GBH Puts Foot in Mouth Again

[_guy sajer]

I think everyone's getting their knickers in a knott over nothing. I seriously doubt the GBH actually meant that women were men's property. He was trying to convey the importance of women and wives to men and husbands and in the process chose a word that made sense to him without realizing that it meant something entirely different to others.

I do think, however, that an objective, impartial observer will also concede that Wrinkley, and other Mormon GAs, hold rather "quaint" views about the women and their roles in society and family that reflect the age and culture in which they were raised.

Even this view is changing over time, although more slowly than that of the rest of society. As backward as are the Bretherens' views of women today, they are, nonetheless, much more enlightened than they were in decades past.

It is intersesting how God's view of women changes, albeit slowly, in the train of changing social mores.

I think we can take this all as one more of many cumulative data points that culture is more powerful than God in shaping the way his "Prophets" view the world, and that the Mormon Church is led by ordinary men, no less subject to the social mores, conventional wisdom, and petty biases of their day than anyone else, rather than by God.

[_Jason Bourne]

I see nothing wrong with asking that the One True Church on the Earth be held to high standards.

Of course you don't. That is why you pounce on every chance you get, even when you have irrational arguments Old Testament just come across as nut pikcy and petty, which you are in this thread and the one about the charity issue.

Now, I think high standard is fine.

An impossible one is not.

[_Boyd_K_Packer]

May there be peace and harmony in your homes. Husbands, love and treasure your wives. They are your most precious possessions. Wives, encourage and pray for your husbands. They need all the help they can get.

If you think this is bad....check out GBH's first draft of this speech...

May there be peace and harmony in your homes. Husbands, love and treasure your wives. They are your most precious chattel, better than any pig or goat, more enjoyable than any easy chair. Wives, encourage and pray for your masters. They appreciate any help you pea brains can provide.

Just to let you know, I was opposed to changing this part of Brother Hinckley's talk. However, when it came time to sustain or oppose the changes, I was the only "opposed" vote, therefore the changes stood. I think the first draft sounded fine. Why change the inspired words, which were received direct from heaven, to meet the wordly customs of the teased-hair mob? I believe Brother Hinckley is becoming more liberal in his old age.

I say these things in the name of Jesus Chrsit, amen.

Sincerely,

Boyd K. Packer

[_Coggins7]

In the Oct. 2006 General Conference, some will recall that GBH put his foot in his mouth during the Priesthood Session when he asked the men gathered if they "wanted to marry a women whose education is superior to your own"? It turns out that such a thing shouldn't matter, since, as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator informs us, women are little more than material objects:

Your transparent and disingenuous semantic games do not fool any but those with itching ears who wish to be fooled Scratch.

When you do actually get a life, you'll look back on this whole phase of your life with disgust, and you'll have a much better understanding of how faithful LDS viewed your tendentious animadversions.

[_harmony]

In the Oct. 2006 General Conference, some will recall that GBH put his foot in his mouth during the Priesthood Session when he asked the men gathered if they "wanted to marry a women whose education is superior to your own"? It turns out that such a thing shouldn't matter, since, as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator informs us, women are little more than material objects:

Your transparent and disingenuous semantic games do not fool any but those with itching ears who wish to be fooled Scratch.

When you do actually get a life, you'll look back on this whole phase of your life with disgust, and you'll have a much better understanding of how faithful LDS viewed your tendentious animadversions.

What exactly do you classify as your possessions, Loran?

[_Coggins7]

What exactly do you classify as your possessions, Loran?

My rubber Iguana, by plastic wind-up Blue, my latest issue of National Review, and yo Mama.

If you actually think I'm going to get into a serious discussion with you or Scratch regarding this perverse assault on the quite pedestrian and common expressions of the relationship between a husband and wife whose connotations are intended to be positive and affirming, you are sadly mistaken and have quite clearly lost your mind.

Offenders for a word have their reward Harmony.

[_guy sajer]

[

If you actually think I'm going to get into a serious discussion with you or Scratch regarding this perverse assault on the . . . common expressions of the relationship between a husband and wife . . . .

Common perhaps in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, or among hard-core fundamentalist Christian whack-jobs, but I do not hear too many people in the West referring to their wives as a possession. Your right, it is probably a harmless reference (I should add by a dottering old man who confuses his cultural mores with God's will), but you're totally wrong in suggesting that this is a common expression in contemporary Western society.

You can't really be that ignorant of society around you, can you??

[_SatanWasSetUp]

[

If you actually think I'm going to get into a serious discussion with you or Scratch regarding this perverse assault on the . . . common expressions of the relationship between a husband and wife . . . .

Common perhaps in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, or among hard-core fundamentalist Christian whack-jobs, but I do not hear too many people in the West referring to their wives as a possession. Your right, it is probably a harmless reference (I should add by a dottering old man who confuses his cultural mores with God's will), but you're totally wrong in suggesting that this is a common expression in contemporary Western society.

You can't really be that ignorant of society around you, can you??

You're correct that most of Western civilization has moved beyond this type of Dark Age thinking, but you still find pockets of people stuck in the stone age in the Bible Belt and Utah. Just as you find pockets of enlightenment in the Middle East, you also find pockets of fundamentalism in the West.