liz3564 wrote:This is a direct quote from the 1998 version of the Church Handbook of Instructions:
Surgical Sterilization (Including Vasectomy)
The Church strongly discourages surgical sterilization as an elective form of birth control. It should be considered only if (1) medical conditions seriously jeopardize life or health or (2) birth defects or serious trauma have rendered a person mentally incompetent and not responsible for his or her actions. Such conditions must be determined by competent medical judgment and in accordance with law. Even then, the persons responsible for this decision should consult with each other and with their bishop and should receive divine confirmation of their decision through prayer.
Even with this bolded emphasis, in my opinion, the bishop who handled Kimberly Anne's case is an ass.
There were obviously extenuating medical circumstances with her situation, which any doof should have been able to figure out.
It does make one think how the church can enforce rules like this. If the CHI is not for public consumption, how do members know they can't have surgical sterilizations without a bishop telling members either publically over the pulpit, or in private during interviews? The apologists say the church doesn't control member's personal lives, therefore I can assume no bishop would ever tell their members they can't have surgical sterilization. So how would this rule be enforced?
"We of this Church do not rely on any man-made statement concerning the nature of Deity. Our knowledge comes directly from the personal experience of Joseph Smith." - Gordon B. Hinckley
"It's wrong to criticize leaders of the Mormon Church even if the criticism is true." - Dallin H. Oaks
KimberlyAnn wrote:I posted such a sad little story and now this thread has turned into a discussion of condom lessons, vibrators and man-thongs, lol! For some reason many of my threads end up this way - and it doesn't matter what the original topic is. Strange.
Sorry KA, I guess joke telling is a defense mechanism that many people pickup. (especially on Mormondiscussions)
I thought your story was very sad. :( (many HUGS)
Don't be sorry, Bond! I was laughing about the direction this thread has taken which is a good thing! I'm glad it's not somber. That's boring. :)
KimberlyAnn wrote:I wonder why Shades has Hysteria as his avatar when he could have the much better album, Pyromania? I mean, everyone knows Def Leppard sold out on the Hysteria album - it's nothing but a collection of chick songs.
In that case, I guess I like the chick songs better.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
KimberlyAnn wrote:I wonder why Shades has Hysteria as his avatar when he could have the much better album, Pyromania? I mean, everyone knows Def Leppard sold out on the Hysteria album - it's nothing but a collection of chick songs.
In that case, I guess I like the chick songs better.
"Pour some sugar on me, IN THE NAME OF LOVE...". Could there ever be a more "chick" lyric than that?
On July 4th, 1988, I had an awful wreck in my cute red Mustang with the tinted t-tops; the car was completely smashed and I was, too. But the tape player still worked. I remember being loaded into the back of an ambulance and hearing "Hysteria" blaring from the crumpled heap of metal that used to be my car. I'll never forget it.