Miracle Of Forgiveness

[Senator]

I would be devastated because knowing both of my children, I know that it would take something horrible happening to them to put them in that situation where they felt they needed to violate their covenants as well as what the emotional consequences would be for them from having engaged in intimacy before they were ready for it. I've seen how some have talked themselves into seeing it as acceptable---and it is because of some extreme insecurity, a perception of themselves as not having much worth for others and need for love to validate even if it comes in twisted forms---and then the emotional upheaval they go through when they confront themselves with what they have done.

Perhaps those who haven't grown up expecting something different from themselves don't have such an emotional impact, but for those that have been brought up with the Law of Chastity, there are many who take it very seriously and thus are harmed by breaking it as well as being harmed by whatever put them in that situation.

I would never compare the two situations, I would much, much, much prefer my children in health even if unchaste because that can always be repented of and whatever damage was done can be healed...death is long term.

I understand all that you have said. That is why stated to each their own and that devastation need not necessarily be a response.

[Scott Lloyd]

The difference is not as clear as you claim.

Kimball: "It is better to die in defending one's virtue than to live having lost it without a struggle." Some may interpret this to mean that if a girl did survive and was raped, her struggle wasn't great enough.

If that's how you interpret it, then I repeat, yours is a poor comparison. It is obvious that Marion G. Romney's father was not talking about his son being raped; he was talking about his son possibly committing sexualsin.

[Senator]

Cal, Going back and seeing the context of what has been said here, I probably need to clarify. If in the case that my child was forced into sex, then yes, devastation would be an apt response. However, I still stand by my "reduced" response in regards to other consensual events.

[Thinking]

If that's how you interpret it, then I repeat, yours is a poor comparison. It is obvious that Marion G. Romney's father was not talking about his son being raped; he was talking about his son possibly committing sexual sin.

Did you even read my post? Kimball qualifies the loss of virtue as possibly being without a struggle and places death as the better option. This suggests that a girl who survives a rape may not have struggled enough.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

In another thread, I was talking about "secondary doctrine" books. I was given "The Miracle of Forgiveness" at one time by my bishop. Although I pretty much dived into scripture during that time, I could not discern what is truly official and not about the book. So for those who have read it, what is it inside the book that makes it unofficial. What is said that is not truly accurate. Thanks.

I read in in my 20's made me feel old...I was focusing too much on sin ans too little the forgiveness. Being a Parent and one to have two more children after reading it, I now see myself more and a son, and my Father, more, dad. Oh how I am loved!

[Scott Lloyd]

Did you even read my post? Kimball qualifies the loss of virtue as possibly being without a struggle and places death as the better option. This suggests that a girl who survives a rape may not have struggled enough.

Did you read mine? Marion G. Romney was not talking about his son being a victim of rape and failing to struggle enough.

[Brian 2.0]

Did you even read my post? Kimball qualifies the loss of virtue as possibly being without a struggle and places death as the better option. This suggests that a girl who survives a rape may not have struggled enough.

This is still a horrible thought, if I'm understanding correctly. So if a girl doesn't fight back the rapist sufficiently enough because she fears her life is in danger, then that means she has lost her virtue?

[Scott Lloyd]

This is still a horrible thought, if I'm understanding correctly. So if a girl doesn't fight back the rapist sufficiently enough because she fears her life is in danger, then that means she has lost her virtue?

I don't believe that's what President Kimball said.

It's certainly not what Marion G. Romney's father said -- which is what he's comparing it to.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

"It is better to die in defending one's virtue than to live having lost it without a struggle."

That would depend on what President Kimball meant by "without a struggle". Does he mean specifically physically not fighting back when threatened (if so, then I would very much disagree with him as would current LDS teachings) or otoh, does he mean not caring one way or the other (being passive) or even participating actively in consensual sexual activity? One assumes that he is talking about rape because one wouldn't generally have a choice between death and "virtue" in normal consensual sex, but perhaps he is using the extreme position to show how much we should invest into not placing ourselves into situations where we calmly walk right into consensual sexual interaction....something similar to the idea of cutting off one's arm if 'it' commits sin when it is obvious that it is not the arm that is the cause but the mind/heart. We may not see it as a life and death situation, but since virtue is connected to our spiritual status, one could describe it as a spiritual life and death situation. How many have begun their distancing from God by getting involved in improper sexual situations?

