Ironically, the one time we were encouraged to bare our souls was in the sharing of our testimonies. But even in this we were told what was appropriate and not. I recall that not long ago, one of the apostles spoke in conference about what the proper elements of a testimony were (I can't remember who it was and am too lazy to look it up). But people have an innate desire to express what is inside, and for many Mormons, testimony meeting is the time it comes spilling out.
Who Knows wrote: Yet, somehow we're better than the youth from his day? And today's generation is stronger morally than his was, but worse in terms of dress and grooming? WTF!? Maybe the 2 aren't correlated?
Well if there's a correlation it comes in being respectful of others through your dress and grooming. But then again I think it's a two way street. One ought to be able to respect a variety of dress and grooming choices (just be sure to bathe frequently and don't overdo it on perfume/cologne).
Personally I'm excited to hear someone say my generation is stronger morally than thiers was. You don't know how sick I get about hearing how terrible we are. Actually my biggest pet peeve is having leaders say that women are so much more spiritual than men. It drives me nuts, and not because I hate women since I don't.
My guess is (and I have no statistics at hand to prove it) that women ARE more spiritual than men. That is, women, on average would score higher than men using some measure of "spirituality" or "religiosity" or the like. But this would be very general and with many exceptions.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
asbestosman wrote:Well if there's a correlation it comes in being respectful of others through your dress and grooming. But then again I think it's a two way street. One ought to be able to respect a variety of dress and grooming choices (just be sure to bathe frequently and don't overdo it on perfume/cologne).
I agree - but no one needs a prophet to tell them to be respectful to others when it comes to dress and grooming.
And I somehow fail to grasp the relationship between being respectful and teased hair.
Come on Asbestosman, you're a TBM - let us know what you thought of his talk.
How would you define "respectful" in this context?
Moreover, why is the burden on the one to dress "respectfully" of others more so than on the former to be "respectful" of how others choose to dress? It is not entirely clear to me that that burden is consistently on the former rather than the latter. More, why should I really care how others choose to dress and groom (within reason). What stake do I have in it?
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
Can women still dye their hair..or is that forbidden as well???? Can they wear make-up????
I need a Tattoo and to tease my hair and pierece my ears a dozen more times....OUCH..... maybe I should pierce my bellybutton also....Let me see what else can I do???
When I wake up I will be hungry....but this feels so good right now aaahhhhhh........
What I want to know is why are we all required to look like people who are caught in a 50's time warp? Why is the church always so much more concerned about outward appearances than they are about inward character?
harmony wrote:What I want to know is why are we all required to look like people who are caught in a 50's time warp? Why is the church always so much more concerned about outward appearances than they are about inward character?
One more instance when we have failed our God.
It's not that we are supposed to look like people from the 50s; we are supposed to look like IBM employees from the 50s.
harmony wrote: Why is the church always so much more concerned about outward appearances than they are about inward character?
It's a whole lot less work to look at someone and judge them than it is to spend twenty minutes talking to them and then judging.
Last edited by Anonymous on Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Runtu wrote:I was watching an old Simpsons rerun, and Marge said something that really stuck with me:
"It doesn't matter how you feel inside, you know. It's what shows up on the surface that counts. Take all your bad feelings and push them down, all the way down, past your knees, until you're almost walking on them. And then you'll fit in, and you'll be invited to parties, and boys will like you ... and happiness will follow."
Marge learned her lesson and was giving the advice about "being yourself" by the end of a 30 minute episode. Now if only we humans (of the non-cartoon variety) could learn life lessons that quickly.
Bart....James Bond
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
It's not that we are supposed to look like people from the 50s; we are supposed to look like IBM employees from the 50s.
Well, for the guys yes for women....well, more like Tupperware representative from the fifties! :-)
I actually saw a special on Tupperware on PBS... I couldn't get over how much it looked like the LDS ideal. It is like the church got stuck in that era!
asbestosman wrote:Well if there's a correlation it comes in being respectful of others through your dress and grooming. But then again I think it's a two way street. One ought to be able to respect a variety of dress and grooming choices (just be sure to bathe frequently and don't overdo it on perfume/cologne).
I agree - but no one needs a prophet to tell them to be respectful to others when it comes to dress and grooming.
And I somehow fail to grasp the relationship between being respectful and teased hair.
Come on Asbestosman, you're a TBM - let us know what you thought of his talk.
How would you define "respectful" in this context?
Moreover, why is the burden on the one to dress "respectfully" of others more so than on the former to be "respectful" of how others choose to dress? It is not entirely clear to me that that burden is consistently on the former rather than the latter. More, why should I really care how others choose to dress and groom (within reason). What stake do I have in it?
If you were referring to me, then I think you merely misunderstood what I was saying. I didn't mean to imply that the one form of respect was more important than the other. In ohter words, I agree with you.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO