The Nehor wrote:Okay, what's the repression? A veil worn briefly for symbolic purposes (which I'm guessing you don't understand)? Not seeing it in kind either.
Why do you guess that? Sounds like an uninformed guess, Brother Nehor. The "kind" is in the shared doctrines that, among other things: (1) God prescribes strict roles along gender lines, roles which give preference to men in ecclesiastical leadership and leadership in society; (2) men are to preside over women in the home and women are to submit their husbands when their husbands invoke the alleged imprimatur of deity; (3) women are responsible for the sexual misconduct of men, including abusers, and should be subject to strict codes of dress and behavior dictated by men (again claiming divine authority for the rules they impose); and (4) the primary raison d'etre for a woman is to birth babies and raise them in the religion into which they were born.
That's for starters. There is, of course, much more. As I said, Mormonism and Islam are in alignment in principle on these things. The biggest difference is that, at least with respect to the branch of Mormonism headed by Thomas Monson, women generally have been the beneficiaries of the societal advances made in the western democracies in the 20th century (advances which were opposed every step of the way by LDS leaders) and the church has largely accommodated social trends (albeit slowly). The same can't be said for many smaller branches of Mormonism (e.g., the FLDS church, which follows Mormon doctrine more closely on gender issues than the Monsonite branch), where we see more starkly portrayed the consequences of putting into practice that which has been preached and published as authoritative Mormon doctrine over the last 178 years.
It's a guess based on the knowledge that it takes spiritual power and insight to discern the symbols of the Temple. Someone against the leadership of the Church and imputing flaws like this to the Gospel is unlikely to have this insight. I find it to be an informed guess.
(1) Yes, and it gives preference to women in other matters (2) No, I have never been taught that men have some license from God to overrule their wife in family decisions. In fact I was told the opposite. I was told to continue to pray to God until you both agree on a course of action. I have heard stories of men going to their leaders and asking them to explain to their wives that she has to obey him. These stories were always told to explain that what the man did was WRONG and an abuse of the role of husband. (3) Bollocks. The commandments for modesty and the Law of Chastity apply to both males and females. (4) Yes, but the same injunction is placed on men with more emphasis on feeding and clothing the children as opposed to giving birth.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Sister Mary Lisa wrote:That's it? That's all you can come up with? That right there is more telling than anything else you've said all day.
I agree. I also find it shocking that you can go to Church to hear the word of the Lord and spend the whole time looking for anything that sets off a sexism alert. Of course you find it. So does the person endlessly looking for racism everywhere. Then you start talking superficially about godhood (like virtually everyone here) as if you understand it at all. Then you demean Christ for not being a woman so you can have another role model? I don't think anyone who thinks this way understands the atonement. If you don't get the atonement at all you shouldn't be prattling about becoming a deity. You have to meet God (Father and Mother) before you can have an inkling of what it means to become like them.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
The Nehor wrote: It's a guess based on the knowledge that it takes spiritual power and insight to discern the symbols of the Temple. Someone against the leadership of the Church and imputing flaws like this to the Gospel is unlikely to have this insight. I find it to be an informed guess.
(1) Yes, and it gives preference to women in other matters (2) No, I have never been taught that men have some license from God to overrule their wife in family decisions. In fact I was told the opposite. I was told to continue to pray to God until you both agree on a course of action. I have heard stories of men going to their leaders and asking them to explain to their wives that she has to obey him. These stories were always told to explain that what the man did was WRONG and an abuse of the role of husband. (3) Bollocks. The commandments for modesty and the Law of Chastity apply to both males and females. (4) Yes, but the same injunction is placed on men with more emphasis on feeding and clothing the children as opposed to giving birth.