It has been a long time since I've read that book or other stuff by him so I can't tell if this would be a very unlikely interpretation or a likely one.

I would not be surprised if given his time period he probably included in "without a struggle" women who without concern or caution or need placed themselves in situations where rape was more likely to occur, intentionally got themselves drunk among strangers and such things, but I also see him doing the reverse, including in those defending their virtue as those who dressed and acted modestly, avoided dangerous areas if it was not necessary to go there, did not associate with strangers without backup, etc. For one thing, I have heard my grandmother speak of defending virtue in that way and she was of his generation and culture.

I am not saying that women who were careless were responsible for getting themselves raped here, I am merely talking about that POV that many have held in the past.

Edited July 11, 2013 by calmoriah

[Thinking]

Did you read mine? Marion G. Romney was not talking about his son being a victim of rape and failing to struggle enough.

I will explain it one more time.

Kimball left open the possibility of some responsibility if virtue was lost without a struggle and he places death as a better option. Romney also places death as the better option. Therefore, the difference is not as clear as you claim.

[Calm]

Kimball left open the possibility of some responsibility if virtue was lost without a struggle and he places death as a better option. Romney also places death as the better option. Therefore, the difference is not as clear as you claim.

I know there is a logical fallacy in there somewhere, but since I've taken my nighttime cocktail and it is pulling the blanket up over my brain and singing lullabies....I will have to wait for a less foggy head to figure it out...unless Scott comes up with it first. Edited July 11, 2013 by calmoriah

[Scott Lloyd]

I will explain it one more time.

Kimball left open the possibility of some responsibility if virtue was lost without a struggle and he places death as a better option. Romney also places death as the better option. Therefore, the difference is not as clear as you claim.

And you are still not taking cognizance of President Romney's father's meaning, which is obviously not his son being raped and passively accepting it. He was talking about the possibility of his son committing sexual sin, not being a victim of sexual assault.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

That would depend on what President Kimball meant by "without a struggle". Does he mean specifically physically not fighting back when threatened (if so, then I would very much disagree with him as would current LDS teachings) or otoh, does he mean not caring one way or the other (being passive) or even participating actively in consensual sexual activity? One assumes that he is talking about rape because one wouldn't generally have a choice between death and "virtue" in normal consensual sex, but perhaps he is using the extreme position to show how much we should invest into not placing ourselves into situations where we calmly walk right into consensual sexual interaction....something similar to the idea of cutting off one's arm if 'it' commits sin when it is obvious that it is not the arm that is the cause but the mind/heart. We may not see it as a life and death situation, but since virtue is connected to our spiritual status, one could describe it as a spiritual life and death situation. How many have begun their distancing from God by getting involved in improper sexual situations?

It has been a long time since I've read that book or other stuff by him so I can't tell if this would be a very unlikely interpretation or a likely one.

I would not be surprised if given his time period he probably included in "without a struggle" women who without concern or caution or need placed themselves in situations where rape was more likely to occur, intentionally got themselves drunk among strangers and such things, but I also see him doing the reverse, including in those defending their virtue as those who dressed and acted modestly, avoided dangerous areas if it was not necessary to go there, did not associate with strangers without backup, etc. For one thing, I have heard my grandmother speak of defending virtue in that way and she was of his generation and culture.

I am not saying that women who were careless were responsible for getting themselves raped here, I am merely talking about that POV that many have held in the past.

Since it seems inconceivable to me that President Kimball or any Church leader would hold a rape victim responsible for sin, I have to conclude your analysis is correct or at least pretty close.

I wish he had expressed himself more clearly, but I'm not inclined to make him an offender for a word.

That others seem so inclined saddens me.

[Thinking]

And you are still not taking cognizance of President Romney's father's meaning, which obviously not he's son being raped and passively accepting it. He was talking about the possibility of his son committing sexual sin, not being a victim of sexual assault.

Of course I am. I never said that I believed that they were the same. I said

Some may interpret this to mean that if a girl did survive and was raped, her struggle wasn't great enough.

Therefore, from this perspective of death being the better option (in both cases), the difference (there still is one) is not as clear as you claim.

