BKP's latest rant: Evils of TV and Teased Hair ....

[_skippy the dead]

No, teased hair doen't equal prostitution, but I'm beginning to suspect that serious, committed ant-Mormonism equals Down's Syndrome.

Oh yeah - that's a good way to make a point: insult the less-abled. On behalf of those who have loved ones with Down Syndrome, you are a complete idiot.

[Analytics]

On behalf of those who have loved ones with Down Syndrome, you are a complete idiot.

No, he's not a complete idiot. He's still missing a few parts.


Hopefully that shipment of tact will arrive soon.

[_guy sajer]

The same way that drinking a non-caffeneited cola is on the periphery of sin. It is a proven fact that if one drinks non-caffeneited colas, it is only a matter of time before he drinks caffeneited cola, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he drinks coffee and tea, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he masturbates, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he commits adultery, homosexuality, or beastiality, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he rapes and kills.

So, silly, decaffeited cola = raping and killing.

Using similar process of sound, logical reasoning, everyone knows that teased hair=prostitution.

No, teased hair doen't equal prostitution, but I'm beginning to suspect that serious, committed ant-Mormonism equals Down's Syndrome.

You don't understand the counsel against caffinated soda (which isn't a commandment, as is the Word of Wisdom), so don't pontificate about it. The slippery slope argument you imply exists within the doctrines of the church regarding personal behavior don't, and the sheer hysterical extremity of your implication indicates that you don't really believe it does either.

Try something serous here for a change on this thread.

That you are, apparently, ignorant of the slippery slope logic that absolutely underlies a good deal of Mormonism' fascination with straining at gnats suggests that it is you who doesn't have a clue.

[_Coggins7]

That you are, apparently, ignorant of the slippery slope logic that absolutely underlies a good deal of Mormonism' fascination with straining at gnats suggests that it is you who doesn't have a clue.

Yada yada, rama lama ding dong, blah, blah, blah.

Care to make a substantive statement in support of your assersions here?

[_guy sajer]

That you are, apparently, ignorant of the slippery slope logic that absolutely underlies a good deal of Mormonism' fascination with straining at gnats suggests that it is you who doesn't have a clue.

Yada yada, rama lama ding dong, blah, blah, blah.

Care to make a substantive statement in support of your assersions here?

You care offer substantive evidence that I'm wrong?

There's nothing I could offer you that you would accept, so why bother?

Both our perceptions are primarily a function of how we've understood the messages we've heard after decacdes in the Church.

We have obviously intrepreted our experience in the Mormon Church quite differently.

That's ok, as the same is true between me and my wife. The only difference is that she is, at least, rational and reasonable. Two adjectives I would never use to describe you.

[_Coggins7]

Oh yeah - that's a good way to make a point: insult the less-abled. On behalf of those who have loved ones with Down Syndrome, you are a complete idiot.

Leave your parents out of this Skppy.

[_skippy the dead]

Oh yeah - that's a good way to make a point: insult the less-abled. On behalf of those who have loved ones with Down Syndrome, you are a complete idiot.

Leave your parents out of this Skppy.

Oh lord, you are a major jackass.

[_Coggins7]

You care offer substantive evidence that I'm wrong?

There's nothing I could offer you that you would accept, so why bother?

Both our perceptions are primarily a function of how we've understood the messages we've heard after decacdes in the Church.

We have obviously intrepreted our experience in the Mormon Church quite differently.

That's ok, as the same is true between me and my wife. The only difference is that she is, at least, rational and reasonable. Two adjectives I would never use to describe you.

Its reeally quite simple. You made a slippery slope argument regarding Packer's mention of teased hair re Mormon grooming standards and claimed that Packer's (and the church's) implied positon is that if one teases one's hair, that the end of this will be sexual immorality, bestiality, rape and murder. Of course you forgot pedophilia and ethinic cleansing.

This argument, if serious, is not only neither rational or reasonable, but is the kind of argument, not a philosopher, but a political demagogue or issue activist who really has not serious knowledge of his subject would make to smear an opponsing interlocutor. If you meant it as a sarcastic parody, that's one thing. If you actually believe that Packer believes what you state in this post, then this tells me that your own knowledge of LDS doctrine is not only seriously limited and poorly understood, but that another powerful, perhaps unexamined bias is at work.