Wow, Nehor, you would make a good Muslim. Pulling out the old "spiritual power and insight" card, eh? That's sort of a dead end, no? Let me see if I (in my darkness and spiritually weak position) can understand what you are saying? You have spiritual power and insight and I don't. And you have arrived at this conclusion based solely on the fact that I disagree with you? Interesting. Again, it is amusing to me how religious zealots all seem to use the same playbook. Just recently, I was told that I couldn't understand all the silly rules and social arrangements in Islam because either Satan or Allah was darkening my mind. The old "if someone disagrees with my absurd propositions, it's because they are just not as spiritually in tune as I am" argument really isn't a rational one, but it is, I admit, about as hard to refute as the last refuge of the apologist--the old "God did it in a miraculous, mysterious way that we can't understand through our physical senses and just have to take on faith" assertion.
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The lds church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
The Nehor wrote:If you don't get the atonement at all you shouldn't be prattling about becoming a deity.
Is that why Gordon Hinckley refused to prattle about becoming a deity? Because he didn't get the atonement?
The Nehor wrote:You have to meet God (Father and Mother) before you can have an inkling of what it means to become like them.
Like this guy? He's met both Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. Do you follow him? If not, I suppose it's only because you are not spiritually powerful and enlightened enough to see the truth of his message. Fools mock! But they shall mourn. http://www.thesongofgod.com/about%20azrael.html
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The lds church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
Sister Mary Lisa wrote:That's it? That's all you can come up with? That right there is more telling than anything else you've said all day.
I agree. I also find it shocking that you can go to Church to hear the word of the Lord and spend the whole time looking for anything that sets off a sexism alert. Of course you find it. So does the person endlessly looking for racism everywhere. Then you start talking superficially about godhood (like virtually everyone here) as if you understand it at all. Then you demean Christ for not being a woman so you can have another role model? I don't think anyone who thinks this way understands the atonement. If you don't get the atonement at all you shouldn't be prattling about becoming a deity. You have to meet God (Father and Mother) before you can have an inkling of what it means to become like them.
I'd love that. Except that the guys who created your church found it not worth their time to create for us the life and name of Heavenly Mother and share with us her equal power and her equal wisdom and her equal divine godess-like attributes that half the population of the church should strive for, seeing that gender is so darned important in the roles we are to play.
And I don't have to look for the sexism to find it. It's so all-encompassing as to be laughable. Imagine stepping foot in a congregation where only females presided in the front and only females were recognized as wielding the power to act in Goddess' name, and only females were allowed to bless children and only females were able to hold positions of power within the church. I bet even you would find the sexism of that scenario pretty easily, should you encounter such.
Sister Mary Lisa wrote:I'd love that. Except that the guys who created your church found it not worth their time to create for us the life and name of Heavenly Mother and share with us her equal power and her equal wisdom and her equal divine godess-like attributes that half the population of the church should strive for, seeing that gender is so darned important in the roles we are to play.
And I don't have to look for the sexism to find it. It's so all-encompassing as to be laughable. Imagine stepping foot in a congregation where only females presided in the front and only females were recognized as wielding the power to act in Goddess' name, and only females were allowed to bless children and only females were able to hold positions of power within the church. I bet even you would find the sexism of that scenario pretty easily, should you encounter such.
You capture so eloquently the feelings I had all my life in the church. Thank you.
(I've read you on FLAK and your blog, and have appreciated your perspective and insight. I feel like an SML fangirl.)
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
Sister Mary Lisa wrote:I'd love that. Except that the guys who created your church found it not worth their time to create for us the life and name of Heavenly Mother and share with us her equal power and her equal wisdom and her equal divine godess-like attributes that half the population of the church should strive for, seeing that gender is so darned important in the roles we are to play.
And I don't have to look for the sexism to find it. It's so all-encompassing as to be laughable. Imagine stepping foot in a congregation where only females presided in the front and only females were recognized as wielding the power to act in Goddess' name, and only females were allowed to bless children and only females were able to hold positions of power within the church. I bet even you would find the sexism of that scenario pretty easily, should you encounter such.
You capture so eloquently the feelings I had all my life in the church. Thank you.
(I've read you on FLAK and your blog, and have appreciated your perspective and insight. I feel like an SML fangirl.)