Note: (the difference is not as clear) ≠ (they are the same)

Now if you believe that Kimball is being misunderstood, we can discuss that.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Thinking

[Calm]

Since it seems inconceivable to me that President Kimball or any Church leader would hold a rape victim responsible for sin, I have to conclude your analysis is correct or at least pretty close.

I can see one or two Church leader (none of the top authorities, just a few that I've known personally) that were so caught up in rigidness and LAW and the BOOK (and I don't mean scripture here or the word of God, but their own personal BOOK of RULES NEVER TO BE BROKEN, NO EXCEPTIONS). The one leader I expected to be the worst of this kind actually became a very open, loving Bishop who approved a friend to continue to work as a horoscope reader (not as a fortune teller, but as a therapist where the horoscope opened up areas to talk about).

Now I can see a few of these local leaders nowadays (and perhaps in the past they would be more frequent because of our culture) telling a rape victim she must deeply examine her soul to root out anything that she did that led to her rape, etc. and perhaps treat her as if she had a Scarlet R on her chest, urging her to confess her sins and purge her soul of guilt not having a clue how a woman might react postrape, that there would b many feelings of guilt that had nothing to do with her actual behaviour that instead arise due to our American (and many, many other) society that has placed so much of the blame for rape on the woman (if his wife would satisfy him, he wouldn't have to go looking for others, etc. etc.). Seeing the gentleness of President Kimball in many other things, if he was face to face with a victim I really can't see him condemning her, but rather encouraging her to rid herself of the unnecessary feelings of guilt and impurity that are a result of the violence and invasiveness and loss of control of rape so that the Atonement could have full effect on her wounds.

Considering President Kimball, from what I remember of him, it seems likely he was very, very concern with the spiritual struggles people go through to maintain their virtue, probably even more so than the physical ones...since we can put all our heart and soul into a spiritual struggle and come out a winner every time while a woman, especially in the rape, even if she managed to put every last ounce of energy and strength into a physical fight still come out to be very much of a loser in that category....but still a shining example of determination and survival and purity in her spirit.

Edited July 11, 2013 by calmoriah

[LordUther]

You see I don't get or see Kimball saying this, what I 'hear' is Kimball saying is "struggle with everything you have to protect your body, don't be afraid to die to protect your virtue". He's not saying it's a sin, or that you possibly didn't struggle enough if you don't get killed, but to look at it from an eternal perspective, that if you're killed protecting your virtue it's not the end of the world, nor your existence. Your death also condemns the rapist because now he/she has committed 2 serious transgressions and your blood will cry out for justice from the grave. This enables Heavenly Father to further pour out his wrath upon this vile wretch & you will be blessed with all that you lost.

[Tacenda]

You see I don't get or see Kimball saying this, what I 'hear' is Kimball saying is "struggle with everything you have to protect your body, don't be afraid to die to protect your virtue". He's not saying it's a sin, or that you possibly didn't struggle enough if you don't get killed, but to look at it from an eternal perspective, that if you're killed protecting your virtue it's not the end of the world, nor your existence. Your death also condemns the rapist because now he/she has committed 2 serious transgressions and your blood will cry out for justice from the grave. This enables Heavenly Father to further pour out his wrath upon this vile wretch & you will be blessed with all that you lost.

What would you do? Would you be willing to die? Get real.

[Senator]

Your death also condemns the rapist because now he/she has committed 2 serious transgressions and your blood will cry out for justice from the grave. This enables Heavenly Father to further pour out his wrath upon this vile wretch & you will be blessed with all that you lost.

Why would you sponsor for anyone to enact the greatest transgression they possibly can in hopes of reaping the greatest punishment? I don't understand this.

[LordUther]

What would you do? Would you be willing to die? Get real.

What would I do? Would I be willing to die? I'll tell you what I did! Just over 15yrs ago I WAS raped, and I froze. Completely & utterly. I was petrified & couldn't believe it was happening to me. I resisted at first but as he became violent & I realised what was about to happen I froze. All those years ago I was no where near the man I am today, I did not realise the strength that I had, and I froze. And the aftermath was even worse. All those years ago, in the UK, male rape was barely recognised, I had heard of people who had been laughed out of the police station when they went to report it to the police, and if it did manage to get to court very few prosecutions were successful, I couldn't go through all that for nothing so I had no legal recourse. When I got in touch with the rape crisis centres I was told that, they were for women only & to go elsewhere. I couldn't tell my parents because a) I wasn't talking to my mum at the time & b) if I'd told my dad he would've hunted the guy down & killed him, and as much as my blood called for him to do that I needed my dad in my life more than I needed revenge with my dad in jail. I had no-one and had to deal with it by myself, and it took years to get over it. Today if it happened I would fight with every ounce of strength that I had and they would have to kill me to get me, and if I could take the [bleep] out with me I would!

