters with their Bishops. You probably get a few dozen Church-wide and when they are all in one place, see sampling above....
There are two types of LDS teenage boys - those who admit to masturbating to their bishop and those who lie about it. bcspace obviously came from the latter camp.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Jason Bourne wrote:BC if you really dispute that the anecdotes here are not a fair sampling then go read the study that corpse grinder linked to in his thread on that confirms the comments here. I know you have a great need to devalue people here as flawed and somehow apostates in making even when they were solid TBMs. Otherwise it threatens your narrow views of the world and might unravel your testimony. I think at times you are close to that really. To admit that the LDS Church teachings and culture does and can result in some areas that are really harmful to people is more than you can take.
That's quite a condemnation of BCSpace. Sadly what you go after him for seems to be the corrolary of how many posters here treat LDS--just read the responses, particulary the initial responses, to Mattie in this thread. Then go and see the other thread started directed at her.
If there were more of a balanced view on this type of thing I'd be much more willing to sit idly by and let these comments directed at BCSpace, but since its clearly an effort to complain about LDS posters while letting the critics go without comment, I feel obligated to say something.
You obviously haven't read many of Jason's posts. Jason is LDS, and a very respected LDS poster. He is also a former bishop. If anyone has a right to speak to BC about this issue, it's Jason.
Jason Bourne wrote:BC if you really dispute that the anecdotes here are not a fair sampling then go read the study that corpse grinder linked to in his thread on that confirms the comments here. I know you have a great need to devalue people here as flawed and somehow apostates in making even when they were solid TBMs. Otherwise it threatens your narrow views of the world and might unravel your testimony. I think at times you are close to that really. To admit that the LDS Church teachings and culture does and can result in some areas that are really harmful to people is more than you can take.
That's quite a condemnation of BCSpace. Sadly what you go after him for seems to be the corrolary of how many posters here treat LDS--just read the responses, particulary the initial responses, to Mattie in this thread. Then go and see the other thread started directed at her.
If there were more of a balanced view on this type of thing I'd be much more willing to sit idly by and let these comments directed at BCSpace, but since its clearly an effort to complain about LDS posters while letting the critics go without comment, I feel obligated to say something.
The OP in that thread wasn't condemned? How about some balance from you, Stem? You've been pretty off balance lately.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
The reality is some bishops ask and some do not. But the ones who ask are not a few. I have been a bishop. I have discussed with other bishops what they ask. Again a number of them do ask the question. Some stuck to the general law of chastity question like I did.
What’s the ratio of bishops who ask about masturbation to bishops who don’t? It might not be possible to answer this question but I can’t help but wonder about it.
And what’s the official party line on the matter? Does the bishop’s handbook specifically instruct you to ask detailed questions about masturbation?
I rarely make such judgements. But BC has a pattern of blithely dismissing the real life experiences of other humans that were likely just as faithful LDSers as he is. He does the same thing when discussing sticky LDS teachings from the past as simply not official when it is simply obvious that the LDS leaders that taught these things believed they were true.
And I understand BC and how he is better than you might think. I used to be much like him. I said many of the same things he does when I was a defender. I dimissed so much as not official and some leaders opinion and so on. I often dismissed what others said as lies or some abberition as BC does here.
I am sure you know the story of The Emporeres New Clothes. Admitting that some things may not be well in Zion is risky business. Once you do this it is more and more easy to realize that in lots of ways the Church has many areas where it really had no clothes. But members are culturally conditioned to be like the Emporeres subjects who all gushed and gave accolades about his new clothes that simply did exist. Admitting that there may be no clothes may put one on a path that is had to turn back from. BC just cannot admit even in one instance that the clothes may be even a bit dirty let alone non existent. He knows if he does it may all fall apart.
What’s the ratio of bishops who ask about masturbation to bishops who don’t? It might not be possible to answer this question but I can’t help but wonder about it.
And what’s the official party line on the matter? Does the bishop’s handbook specifically instruct you to ask detailed questions about masturbation?
As you note there is no way to know ratio without a statistical example. But the handbook in use when I was bishop gave no specific guidance on what to say and ask when interviewing a youth and what not to. I figures TR questions and or Strength of Youth booklet were basis for discussions I had with youth.
liz3564 wrote:You obviously haven't read many of Jason's posts. Jason is LDS, and a very respected LDS poster. He is also a former bishop. If anyone has a right to speak to BC about this issue, it's Jason.
BC is the one being overly judgemental.
I've read a number of Jason's posts. I do see he is a good person, if that's what you're saying. He's come after me a time or two for perceptions (mistaken perceptions, no less) about me, though. Although he might have balance, I don't see it in this thread. For when its obvious to me that there are posters here who try their best to attack LDS posters, like Mattie, as this thread demonstrates, he instead goes after BCSpace with no effort at balance. Its confusing to me, so I must say something.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.