[_SatanWasSetUp]

The answer is no. As I heard Packer's talk, the counsel was for Latter Day Saints, not those of the great and spacious building. And, as Packer's counsel had no particular moral meaning, in and of itself, nothing precludes Mormon hair stylists from teasing the hair of others, just as nothing prevents Mormon restaruant or hotel owners from serving liquor. Just as alcohol is not in and of itself evil, neither is teased hair, and this was not Packer's meaning. Teased hair, overuse of body ornimentation, such as earrings, jewlry, tattoos, body piercing, to different degrees, are an integral part of the culture of "the world" represented by the great and spacious building, and the Saints don't need to be imitating Babylon, even in small things, because imitation, in time, very often leads to integration.

Gospel teachings try to avoid sin at the periphery so that it need not be dealty with later at the center, or core.

I guess I'm still puzzled as to why teased hair is more worldly than other hair and how that relates to the periphery of sin.

The same way that drinking a non-caffeneited cola is on the periphery of sin. It is a proven fact that if one drinks non-caffeneited colas, it is only a matter of time before he drinks caffeneited cola, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he drinks coffee and tea, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he masturbates, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he commits adultery, homosexuality, or beastiality, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he rapes and kills.

So, silly, decaffeited cola = raping and killing.

Using similar process of sound, logical reasoning, everyone knows that teased hair=prostitution.

As rediculous as your "slippery-slope" example seems to normal thinking people, I actually had an Elder Quorum President give a lesson in EQ class several years ago on pornography. He said that pornography leads to adultery, and adultery leads to murder. He actually wrote it out on the chalkboard with arrows going from pornography to adultery to murder. He used the story of David looking at Bathsheba in the shower, which he equated to viewing pornography. This led to David committing adultery with Bathsheba, then he murdered Bathsheba's husband so he could have her. I guess it all made sense to those of us listening to the lesson. Once you look at a Playboy, it's only a matter of time before you're planning your first murder.

[_guy sajer]

The answer is no. As I heard Packer's talk, the counsel was for Latter Day Saints, not those of the great and spacious building. And, as Packer's counsel had no particular moral meaning, in and of itself, nothing precludes Mormon hair stylists from teasing the hair of others, just as nothing prevents Mormon restaruant or hotel owners from serving liquor. Just as alcohol is not in and of itself evil, neither is teased hair, and this was not Packer's meaning. Teased hair, overuse of body ornimentation, such as earrings, jewlry, tattoos, body piercing, to different degrees, are an integral part of the culture of "the world" represented by the great and spacious building, and the Saints don't need to be imitating Babylon, even in small things, because imitation, in time, very often leads to integration.

Gospel teachings try to avoid sin at the periphery so that it need not be dealty with later at the center, or core.

I guess I'm still puzzled as to why teased hair is more worldly than other hair and how that relates to the periphery of sin.

The same way that drinking a non-caffeneited cola is on the periphery of sin. It is a proven fact that if one drinks non-caffeneited colas, it is only a matter of time before he drinks caffeneited cola, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he drinks coffee and tea, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he masturbates, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he commits adultery, homosexuality, or beastiality, and once this happens, it is only a matter of time before he rapes and kills.

So, silly, decaffeited cola = raping and killing.

Using similar process of sound, logical reasoning, everyone knows that teased hair=prostitution.

As rediculous as your "slippery-slope" example seems to normal thinking people, I actually had an Elder Quorum President give a lesson in EQ class several years ago on pornography. He said that pornography leads to adultery, and adultery leads to murder. He actually wrote it out on the chalkboard with arrows going from pornography to adultery to murder. He used the story of David looking at Bathsheba in the shower, which he equated to viewing pornography. This led to David committing adultery with Bathsheba, then he murdered Bathsheba's husband so he could have her. I guess it all made sense to those of us listening to the lesson. Once you look at a Playboy, it's only a matter of time before your planning your first murder.

A normal thinking person would recognize that I was being facetious. Gross exagerration is an effective tool to highlight absurdity.