Stone holm Posted April 1, 2014 Posted April 1, 2014 Has the LDS church officially come out as condemning plastic surgery and... uh... body augmentation?Does it still condemn tatoos?Does it condemn Lap-Band operations? Liposuction?Hair transplants? Organ donations? Perms? Toenail clipping? Circumcision?Are hair follicles, mammary-gland-size, cellular fat quantities, cuticles, organs, skin coloration, and foreskin all eternal...? If Christ cut something of his off during mortality, should we all follow suit in a quest to "be like him"...?Is it necessary to possess all of the same body parts that Christ had/has to appear "in his likeness"?The line of questioning may offend some, but it isn't meant to be intentionally inflammatory--just thought-provoking. I imagine most of us likely unintentionally offend transgendered individuals all the time.DanielDaniel this is at best ignorant, and not particularly thought provoking.
Daniel2 Posted April 1, 2014 Posted April 1, 2014 (edited) Daniel this is at best ignorant, and not particularly thought provoking.in what way do you feel it is ignorant? Wade condemned altering one's body via scalpel, in a post referencing God's disapproval of transgendered individuals. I listed several other examples of how humans alter their bodies, rangeing from common to obviously absurd--many of them via scalpel, and often times permanent. I'm wondering how consistent the church's rules on the matter are.Is the church ok with women reconfiguring their breast size (thereby losing the ability to nurse children)? If so, why is that ok, but a transgendered person not?Was it similarly ignorant for the prophet to declare that it was shameful for a woman to alter her body by wearing two sets of pierced earrings?Circumcision is definitely a physical alteration of one's genitals. If God disapproves of altering ones body via scalpel, it seems contradictory he would have once required the removal of the foreskin of any male counted among his people.I find it inconsistent that a god would be terrifically prohibitive of some types of body alterations (sexual reassignment surgery, tatoos or multiple ear piercings), would specifically mandate genital mutilation (circumcision) and be completely indifferent to other forms of body alteration (liposuction, plastic surgery, face lifts, hair dying or perming, and breast augmentation).I also find any implication that a transgender woman (who removes her male body parts) could not be "in the likeness of Christ" to be male-centric and demeaning to all women--assuming, of course, that one would believe that women are not considered less Christ-like merely because they have different genitals.Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.If you find my comments ignorant and thoughtless, that is your right, of course. Edited April 1, 2014 by Daniel2 1
Calm Posted April 1, 2014 Posted April 1, 2014 (edited) Wade did not suggest any outward alteration removed the image of Christ or somehow imparted the image; he referenced the image of Christ for an inward change of being into the likeness of Christ, being I am assuming a likeness of mind, heart and spirit having nothing to do with altering our physical appearance intentionally:" Be that as it may, to me the plan of salvation doesn't consist of taking a human scalpel to change us externally into the image we as a human may have of ourselves, but rather to progress us internally to conform us into the likeness of Christ that God has in mind." Edited April 1, 2014 by calmoriah 2
Stone holm Posted April 1, 2014 Posted April 1, 2014 Wade did not suggest any outward alteration removed the image of Christ or somehow imparted the image; he referenced the image of Christ for an inward change of being into the likeness of Christ, being I am assuming a likeness of mind, heart and spirit having nothing to do with altering our physical appearance intentionally:" Be that as it may, to me the plan of salvation doesn't consist of taking a human scalpel to change us externally into the image we as a human may have of ourselves, but rather to progress us internally to conform us into the likeness of Christ that God has in mind." Calmoriah, you get kudos for going the extra mile in trying to make his mixing of metaphors somewhat less offensive.
wenglund Posted April 1, 2014 Posted April 1, 2014 I don't think that conflating the gospel with popular world culture is the problem here.... I know. Otherwise, you probably would stop your huge role in the conflating here. Thanks, -Wade Englund
wenglund Posted April 1, 2014 Posted April 1, 2014 Wade did not suggest any outward alteration removed the image of Christ or somehow imparted the image; he referenced the image of Christ for an inward change of being into the likeness of Christ, being I am assuming a likeness of mind, heart and spirit having nothing to do with altering our physical appearance intentionally: Kudos to Cal for assisting the comprehension-challenged grasp a simple analogy. Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Recommended Posts