Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>But the Law of Chastity, meaning sexual relations are only permitted between man and wife, will never change. << It changed from between man and wives to man and wife. So it will likely change again at some point when it benefits the LDS to do so. Same as it ever was, as the Talking Heads told us long ago.
Originally Posted By ecdc Two other essential, Mormon "laws": The Law of Adoption The Law of Consecration These are eternal principles, which is why the LDS Church continues to practice them...oh. Wait. Sorry.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Yup. I also expect that when it happens, there will be splinter groups that will go off in a huff and form their own religion, as other factions have done.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I suppose that there will always be a remnant, and that BSA won't disappear completely. But it's far less relevant than it used to be.<< Well, another unknown here is if Scouting becomes more inclusive, will people who have stayed away from it give it another look? For sticking by this outdated relic of banning gay people, Scouts have paid quite a price. They've had high profile former scouts, such as Steven Spielberg, have nothing to do with them. (Remember that he showed a young Indiana Jones as a Boy Scout, and Spielberg himself is an Eagle.) And the United Way stopped providing funding support as well. I am sure these are the things BSA is mulling over as we speak. I just hope that once they finally DO get it right, people will take a fresh look and see that it's a great program.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>The Mormon church requires young girls to sit behind closed doors with an adult male who will ask her very pointed, very explicit questions about her sexuality<< Uh ... why do they do this? Are parents present? How "young" is young?
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Well, another unknown here is if Scouting becomes more inclusive, will people who have stayed away from it give it another look?<< I'm sure that some will. But realistically, how many will come?
Originally Posted By utahjosh <>>The Mormon church requires young girls to sit behind closed doors with an adult male who will ask her very pointed, very explicit questions about her sexuality<< Uh ... why do they do this? Are parents present? How "young" is young?> Bishops and other leaders regularly (every two years) meet individually with every member of the congregation when said member wishes to get a Temple Recommend. Questions about worthiness are asked, including, "do you live the law of chastisty." ecdc is making it sound sinister, because he's ecdc. Bishops will also meet yearly or more often with youth, to see how they are doing and counsel with them. There is always another adult just outside the door. Sexuality is rarely discussed, except for the interviews when they ask (or explain) about the Law of Chastity. "Very explicit" discussions don't happen. Rarely, when a Bishop is helping the person to repent, they will ask what the person has done to violate the law of chastity, and he'll help that individual repent of any sin. Kind of like Confession.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Questions about worthiness are asked, including, "do you live the law of chastisty." ... ecdc is making it sound sinister<< Uhhhh, he's not the only one. But yeah, sounds pretty close to Roman Catholic practices to me ... and I guess further comment on that score would be superfluous.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Uh ... why do they do this? Are parents present? How "young" is young?<< No, parents are not present. This is girls aged 12 and up. Whether or not it's sinister depends on one's perspective. I'm certainly not suggesting the church advocates sexual relationships between its leaders and the youth. I'm also not suggesting sexual behavior routinely goes on behind closed doors. I am suggesting a few things: 1) It highlights the absurdity of the LDS stance that gay men can't be trusted with teenage boys, since straight men can apparently be trusted with teenage girls. 2) The innocence with which Josh presents this is naive and disingenuous. No, LDS leaders are not raping women behind closed doors. Yes, some of them undeniably get a small measure of sexual gratification from asking teenage girls and twenty-somethings about their sexual behavior. I have plenty of active, believing LDS female friends who would take issue with the claim that they are only asked, "Are you living the Law of Chastity?" Many LDS women report being asked, "Do you and your boyfriend makeout?" "Do you engage in heavy petting?" "What does that mean to you?" "Do you masturbate? How often?"
Originally Posted By ecdc >>ecdc is making it sound sinister, because he's ecdc.<< Josh, you've seen me defend the LDS Church plenty around here. I'm happy to show you the posts, if you like. It's not my problem that I'm more familiar with the history and practices of your church than you are, and that I insist on some accuracy and honesty about the LDS faith, given its ever-increasing prominence in American life and culture.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<Many LDS women report being asked, "Do you and your boyfriend makeout?" "Do you engage in heavy petting?" "What does that mean to you?" "Do you masturbate? How often?">> It's bad enough that LDS still keeps coffee and alcohol on the no-no list, even in light of scientific proof that chlorogenic acid in coffee and resveratrol in wine are very potent antioxidants and good for your cardiovascular system and brain. Smith could not have possibly known this at the time he told his followers not to consume them, but the church leaders of today have the knowledge at their fingertips right now. Yet, they prefer to live in the dark ages with regard to modern scientific discoveries. But prohibiting masturbation? That's nuts. Sexual urges are nature's way of keeping the species from dying out. Of course, there's no reason to act on them all the time. Human beings are in no danger of dying off as a species anytime soon. So releasing those urges through masturbation makes sense for a person's well-being, both physical and mental. Especially if you're a young growing teenager who has sex sex sex on the brain brain brain all the time time time. If I hadn't learned about masturbation in my teens, I never would have graduated as an honor student in either high school or college. Who gives a sh*t about macro economics when all you can think about is jumping the bones of the student sitting next to you? 8^D
Originally Posted By Tikiduck I remember my Mormon buddies telling me about the masturbation questions. It shook some of them up, as that is such a personal thing to have to explain. I knew right then that I did not stand a chance as a Mormon.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Wow, Skinner, I'll use you as my moral compass from now on.<< Sigh. Skinner's right on the money. Only a culture so determined to demonize healthy behavior that they dub it "self abuse" would think otherwise.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>But yeah, sounds pretty close to Roman Catholic practices to me<< No one grills you in the confessional, which is anonymous, voluntary and you are separated by a barrier.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Indeed. It's arguably less moral to deride or encourage someone to suppress masturbation, a perfectly natural and harmless thing, than to teach that it is, well, a partially natural and harmless thing. People who try to suppress it and can't end up feeling guilty for no good reason. People who suppress their sexuality completely, including that, often end up doing worse things than a little private rubbing.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***"Very explicit" discussions don't happen*** Not true, unless the (several) Mormons (in good standing) who told me about the experience were all lying.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***No one grills you in the confessional, which is anonymous, voluntary and you are separated by a barrier*** Gotta take exception to this one, as only "separated by a barrier" really applies. I have certainly been "grilled" in the confessional before, and know of many others who have as well (including girls who have been brought to hysterics over it). It is supposedly anonymous but in a small parish all a Priest would need to do would be to recognize your undisguised voice. I've been called by name in the confessional too (at the end, specifically "see you in class tomorrow" by a priest who was also a teacher). And as for voluntary, it's certainly no more voluntary than any Mormon rite. Unless by voluntary you mean "you can voluntarily go to hell if you don't comply".