How much more real would you like me to get?

[LordUther]

Why would you sponsor for anyone to enact the greatest transgression they possibly can in hopes of reaping the greatest punishment? I don't understand this.

I wouldn't be 'sponsoring' anything, if they choose to kill than respect my "no" they are accountable for their own decisions.

[Calm]

I had no-one and had to deal with it by myself, and it took years to get over it.

I cannot (and am very grateful for that fact) imagine the hell that you must have gone through and to come out the other side and be able to live a productive and healthy life is a remarkable tribute to your inner strength and wisdom.

Just as a note, I hope that if something happens in your life that triggers some of the stuff you have dealt with in the past, that you will not hesitate to get outside help for it now that it is available even if at this point in your life you have successfully processed it. Traumatic experiences of this level can manifest in multiple ways over time so some care is probably of value and it can be helpful to approach the scar of the trauma in various ways at different times in one's life, though with the Atonement God has given us the power to release ourselves completely from the evil that has attached to our lives.

[LordUther]

I cannot (and am very grateful for that fact) imagine the hell that you must have gone through and to come out the other side and be able to live a productive and healthy life is a remarkable tribute to your inner strength and wisdom.

Just as a note, I hope that if something happens in your life that triggers some of the stuff you have dealt with in the past, that you will not hesitate to get outside help for it now that it is available even if at this point in your life you have successfully processed it. Traumatic experiences of this level can manifest in multiple ways over time so some care is probably of value and it can be helpful to approach the scar of the trauma in various ways at different times in one's life, though with the Atonement God has given us the power to release ourselves completely from the evil that has attached to our lives.

Thank you very much for your kind words, you are right the world is a different place today and the help is there. And today I have the gospel again in my life to help me deal with anything that comes along. Thank you again. :-)

[Tacenda]

What would I do? Would I be willing to die? I'll tell you what I did! Just over 15yrs ago I WAS raped, and I froze. Completely & utterly. I was petrified & couldn't believe it was happening to me. I resisted at first but as he became violent & I realised what was about to happen I froze. All those years ago I was no where near the man I am today, I did not realise the strength that I had, and I froze. And the aftermath was even worse. All those years ago, in the UK, male rape was barely recognised, I had heard of people who had been laughed out of the police station when they went to report it to the police, and if it did manage to get to court very few prosecutions were successful, I couldn't go through all that for nothing so I had no legal recourse. When I got in touch with the rape crisis centres I was told that, they were for women only & to go elsewhere. I couldn't tell my parents because a) I wasn't talking to my mum at the time & b) if I'd told my dad he would've hunted the guy down & killed him, and as much as my blood called for him to do that I needed my dad in my life more than I needed revenge with my dad in jail. I had no-one and had to deal with it by myself, and it took years to get over it. Today if it happened I would fight with every ounce of strength that I had and they would have to kill me to get me, and if I could take the [bleep] out with me I would!

How much more real would you like me to get?

I'm so sorry. Please forgive me. I use to feel that way, that I'd fight to my death. I lived with Pres. Kimball's words and was taught them. But now I see it differently, again, I'm sorry and no one should go through that. Edited July 11, 2013 by Tacenda

[LordUther]

I'm so sorry. Please forgive me. I use to feel that way, that I'd fight to my death. I lived with Pres. Kimball's words and was taught them. But now I see it differently, again, I'm sorry and no one should go through that.

No worries, no harm done. :-) xxx

[Scott Lloyd]

I know there is a logical fallacy in there somewhere, but since I've taken my nighttime cocktail and it is pulling the blanket up over my brain and singing lullabies....I will have to wait for a less foggy head to figure it out...unless Scott comes up with it first.

The straw man is the closest fallacy that comes to mind.