THE LOC: What does.it cover.

[_3sheets2thewind]

The LOC, what does it cover? This is the question posted by log. I think he is asking if masturbation violates the LOC. Is masturbation is a sexual relationship with ones self? If the answer is yes, then masturbation does violate the LOC..

[_bcspace]

I will answer with the post I made before thread on MDD was closed. I'd say Minos is a prude but the rule does seem to be made to protect any young posters who might be watching so I'll give him a pass though I would not hesitate to say the same things to any young person in an interview:

The LoCh (as opposed to the LoC, Law of Consecration) covers more than interpersonal relationships. But I would say that interpersonal relationships is where Church discipline for LoCh violations generally begins. We typically don't ask about thoughts, masturbation, or pornography etc. in interviews unless one decides to confess such or there is an "interpersonal" relationship problem involved.

Especially regarding the first two, the reality on the ground is essentially "don't ask don't tell" and other than staying out of situations, piling more duties onto the young confessor, and advising to mentally hum those hymns, there is not a lot to be done or that can or should be done.

[_SteelHead]

LOC as taught in the temple uses certain words. As language has meaning, the LOC talks about sexual relations.

I have heard it said (taught from the pulpit) that pornography is against the LOC. I call bullocks on this, as well as bullocks on masturbation violating LOC as there is no relationship.

[_bcspace]

I have heard it said (taught from the pulpit) that pornography is against the LOC. I call bullocks on this, as well as bullocks on masturbation violating LOC as there is no relationship.

Are you arguing perhaps that while the Church still considers those to be sins, they are not part of the LoCh or are you arguing they are not sins at all according to the Church?

[_3sheets2thewind]

For those who believe masturbation does not violate the LOC can you articulate why masturbation is not a sexual relation

[_bcspace]

For those who believe masturbation does not violate the LOC can you articulate why masturbation is not a sexual relation

It's not an interpersonal relationship which is what Log originally asked about. But it does violate the LoCh.

[_SteelHead]

And I say bullocks as a relationship needs more than one person.

Look at the definitions for relationship and chaste.

[_Sophocles]

In addition to requiring abstinence before marriage and fidelity within, the Law of Chastity forbids any "unholy, unnatural, or impure practice." Call it the community standards clause--it changes with the times.

In the past, certain sexual activities among married couples were considered in violation of the Law of Chastity. Now it seems they prefer not to weigh in on such things. I can definitely see the church moving towards a similar "don't ask don't tell" position on masturbation.

Look at how the attitude towards birth control has changed over time. It was once compared to murder. Now it's more like drinking caffeine.

[_Buffalo]

It's not an interpersonal relationship which is what Log originally asked about. But it does violate the LoCh.

Can you point to the scripture or revelation that is the basis for this idea? When was it voted on by the quorum?

[_3sheets2thewind]

"Spilling seed on the ground" got one man killed in the Bible, so I can see how that story and spilling seed could be a basis for a stance against masturbation.